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.
@Uff ki baat: Please see Help:Logging in § Login issiues and problems. If you no longer remember the password: Did you provide an email address for the account? If you did, you should be able to request at the log in page, that a new password is sent to that email address. If you didn't provide an email address, bad luck; you won't be able to gain access to your account. However, you can create another account, and using that account, edit your old account's userpage to mention that you no longer use it. Before creating the new account, please read up on Wikipedia's username policy, to make sure your account complies. Hope this has helped. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Automatic "Add a citation" sometimes creates an invalid date field
When the visual editor automatic option for "Add a citation" imports from some sources, for example the DOI 10.1080/20008198.2018.1425574, it puts "2018-01" in the "Source date" field. Which is an invalid date that I could manually change to "Janurary 2018" to make it valid. In my experience some journals don't list the day of publication, only the month. Is there a way for the auto cite to do that for me?
Also, how important is it (how much effort should I spend looking) for citations to have day, month and year, compared to just month and year? Especially for articles that have a DOI, I'm not sure if it matters.
The error message after automatically adding the citation I got is:
Use of QI/FP/VI icons in image captions within Wikipedia topics
Hello Teahouse:
Given the large number of images in Commons, I am in favor when a user both uploads their images, then seeks Quality Image/Featured Picture/Valued Image ratings as it helps distinguish image quality for specific goals in Commons and Wikipedia.
While this information is good to know (and retained in the image description), is it acceptable to place QI/FP/VI icons in image captions of Wikpedia topics as shown in this Adenium obesum example?
I am thinking that as described in Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Icons, inclusion of these inline icons would be merely decorative and not be in keeping with encyclopedic use (MOS:DÉCOR).
Can you please advise? GRDN711 (talk) 18:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
@GRDN711 Welcome to the Teahouse. It took me a while to appreciate what you were asking, but having realised you meant the placement of {{QI seal}} and other image quality icons at the start of an image caption on en-wikipedia, then the answer is absolutely not. These are not appropriate within articles, and should all be removed. I did a quick check for all articles containing the 'Quality Image icon (), and found only these 31 uses of them in article space. Each image is, admittedly, really lovely, but all were taken by User:Tagooty, who is clearly an extremely competent photographer and their work is much appreciated here. I suspect they thought it was an OK thing to add, but it really mustn't go into the articles themselves I've pinged Tagooty here so that they are made aware of the concern you raise, and I would respectfully ask them to go back and edit all the articles into which they've placed these unnecessary image quality icons and remove them as soon as they are able to, please. The quality assessments are always available on Commons for anyone interested in seeing and appreciating how they've been assessed. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Done@GRDN711 and Nick Moyes: Thanks for flagging this issue and for providing the helpful link to articles with QI seals. Also removed VI and FP seals. Please let me know if I've missed any. Tagooty (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
I've just had a concern after reading over the Wikipedia:Username policy and am now wondering, based on the fact that Charizard is a Pokémon and is a trademarked term, that my name "Notcharizard" might be classed as somehow promotional (I've nothing to do with the Pokemon company or Game Freak at all, I'm just a fan) and wanted to check if it's necessary for me to change it? I am hoping not. Thank you! -- NotCharizard🗨09:23, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
@Notcharizard I don't see a problem, either. Dot333 and I are both administrators here, and I do a lot of work at Usernames for Admin Attention and any concerns would be rejected by me if they were raised. The only thing that does concern me is the lack of visibility of your signature. Pale purple against white is hard for anyone without perfect vision to read, so it might be nice if you would consider enhancing the contrast. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
I'll let somebody else answer this, Apocalypticwarlord. But I have to say that if there are, and if I'd previously been considering going along, I'd wonder if I really wanted to meet an apocalyptic warlord there. (Indeed, I'm not sure I'd want to meet either a warm and fuzzy warlord or an apocalyptic santa Claus.) Perhaps I'd just stay at home. -- Hoary (talk) 23:00, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
I haven't been to the Mumtaz for years - I moved away from Bradford 6 years ago - but it was always a special place. ColinFine (talk) 10:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Roxy the dog, its website (NB not a RS) says that it provides (A) a "cosy environment" and (B) "a seating capacity of 500". Either of the two, no biggie; but both, a truly remarkable combination (if verifiable via RS, of course). -- Hoary (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Article at AfC, mainspace, but then edited back to (declined AfC version)
Margaret A. Wilcox was declined at AfC for not being written in formal, neutral tone. I re-wrote the article, and moved it to the mainspace. Now a new editor has come along and changed it back to the version that was declined. What is the appropriate next step here? DaffodilOcean (talk) 22:40, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
DaffodilOcean, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You help us aid you better if you provide links (diffs) to what you reference, This circumstance seems rather strange, please can you show us links to that which you speak of? Celestina007 (talk) 22:54, 18 April 2022 (UTC)
Ah...looks like someone just reverted it. I don't know how to show differences (though I have seen this done).
And now another new editor YeonL has come along (with only this one edit) and added back some, though not all, of the encyclopedic statements and un-cited statements. See diff here [3]. I have edited the page again, but is it appropriate to protect the page, or is this too minor to bother? DaffodilOcean (talk) 12:42, 20 April 2022 (UTC)
Celestina007 - this page keeps getting changed back to non-encyclopedic statements. I have changed it back once and Mcmatter changed it back. The latest difference is this: [4] Is there a means to protect the page so people need more edits on Wikipedia before they can change the page? The edits are not slander, they are just WP:PUFF. DaffodilOcean (talk) 10:35, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to add a custom "Length (minutes)" parameter to the {{Episode table}} / {{Episode list}} templates at Salad Fingers#Episodes. I understand that you can add custom parameters with "aux" and "auxT", but I can't seem to get it to work properly. Whenever I try, the custom parameter either replaces an existing one or doesn't show up at all. Would be greatly appreciated if anyone could help out. Throast (talk | contribs) 23:03, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Falk, Ruma (2008). "The Unrelenting Exchange Paradox". Teaching Statistics. 30 (3): 86–88. doi:10.1111/j.1467-9639.2008.00318.x.
The citation in Introduction/Problem/Basic setup directly quotes from the problem definition of wikipedia, and the citation is used as reference to the problem definition. I feel it would be more appropriate to find a definition not cyclically referencing wikipedia, but I can't find an appropriate one easily.
Also, there is no attribution to the cquote in the opening abstract section, I can't tell if it should be changed to a normal paragraph or there is a citation containing that exact text--- would it be more appropriate to use the original problem definition given in the section "History of the paradox", or is it appropriate here for wikipedia editors to make a problem definition synthesis for modern-language clarity? Darcyisverycute (talk) 03:32, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
@Darcyisverycute: Hi, and welecome to the Teahouse! You said, "I feel it would be more appropriate to find a definition not cyclically referencing Wikipedia", and you are right. As far as I can tell, in that context the footnote is used similarly to how a {{seealso}} tag would be at the top of the article, but the footnote is definitely not conventional style. As for the quote, I think the definition given in the History of the paradox section, properly cited, would work just fine. (I was taken aback by the footnote defined as #3, though. Such information is typically in a see also section, not a talk page. The banners at the top of the article are right – it definitely needs cleanup.) I hope that answered your question, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 14:24, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Categories creation and how to deal with them
Hi, i was trying to create new categories, I have already red the guidelines but i didn't quite grasp it fully, i think. Would you mind to take a look at them see here,and here, here and share any suggestion on how to do it better? Some advices would be helpful. Cheers. --Opencross (talk) 13:21, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
I really feel out of my depth with this article. I just came across it at recent changes. It's being heavily edited by an editor with a name that suggests a CoI, and by an IP editor and two other named editors, who are adding all sorts of dubious stuff such as this [5]. Normally I'd just revert something unsourced like that, with an edit-summary that it's "anecdotal" but I can't work out where the rot set it. The article's got an enormous quantity of dubious editing. Anyone feel like a challenge? And please do let me know what I should have done with such a mess. Elemimele (talk) 22:24, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Looks like someone has restored the article to the pre-chaos version. I'll watch the article and maybe temporary protection is in order if it persists. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 22:42, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
I have blocked two editors as vandalism only accounts and another administrator has blocked a third account. Jay Spearing is now semi-protected. Thanks for reporting this, Elemimele. Cullen328 (talk) 18:31, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Kowser CS, here's the first paragraph of what was deleted: Chartered Skills™ is a quality professional e-learning & hiring platform. We Provide Versatile skill-oriented courses which really touch one’s goal. We also ensure freedom for entrepreneurs, the job for job seeker ecstasy for professional people. And it continued in the same vein. I'll try to be kind about this, and merely say that it demonstrates a complete unawareness of what Wikipedia is for. Nobody here will give you any help publishing it or anything like it. You're at the wrong website. -- Hoary (talk) 09:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Per your Talk page, the Speedy deletion was done "...under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic." David notMD (talk) 18:53, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm trying to create an article for an actress that is on Wikipedia but she doesn't have an article. I put brackets on her name and wrote an article. Not sure why it was declined. Her name is Kristine Kelly. Mszeldazonk (talk) 02:52, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
A "pages containing" search finds mentions of her in two articles on films she has appeared in – a fairly small toehold. (A third mention is probably someone different with the same name.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.101.71 (talk) 07:20, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Draft got declined for advertising and I don't understand why
Draft:PropertyGuru is my first-ever article, so I'm sure it's rife with problems... I just don't understand what they are. If the reviewer had specific critiques, I don't seem to be able to locate them. I've asked the reviewer, Theroadislong, for help, so hopefully I get some constructive feedback from them about where to go from here. But if anyone else has advice, I'd be forever grateful for help!
I don't have any COI, and I can't see any of the reasons the article's tone isn't a neutral POV. (I tried to make every sentence an objective summary of information gleaned from the sources.) I don't think there's any promotional language in the article. I assume the company wouldn't much like my mentions of their negative income, their labor disputes, their failed IPO, or any of the other negative news stories I found while researching, so I think it's objective.
PropertyGuru is a massive company here (the "Zwillow of Asia", as per trusted sources), getting over 40 million monthly visits. And it's on the brink of a big IPO on the NYSE with a valuation of over a billion dollars. Lots of coverage in major finance news sources around the globe, so I believe it's pretty notable.
(And while you're gifting me free advice, I'd also love help with fixing the Categories section and deciphering the copyright rules for adding logos – I'm terrified that I might screw it up.)
@Pathologix: Are you familiar with the concept of "promotion-by-overdetail"? The draft goes into the weeds on things it shouldn't, such as funding rounds (we don't care about it) and a bulleted M&A list. Strip out everything that doesn't explain what the company is, its core business, and its most notable achievements. —Jéské Courianov^_^va little blue Bori10:36, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Pathologix Most of the sources you offer just document the routine business activities of the company, this does not establish that the notability guidelines for companies are met. As Jéské alludes to, you have too many sources(as odd as that may sound). Fewer high-quality sources are much better than a large number of low-quality sources. Take your three best sources that provide significant coverage of this company itself(not just its activities) and concentrate on summarizing those. 331dot (talk) 10:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
@Jéské Couriano:@331dot: Ahhh... that makes a lot of sense sense. I definitely went pretty far down the rabbit hole and must've lost some perspective on what's encyclopedia-worthy. Back to the drawing board.. Thanks! Pathologix (talk) 10:47, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
@Pathologix: On the logo: When the article exists in mainspace, copy the logo into a file, upload it to en.wiki (not Commons) as a "non-free file", and there are options to select to show that it's the logo of a company etc; add a statement on the lines of "The logo will be used once in one article as a means of visual identification for the company", add "none" in the "special conditions" box, and all should be well. I don't think this can be done until the article exists in mainspace, as a check for the existence of the article it's going to be included in is part of the file upload system checks. PamD11:46, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Some easy ways to improve the draft:
Delete the "Funding" section.
Delete the list of acquisitions.
Delete the failed Australian IPO.
Delete the SPAC merger. Maybe re-add it once it has happened.
All this will make it look more like an encyclopedia article, and less like advertising material aimed at potential investors. Maproom (talk) 19:28, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Articles Written on Wikipedia
This is one of the questions that i have being wanting to ask for a long time now.
Do Wikipedia pay writers for their articles Giftyemmy (talk) 18:37, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, Giftyemmy, and welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia does not pay writers for their articles; pretty much everything on Wikipedia is done by volunteers. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 18:40, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
There are people/companies offering to create articles for pay - some valid - some scams - but none of that is affiliated with Wikipedia. Paid editing must be declared on the User page of the editor. Undeclared paid editing is grounds for being blocked. See WP:PAID for more on the topic. David notMD (talk) 18:57, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Chiming in to also add that paying someone to make edits to a page is risky, as the nature of a wiki almost guarantees that what they wrote will eventually be removed or worked on. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:49, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Links and Editing
Nowadays, in Wikipedia, whenever I aim the cursor of my PC on any hyperlink of any page of Wikipedia, right at my cursor, I just get the name of the page of which the hyperlink is. But, it was not when I was new to Wikipedia. At the time when I was new to Wikipedia, whenever I used to aim the cursor of my PC on any hyperlink of any page of Wikipedia, whatever the page of which the hyperlink may be, I used to get a lot of details of that page along with the main image of the page, right at my cursor. Please help me with this.
Nowadays, in Wikipedia, whenever I try to edit any mistake or any missing part of any page of Wikipedia, I receive a message that my editing was disruptive and the part which I edit gets reversed again. As a beginner, I can't understand that which type of editing is said to be disruptive and which type of editing is not said to be disruptive.
The pages I edited for which I received a message that my editing was disruptive and the part which I edited got reversed again were RRR (film), Mauli (film) & A Gentleman and many more.
The pages I edited for which I didn't receive a message that my editing was disruptive and the part which I edited get reversed again were Vettai, and Damarukam.
I can't understand that which type of editing is said to be disruptive and which type of editing is not said to be disruptive. Please help me with this. Abhijit VK (talk) 10:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
hi Abhijit VK, some explanation is in the edit summaries that you will see if you look at the article's history. Here's a difference where someone undid your edits with an explanation: [6]. Their explanation is that you've converted a lot of ordinary English words, whose meanings are quite clear to our readers, into Wiki-links. This makes the text less clear, and is unnecessary. It's also explained in the manual of style, to which they've given you a link. Elemimele (talk) 11:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
"Yuddham" would be the accurate transliteration of the original title though its not a common spelling. Abhijit VK was trying to help, in my view. However, they were probably not aware of the policies and might have thought that those reverts / warnings were made by bots, not real people. I have asked them to approach the teahouse to clear their doubts, hoping this would turn them into a productive editor. -- Ab207 (talk) 14:01, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Theroadislong, when Abhijit VK altered the spelling, you wrote (or caused to be written) "if you vandalize Wikipedia again, as you did at Krishnarjuna Yudham,...", which strikes me as a wild overreaction. But then again I am a very unobservant and perhaps rather dim-witted person, which perhaps explains why I fail to class "Krishnarjuna Yuddham" with "Krishnarjuna asdfghjkl" or "Krishnarjuna TRUMP WON" or "Krishnarjuna was gay!!!" -- Hoary (talk) 22:42, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Complete rewrite of history with company rebrand
The site on the Icelandic pharmaceutical company Actavis (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Actavis) does not reflect the history of Actavis at all. In fact it is the history of an entirely different company that acquired Actavis in 2012 and took up its name.
The place to ask how any part of an article makes any fucking sense is that article's talk page; in this case, Talk:Actavis. Tips: (1) Write plain "sense" rather than "fucking sense" (you know, winning friends and influencing people and all that). (2) A single question mark suffices. -- Hoary (talk) 02:32, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Inspection of the article's revision history shows that it was enlarged by around 180% in January 2013, presumably as a result of the acquisition, by a single user who remained active as an editor on it up to 2015.
The user (singular?) in question has a username suggestive of a link with the subject, has been discussed as possibly having a Conflict of Interest, has only ever edited this article and one other that now redirects to it, and has never activated their userpage or responded on their User talk page. The history of the originally Icelandic Actavis prior to 2012 has evidently been elided in this process, as I suspect has some of the history of the several other acquired/merged companies involved, though they may not all have had articles. This is less than satisfactory, but would pose a considerable research task to unravel and optimise. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.101.71 (talk) 03:09, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Mustafa Kemal Atatürk 's page does not mention the Genocide he comitted on Armenians although you do have a separate page on the Armenian Genocide.
Hello, i notticed that Mustafa Kemal Atatürk 's wikipedia page didn't mention his responsability in the Armenian Genocide annd i think that should be fixed.
Also, another thing: you DON'T need to post this twice within the space of 15 minutes, IP user. Be patient, and someone will eventually get to your question – we're humans with lives and time constraints, not bots.
The Turkish genocide against the Armenians took place between 1915 and 1917, and Mustafa Kemal Atatürk came to power in 1923. He was a lieutenant colonel during the repression of the Armenians, did not participate and later criticized what happened. How can he possibly be held responsible for events during the chaos of World War I, six plus years before he came to power? Cullen328 (talk) 04:37, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Example texts of languages
Hi everyone, I just have a quick question regarding the example texts (often under the "Example text" or "Samples" section) on Wikipedia pages about languages. Is there any official policy or standard regarding the selection of certain texts as examples? I'm not actually planning to edit any of those articles — just curious :)
Hello, MeasureWell, that is an excellent question. Personally, I only speak American English fluently, and have little difficulty understanding the British, Irish, Canadian, Australian and New Zealander varieties. I know only a smattering of words and phrases in a few other languages. I suggest that you take an in depth look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Languages. You may be able to find some active editors there, although the membership lists of many Wikiprojects have a lot of inactive or retired editors. Cullen328 (talk) 04:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Good Article
Can anyone please review article Mammootty for Good Article. He is in Indian cinema for past 50 years. Still no one has nominated it for GA. I have nominated it and contacted some Admins but says they are not in a time for it as it required more time. Could anyone please helpPaavamjinn (talk) 01:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
The Talk page of the article states that you have nominated it yesterday. In time, a GA reviewer will start the process. Administrators are not GA reviewers. David notMD (talk) 04:18, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Paavamjinn. I am an administrator and took a quick look at the article and, in my opinion, it is very well developed and looks pretty good. I will not participate in the GA review because I am not fully informed about which sources are considered reliable or unreliable for the Indian film industry. I notice that the article has 62 references. If all of those references are solid and reliable, then that is a good thing. But if some are weak, I encourage you to remove the weak ones and keep the best of them. It is much better to have 40 rock solid references than 62 references, if 35% of them are mediocre. As for the comment by David notMD, I disagree. Any administrator or other good faith editor can participate in GA reviews if they so choose, unless they have a conflict of interest. The guideline says The nomination may be reviewed by any registered user who has not contributed significantly to the article and is not the nominator. That certainly includes administrators. Cullen328 (talk) 06:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
I did not express myself clearly. You wrote that you had contacted some Admins. Admins CAN be GA reviewers, but are out-numbered by a larger number of editors who choose to be GA reviewers. Same applies to editors who review drafts under consideration to become articles. Soliciting Admins at random is unlikely to get a nomination reviewed. Secondly, while not a requirement, people who nominate an article for GA frequently first make many edits to the article in question, to bring it to GA quality. I saw that you nominated Mammootty without having made any edits. You have been editing Mammootty filmography, which is distinct from the article about him. David notMD (talk) 09:37, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
David notMD I didn't edited on the article Mammootty because I gone through that article and I thought that article don't need any much edits. So that I didn't make any edits. I thought according to the suggestions of Reviewer I will make edits.
Block advice, non-constructive edits on page of living person
I have reverted nonconstructive edits of an ip user with reference to a living person Justin Harrison multiple times today. Any idea where I can request a block for this ip user? Carver1889 (talk) 11:03, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
...since they haven't yet, I'm warning them with a fourth warning after the mess in Justin Harrison. any further infractions and they can be reverted to AIV. 💜 melecie talk - 11:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
@Melecie Thanks, now reported to AIV via Twinkle as same page vandalised again. Twinkle seemed ok to use, should have set it up sooner! Is there an advantage to RedWarn over Twinkle, or is it just a personal preference thing? (sorry, going a bit off topic)
Carver1889: best to have both! RedWarn is good in reverting and reporting, and Twinkle does other stuff like tagging pages for maintenance or CSD. currently I'm using Ultraviolet to get a feel for how it works, although there is absolutely no reason for using UV over RW right now other than beta testing (they're basically the same tool, except UV lacks many of the non-core features RW has and is in beta). happy reverting! 💜 melecie talk - 11:57, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy: Draft:Lena (short story). The website of the author of this self-published story is cited (the link is to the story). This does not contribute to notability. The first ref (behind a paywall) appears to be a review of another author's work of fiction about mind download. David notMD (talk) 10:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Presumably, much of the history is already covered at History of Sri Lanka, and some of the information at Sinhalese people might also be apposite. If your topic indeed merits an article separate from those articles, a judicious use of the {{Main}} template with short summaries might help you keep the article's length under control. Deor (talk) 14:25, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
@TheCeylon24 Welcome to the Teahouse (Ceylon tea and many other varieties are all served here!). Rather than here (which is a plce where we help people with editing difficulties), you might be better off explaining your plans for a new article at WP:WikiProject Sri Lanka and seeking input from editors there. You may be aware there is already a redirect from Sri Lankan people to Demographics of Sri Lanka, so you may need to consider whether expanding an existing article, or creating a new one with different coverage is the most appropriate way forward. Again, editors at WikiProject Sri Lanka would be the best ones to advise you. I hope you find this comment helpful. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
IS an ethnic group or ARE an ethnic group in peoples articles ?
In English, where a verb agrees (and perhaps with a single exception, but if so then an exception that isn't relevant here), it agrees with its subject. Thus in "The Hmong people are an ethnic group [etc]", "are" agrees not with "an ethnic group" (the predicative complement) but instead with "the Hmong people" (the subject). Now, is "people" (head of the noun phrase "the Hmong people") grammatically singular or plural? "People" is an odd word; it can be either. In a sentence such as this I'd take it not to be the singular form of a word whose plural form is "peoples", but instead the commoner (and suppletive) plural form of "person". And that's why I'd write "are" here and not "is". -- Hoary (talk) 07:59, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
This is also an issue of varieties of English: in British English, it is common for words denoting collectives to be treated as plural, even when the word appears to be singular (see English plurals#Singulars with collective meaning treated as plural). Where a subject has no particular connection with one or other English-speaking country, our policy says that any variaty of English may be used, and should be maintained consistently throughout the article (see WP:ENGVAR). ColinFine (talk) 10:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi hi! I've made my first article on this link, after submitted, it got declined due to references and articles problem. I've made some changes on these, also put some more details that might demonstrates WP:PERSON for a living person biography. Please feel free to comment on the draft and mention specifically which part should I edit more for this. It's confusing for a beginner, the category template also didn't work. Thank you very much for the help! Sarah Arifin (talk) 13:03, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
They're just successive attempts to fan interest. When "megastar" becomes commonplace, we'll have "gigastar", etc. Try "star", or (better) "actor" or "musician" or whatever. -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
In your examples, upper case "Super Star" and "Megastar" are apparently nicknames for those specific people. If you just want to be a "star" then make porn where everybody appears to be "porn stars". PrimeHunter (talk) 15:43, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Searching for Wikipedians interested in articles about decision-making
Good evening from where I am! I recently published the article Quaker decision-making. Now, I'm writing a draft of another decision-making framework https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Douginamug/Draft:Systemic_Consensus The general topic of decision-making greatly interests me, and I would like to contribute more, writing unwritten articles and improving existing ones. I would really like to find other wikipedians who are similarly interested - how might I best do that aside from simply 'going ahead'? I had a look through the Wikipedia Projects, and nothing jumps out at me. DougInAMugtalk17:39, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Great question! Thank for your contributions. Yes there is an undo button when using a mobile device. However, it appears when you change the Wikipedia settings at the bottom of your screen from mobile to desktop mode. After that, you may also change your smartphone's orientation from portrait to landscape for a better view. Happy editing Volten001☎05:17, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
First time trying to publish an article; was wondering how I can check on its progress within the submission pool
Hi, I publish an article about a notable psychologist from my sandbox and don't know how I can check if it's in line to be reviewed and published etc. Was wondering if anyone can help me with that or show me a way I can check or contact Wikipedia reviewers about it. Even an average/estimated timeline for most articles would be nice to know. Thanks everyone!
Don't know if you can view it through another account but I'll drop the link below if anyone's interested in helping me make it better for reviewing!
Assist prof inter, there is no progress, and there won't be until you click on "Submit the draft for review!" (which is rather conspicuous, I think). Once you've done that, you wait. -- Hoary (talk) 08:02, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
But please don't submit it, Assist prof inter, because it has only one reference that appears to be independent of its subject; and that single reference is Newsmax, which fails to cut the mustard for Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 08:06, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
There are currently more than 3,000 drafts waiting for review. The system is not a queue. Reviewers select what they want to review next. Thus, can be days, weeks, or (sadly) months before a draft is reviewed. Quality improves the likelihood of a faster review. Comply with the Comments left at the draft. David notMD (talk) 10:06, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello User:Assist prof inter, first things first, you cannot just write an article in your sandbox or as a draft and wait for it to be published, it needs to be submitted for review, there is no progress and it can take up to months to be reviewed, even then your article may not get published if it does not live up with WP's strict standards e.g WP:NOTABILITY or WP:RS, the last one is paramount since WP essentially revolves around these reliable sources, none or too little and the article cannot/will not be published, if you really have an itch to write an article maybe go over to the simple english wikipedia and write a simplified version of an article from here using the same WP:RS.
Before i found my place on WP i tried writing a few articles and none of them got anywhere, both of the subjects were real (one was about something called kenopsia and the other about a common fault in a certain model of camera) but both were lacking WP:RS - things like forum posts, blog posts and personal experience especially just cannot cut it.
Hello,
I am writing an article on a wrestler that I have seen in Louisville, KY. A few of his co-workers have pages, and I am a fan so thought I should make one for him. I gathered many cites, and edited the page properly. Whereas, the first time I did not. I would like someone to review my work, I submitted it for review but would like to get any advice!
Thanks!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Andreas_John_Ziegler_%22AJZ%22WrestlingNewsReport (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Dear editor, this is with reference to my article created in the name of A S Kabir for the publish on Wikipedia as article. this is submitted for kind review and approval.
@Tehrir: Welcome to the Teahouse! You've submitted the draft, so all that's left to do now is wait. Someone will come along and review the draft eventually, but this could take some time as there are (currently) 1,021 submissions waiting for review. Bsoyka (talk) 23:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
I have two articles I'm planning to write.
One will be on the relationship between Facist Italy and the Catholic Church.
The other will be on Gandhi's 'celibacy experiments' and comments on women/rape/etc.
What are good names for these articles?
TypistMonkey (talk) 15:29, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi everyone. I was curious as to your thoughts regarding why some people might wish to make their user pages blank, and on top of that, make it a re-direct to their talk page? I have a pretty simple and straightforward user page, but sometimes it seems to have angered people to be "too happy" it would seem. I use a lot of hearts and smileys. What can I say, I ♥ them! Regardless, was just curious as to how to technically go about this as well? I am not yet good with making re-directs, and I assume that is how I would go about making this work? Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥22:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
@Th78blue welcome to teahouse! From a technical point of view, they're like any other redirect page. You'd replace the entire text of your User page with #REDIRECT [[User talk:Th78blue]]. See WP:REDIRECT for more about redirects, and WP:USERPAGE for more about policies of user pages. I personally prefer to keep both a talk and user page. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 23:00, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for that! If I ever wanted to undo that, how would I go about that? Short of reverting my edit of course. I was curious because now I cannot click "Edit source" on my user page, because it re-directs me of course! I think this is a lot cleaner personally to just have one page for everything. Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥23:23, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
hi Th78blue! some people opt to do this since most people usually would want to go to their talk page for discussion and/or because they don't see the need for their userpage. as a little sidenote, we're in the same boat of using hearts way too much! I don't use them as much in wp compared to other places in the internet, but I keep a purple heart locked in my signature for this. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 23:06, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
I am not sure how this should work -- there is a redirect page here for the actor Joe Locke that I want to remove as there is a Draft article here that is ready to move to article space and take the place of the redirect. What is the correct way to do this, or can somebody help with this? Thank you. FULBERT (talk) 22:08, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
I am writing a book about aviation. You have about 8 photographs that I would like to use, providing credit to Wikipedia. I am prepared to make a donation in return to Wikipedia. Is this something that could be done ? 2600:1700:C71:3830:2473:FD8B:1AFA:CA41 (talk) 23:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi IP 2600:1700:C71:3830:2473:FD8B:1AFA:CA41. The photos you see used in various Wikipedia articles aren't really "owned" by Wikipedia in the sense that Wikipedia is the orginal copyright holder: so, getting permission from Wikipedia or donating to Wikipedia will not make OK for you to use, and you may actually need to contact copyright holders directly if you want to reuse their content in some cases. Each file (e.g. photo) has an associated file page and clicking on a photo should take you to its file page. On the file page, there should be information as to how the file is licensed and also about its provenance. Whether you can re-use a photo largely depends on how it's been licensed; furthermore, not all the photos you see have been uploaded to directly to Wikipedia (many if not most are uploaded to Wikpedia's sister project Wikipedia Commons). Most of the copyright licenses provide some brief information on the terms that must be followed in order to reuse a file uploaded to Wikipedia or Commons, but you can find out more information at c:Commons:Reusing content outside Wikimedia and Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I think that is fair to say that the vast majority of photos of aircraft that you see on Wikipedia are in one of two categories: First and this is the most common, the photos are freely licensed in a way that allows re-use with the only requirement being attribution. The second category is photos that are in the public domain, and therefore free of copyright restrictions. This includes photos first published over 95 years ago, and photos taken by employees of the U.S. federal government while on the job, and a variety of other cases. Public domain photos have no restrictions although it is ethical to credit the photographer if known. There may be a few non-free photos of aircraft that have copyright restrictions but they should be rare. Click on any photo on Wikipedia and then click the blue "More details" button. This will lead to information about the copyright status of that specific photo and, in many cases, the option to download a higher resolution version of the photo. Cullen328 (talk) 00:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Commerce section
I want to add a "commerce" section to my hometown page, however, I don't really see a precedence for it on any other city pages. I also don't want it to get flagged for advertising or something similar. My intent is to add names of businesses or services available in the town. Especially those that relate to the history of the town. For example, lumber is a main industry and there is one lumber mill left and it supports much of the town population. Additionally, items like gas station information would be helpful for travelers. Finally there is a landmark or point of interest similar in notoriety to the Mothman museum that would be an ideal addition to the page. Can someone provide some direction on if and what I can add in this category? Or what I should name the section? Thank you! VKDuran (talk) 20:33, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello VKDuran, thank you for wanting to improve Wikipedia. Even though you probably know a great deal about your hometown you can only add information that can be cited with a reliable reference, for people reading your additions won't know if what you have been told is correct, unless there's a way to verify it. You may find it helpful to read: Your first article since it has good information that can be used when adding to an article, especially the section on references.
Has there been local history books published that tell about your hometown, or newspaper articles about it's founding or early days? If you can find published information about your town's lumber industry, you can add a "Lumber industry" or "Early industry" section, making sure to add references for what you write about. A couple of sentences (with a properly formatted citation / reference) will be a useful addition. But unless there was a particular company that was known outside of your local area, it wouldn't be notable enough to have a great deal of information written about it. Best wishes on your Wikipedia adventures. Karenthewriter (talk) 21:28, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
@VKDuran, information like "gas station information" is impossible to keep current over the years, especially if you imagine info like that in thousands of articles, with WP editors sometimes retiring. A web search engine is a much better resource for travelers. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 23:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
I have now 438 edits and it's past 30 days since my account was created. So, how many more edits do I need to become an extended-confirmed user? I am Rjsb0192 (talk) 09:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I have a question about the film titles in the filmography of Draft:Philipp Hochmair. Most of the titles are in the original German. Is it better to translate the titles?
If there is no link, I also write the German titles?
Does anyone want to create an article about "parsimonious with the truth"?
I was looking for a Wikipedia reference to the expression "parsimonious with the truth". I thought it was a well known and old expression often attributed to Mark Twain. Though the expression appears in many books, now I think it is probably just a rather obscure euphemism (and almost surely not from Mark Twain). Might be worth a Wikipedia reference or article because of the books? Or maybe not? Perhaps the easiest test of relevance is whether you know what it means? (And if so, then how did you figure it out?)
The following link is the 8th page of results from Google Search. That's the last page with the exact quote, so there are at least seven pages of books that use it. (I noticed that some of them were dictionaries, so I'm not sure if those books should count as significant uses of the expression.)
By the way, I explored creating a new article for the topic. Turned out to be way too much bother for such a trivial topic. Mostly left me wondering what sort of person has that much motivation to do such a thing. Along the way I remember seeing something about being friendly to newcomers. It didn't feel that way. But my sentiments towards Wikipedia have gotten much darker over the years. (So that would lead to a recursive joke from the articles titled "The road to hell is paved..."?) Shanen (talk) 17:43, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Can the dates on maintenance templates and url access dates be updated?
Is it permitted to uptade dates on maintenance templates? For example, if an article with no sources has a {{Unreferenced}} template on it dated June 2019, could the date be changed to the current month if the article still has no sources. Also, I have the same question about url access dates. Can they be dated to the current date if the url is still live? Cyrobyte (talk) 22:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
To your first question, Cyrobyte: this would be pointless. No, it would be worse than pointless: it would deceptively imply that the problem was only recently diagnosed. To your second question: if your examination of the linked page shows that it still states what it is described as stating, then yes. -- Hoary (talk) 23:00, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Interesting! I recently asked about updating the access-date (once here, once on a user or article talk page), both times, I got the answer I felt was wrong, which gives me a sense that my opinion might be relevant! Here are my points:
Standard citation styles call for specifying an access date, so the rules called for by the various citation styles ought to carry some weight.
It would an understatement to describe it as "fairly annoying" if editors actually updated the access-date whenever they checked a cited source.
My view is that the access date ought to be updated whenever the "effective url" is modified, e.g.url or archive-url is modified, depending on the setting of url-status, or if url-status is modified to affect which url is used as the item link.
Abiding by this behavior can be very helpful if someone is trying to find the edit which modified the url, which can be quite useful for somebody looking to determine what the link used to be, in order to repair a broken link.
You think darkness is your ally, Hoary? You merely adopted the dark. I was born in it, molded by it. I didn't see the light until I was already a man, by then it was nothing to me but blinding! Panini!•🥪13:26, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Wrong information on my Bio
Hello,
There is a Bio about me on Wikipedia that is wrong. I tried correcting the information by editing it but @TornadoLGS refuted the edits due to conflict of interest.
How can I find someone who can edit my Bio according to the correct information on www.timaderyan.com ?
If the information cannot be edited, how can I remove the page off Wikipedia? Gipsy2022 (talk) 19:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Here is the page with the wrong information: [[8]] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Gipsy2022 (talk • contribs) 19:15, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
@Gipsy2022: Place a note on the article's talk page with the changes you want made, along with a citation to a reliable source. Then add {{Edit request}} and another editor will take a look at it. There is a backlog for requests like this, so you'll need to be patient. RudolfRed (talk) 19:18, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Except from some very simple information, your website is not a valid reference. You removed referenced content and added content without references. Per above, you are limited to making very specific edit requests on the Talk page, so that another editor can consider accepting or declining. David notMD (talk) 22:36, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
@Bsoyka: I don't feel like the OP's question is about understanding the purpose of Wikipedia. And anyway, you make it sound like the "purpose" of Wikipedia necessarily makes it all-powerful and all-knowing--infallible and beyond correction or criticism. Someone comes to Wikipedia, finds an article about himself or herself, almost certainly didn't authorize it, finds things in it that s/he feels are just plain wrong. One doesn't think then about the "purpose" of Wikipedia; one thinks, what can s/he do about this. Well, while I don't know the details, I understand that there are things one can do. First, as a matter of policy, Wikipedia does try to respect privacy. Second, I understand there are provisions for people written about in Wikipedia to raise objections. And finally, (I don't know the person who raised all this, so I have no idea of his/her notability), I recently read that for a person of marginal or questionable notability, Wikipedia will consider removing an article, if that person doesn't want it. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for bringing that up AzseicsoK. I think a lot of times we forget that aspect of Wikipedia. We are an online encyclopedia and we will come into contact with the subjects of some of our articles. It doesn't change the fact that Wikipedia can not use the subjects personal website as a source for potentially controversial information. What is commonly misunderstood though is that we can use primary sources for biographical information that wouldn't be controversial. However, I think that we can do more to assist this person than shrugging off their concerns with a seemingly non-empathetic answer. Injecting just a little empathy can go a long way. Gipsy2022, can you go to the article talk page here and tell us what you think should be removed and why? Also include any information you think should be added. I know this is going to sound weird but please try to understand. We need you to include sources that are not you or have any affiliation with you for any information you think needs to be added. --ARoseWolf13:28, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Marriage Abnormalities
I want to write an articles on the meaning of Marriage, its advantage, disadvantage, and Marriage abnormalities as a guide for single and married people to follow.
And i will be basing my references on our normal day to day life and also on biblical terms Giftyemmy (talk) 18:55, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are informative, but not guides or how-to. Your thoughts on the topic would be original research = forbidden. David notMD (talk) 18:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
That doesn't matter. We don't allow articles which are clearly opinion or are trying to preach to the reader, and your "meaning of marriage" is little more than your personal opinion of it coloured from a Christian perspective. —Jéské Courianov^_^va little blue Bori19:04, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Given that you started your account today, you cannot edit Marriage until your account is four days old and you have made ten edits, as it is semi-protected (the 'lock' symbol to upper right). David notMD (talk) 19:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
See WP:YFA if you decide to create an article about another topic. New editors are strongly advised to gain experience editing existing articles before attempting to create an article. David notMD (talk) 19:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
There is a clarification necessary here. It is perfectly acceptable to write about marriage, or anything else that falls in an ethical sphere, from a Christian perspective. But it is also correct to write about it from a Muslim perspective, a Jewish perspective, a Sikh perspective, an Atheist's perspective or an Agnostic's; in fact it's essential that in a subject on which religion has an unavoidable opinion, we reflect all religious views neutrally and without bias, and without any personal statement for or against any of those views; Wikipedia does not reject God; Wikipedia rejects Original Research and Unsourced Original Opinion. Wikipedia has no particular opinion on God (or anything); it is here to summarise others' opinions.
In formulating our article, we must stick to reliable secondary sources. Whether you hate Christianity, or adhere to it, you can only write about it in the voice of someone else, someone widely believed to have an opinion worth listening to. Incidentally, we already have an article Christian_views_on_marriage which is a good place for those interested in how Christian beliefs and ethics affect attitudes to marriage. Elemimele (talk) 16:58, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
While the answers to the original question are broadly correct, their contexts seem to be colored by some prejudices--and in at least one case, a chip on a shoulder. The OP did not mention a Christian perspective or Christianity. Wikipedia is not the forum for what s/he proposed; that's all that's needed. The OP, apparently being new here, might not realize that--as many newbies are unclear on just what Wikipedia is. Uporządnicki (talk) 12:02, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I have an url at Foreign relations of the Dominican Republic (ref 3) which has spaces in it and therefore messes up the reference. Now the link works which I guess is the most important part but it just looks amateurish. I tried changing the encoding per Template:Cite web but couldn't make it work so if any of you could take a look, I would appreciate it. Thanks. --Semsûrî (talk) 08:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello Semsûrî! You are correct in that it is the spaces within the original URL causing the error message to display after that reference. To fix it just place %20 where the spaces occur like http://enlacecongreso.mirex.gob.do/ecc/Lists/Establecimiento%20de%20Relaciones%20Diplomticas/AllItems.aspx. You'll note that the second working archived URL you used is in that format & thus is working fine. Those %20 normally get inserted when you copy a URL with spaces in, perhaps got left out when copy/pasting somehow. I do notice that some other references on that page are throwing error messages when the page is edited but those are unrelated to that one. Hope this is of help! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 08:53, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Semsûrî Welcome to Teahouse! If you look at the archived url, you'll notice that the spaces were replaced with %20 which is an example of Percent-encoding. I went ahead and fixed the dead url. I hope I understood your question correctly. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 08:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello! I recently added a few userboxes to my userpage, however i need help formatting them, i would want them on top of one another instead of abreast/side-to-side like they are now, i have tried adding paragraphs between them and even if it looks it in the visual editor it for some reason doesn't work when i publish, is there actually a way of formatting them like this? also is it ok to have subpages of my main userpage?
There are a lot of tools you can use with userboxes, but what often works best is to look at the source code for a page that has the sort of layout you want and steal it. For instance, if you look at the source of WP:Userbox you can see how the stack of userboxes is made with a wikitable styled with style="float:right. The default coding for these boxes is designed to make a page-width block of them. Wrestling them into a different style just takes a little extra effort. — jmcgnh(talk)(contribs)21:08, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello Teahouse hosts. I am an experienced editor, but I have a quick question regarding how the WP:TIES policy works for immigrants. Say someone was born and raised in the United Kingdom, but later moved to the United States where they became notable for their work. Should it use dmy dates and British English (based on birthplace) or mdy dates and American English (because that is where they became notable)? Thanks for your time, Link20XX (talk) 17:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Link20XX: Welcome to the Teahouse. You might be able to get more relevant input if you ask over at WT:MOS. In my opinion, I think American style would be better as they're notable there more than they are in the states. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:45, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Link20XX Welcome to Teahouse! In general, I would emphasize wherever they are notable, but all that said, if there's no compelling argument for a specific variation then the article creator decides and MOS:RETAIN applies. In short, don't worry too much about it would my simpler answer. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 17:46, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedia geniuses, I am looking for some help editing the a draft I have just created (that got immediately rejected) for Zayla Partners. I also want to ensure that I have taken all of the necessary steps with regards to compliance. I am very new to this and would greatly appreciate the help of an experienced editor! Dariaerzakova (talk) 18:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Dariaerzakova. You have properly disclosed that you are a paid editor. Thanks for that. Personally, I consider it highly unlikely that a company founded in 2022 would be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Your draft only has a single reference dated 2016, and that appears to be a directory listing for a company that the founder was previously associated with. That reference is of no value. Your draft is full of unreferenced content and that violates the core content policy Verifiability Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) and Your first article for the required standards. Cullen328 (talk) 19:08, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
How to Change My Username & How long to Post
The username I have is Tzedekassociation and I want to change it to: Tzedek Association with a space. How can I do this. I also want to add another page called Moshe Margaretten. Do I need to create a new account to do this or can I use my existing account to create an additional page?
@Tzedekassociation: Welcome to the Teahouse. Since this is your only edit, it's probably fastest to abandon this account and create a new one called Tzedek Association, so long as either of these usernames don't violate the username policy, particularly organisation names as they're considered promotional. If they do, definitely change your username to something else.An account can create multiple pages, though understand that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and hosts articles, not mere pages. Creating one from scratch is one of the hardest things to do, and I would suggest editing other existing articles to get an understanding of how that works. If you still want to create an article despite that, I strongly recommend you read Your first article before getting started. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure "Tzedek Association" would be a violation of the username policy as it would imply the account is used by more than one person. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654518:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Yes, at first glance that seems to be the case, and with a quick Google search there is an actual organisation that goes by that name. That being said, I've known some people that refer to themselves as a group, so this is a "just-in-case". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:44, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I fear Doug and Blaze are on to something. At the very least both usernames run afoul of username policy. Welcome to the Teahouse, Tzedekassociation. Are you connected with either the association or Rabbi Margaretten in any way? --ARoseWolf19:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Is there an expiration on final vandalism warnings?
I recently reported a user (173.198.159.2) for vandalism on the "Administrator intervention against vandalism" page. According to this user's talk page, the user received a final warning on 21 October 2021 and then vandalized again today. Is there a time limit or an expiration date on final warnings? I tried to ask the admin, however a cleaner bot deleted my comment. Sorry, if I'm confused and thanks for any clarification you can offer so I know when to report in the future. Thanks! Wikipedialuva (talk) 19:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Wikipedialuva: Technically the warnings do expire. For me I usually say that if a warning is over a month old, then a fresh set of warnings is due. However if the user (or IP) has many warnings on their userpage, I might think a bit differently. 19:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC) ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654519:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@Wikipedialuva: Some people might say warnings "expire" a bit sooner, others slightly later. Warnings don't usually expire as something that reflects on the user's behavior. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654520:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I recently created an account. I have plans on writing a page about Dr Ophelia Inez Weeks .... Daughter of 'Rocheforte Lafayette Weeks' see wiki page. Before I do I wanted to see if I could upload a simple picture of Rocheforte Lafayette Weeks to his page as its from our family Library; however, when I do try it says it cannot ....don't know why something about permissions... We have other photos of him for example when being commissioned by the President as Foreign Minister, or signing of the codification of Liberian laws, meeting of the cardinal etc. but if one was reject all will I expect.
Also just wanted to know,... can I as a brother of Dr. Ophelia Inez Weeks write a page about her. She too followed in my Father's steps as also a President of the University of Liberia, started a program at FIU on Quantitative Biology, first woman to graduate from Howard University Neuroanatomy department etc. ....I was thinking about writing the article in Word and then worrying about how to edit to Wikipedia standards.
Any ideas on the photo issue above and if I can write a page about my Sister as I will interview her soon as I asked her so I could gather some facts for the page
@Rweekacl: Welcome to the Teahouse. It depends on who owns the copyright, and if there are current licences that restrict its use (the image use policy has more to say on the matter). If you are Ophelia Weeks' brother, you are strongly discouraged from writing an article (not just a mere page) about her (as you would have a conflict of interest) in the main articlespace. That being said, creating a draft is one of the hardest things to do, and you're better served editing existing articles to get an idea of how Wikipedia articles work. If you are adamant on writing an article about Weeks, I suggest reading Your first article very thoroughly. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello, Rweekacl. You have a Conflict of interest regarding your sister, and should conduct yourself very carefully. Use the Articles for Creation process and disclose your conflict of interest. A photo from your family library is a problem, because in almost all cases, the photographer will be the copyright holder, and therefore the photographer (or their estate if the photographer has died) is the only person who can release the photo under a free license for uploading to Wikimedia Commons. However, because Rocheforte Lafayette Weeks is dead, there is the possibility of uploading a photo here on English Wikipedia under the provisions of Non-free images #10. Cullen328 (talk) 20:29, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Can I sort this table? revisiting standard newbie question #73482
Original question was not clear.
>"Is it ok if I sort the (source) content of this table in an article that I want to work upon?"
>I am confident that this is a well worn consideration but I have not yet learned the rules.
I am not sure where to look for applicable policy/discussion/guidance.
>Yes, I have phrased this (over) generally because I also want to learn a little bit about the
balance to expect between "for some articles you should do this" and "on wikipedia in general
you should do this" and whatever other perspectives that have not yet occured to me.
I am looking for some general community standards/expectations
responsive to my question "Do I?".
The following is a scenario that happens from time to time.
I want to contribute to an article.
That article contains a table.
Wikipedia displays that table in some (sorted) order.
The source of that list, within the article, is not sorted.
I want to sort it.
Do I?
Here is a made up example, in case the above is still not sufficient . . .
The table of professional baseball players who have won Nobel prizes
can be displayed in name, birthdate, & award date order.
But the source text was added over the course of several edits
by different people.
The sequence of edits added:
(edit 1) several entries for a particular baseball team . . .
(edit 12) the contributor's uncle (alphabetically by last name) who was from a different team . . .
(edit 31) (at the begining of the text) the entries for winners of chemistry prizes . . .
(edit 457) (at the bottom) the physics prize winners . . .
(edit 1395) (just after the original baseball team list) the most recent chemistry winner
And now the table _source_ is a mess
That makes it more difficult to avoid duplicate entries, to compare data
between entries that are logically adjacent, and so on. Occasionally one
even finds duplicate entries.
Now consider that the entries may contain inconsistent, duplicate, and
repeated citations.
The previous is made much worse by multiply published references, by
inconsistently versioned updated publications, referenced web sites
that have gigantic URLs and/or that have multiple pages leading to
the same content and/or that have entirely different pages which appear
almost the same to everyone but the web server.
Hello again, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse! The question is still a bit confusing, as Hoary indicated, but I've tried to answer it. In the example you are describing, I think it would probably be okay to sort the table; cleaning up messy source code is generally a good thing to do. However, if you did, it would probably be wise to explain what you are doing in the edit summary/summaries; otherwise those who see the edits may not realize what you are doing. If you first created an account, you could also copy the source over to your sandbox and do your revising there, and then paste it into the source of the article in order to do it in one edit easier. Does this answer your question? Perfect4th (talk) 00:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I would like to ask for help regarding the method to change my user stylesheet's content type from “CSS” to “Sanitized CSS”. I understand this request maybe should be posted to WP:ANI, but the edit notice said only chronic, urgent, and intractable problems are welcome there, so this is the place I guess? Any reply and comment are welcome, thank you!－Taipei NativeComment12:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
@台北人: Such a request should definitely not be posted at WP:ANI, as it has nothing to do with administrators.
@Tigraan:Thank you for your reply! The reason I wanted to seek administrators' assistance was because as far as I knew, only administrators or interface administrators can modify the content model of the page according to WP:INTADMIN. And yes, it seems like WP:VPT is a more suitable place to post a request like this. Thank you for your advice on what to and not to do at WP:ANI, I will keep that in mind.－Taipei NativeComment00:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
@台北人: To expand on Tigraan's answer, ANI is for behavioural/conduct issues of other (English) Wikipedia users that require administrator intervention. It is one of the last stops to escalating inter-user conflict, and it's a place where nearly all parties involved don't come out feeling better off than before. The technical village pump is where technical questions are asked, and regulars there are better equipped to help you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:03, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Does verifiable material that is challenged still have to provide an inline citation?
For example, Lionel Messi has won 7 Ballon D'or titles. If someone decided to challenge that fact and put "Citation needed" at the end of the sentence, is it still necessary to put an inline citation to support the material despite already being an obvious fact? Fijipedia (talk) 23:19, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Fijipedia, and welcome to the Teahouse! As the verifiability policy states, "All material in Wikipedia mainspace... must be verifiable. All quotations, and any material whose verifiability has been challenged or is likely to be challenged, must include an inline citation to a reliable source that directly supports the material." So yes, a citation should be included. In the example you gave, someone without much previous knowledge in the football/soccer world might not know Messi has won 7 Ballon D'ors, so it's good to make sure the claim is verifiable. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 23:52, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
I personally have never heard of Lionel Messi, nor in fact have I ever heard of the Ballon D'or title, and wouldn't even have known that this is a football-related topic without Perfect4th's comment. What is an obvious fact to one person may be completely unknown to another. It's important to remember that Wikipedia is read by a vast variety of people from different backgrounds with different experiences. See WP:CK for more about this. CodeTalker (talk) 01:12, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Fijipedia. I agree with CodeTalker. I live in California. I did recognize Lionel Messi's name but for half a second, thought he might be a mountaineer. Maybe that is because I used to be a mountaineer myself. As for the Ballon d'Or, that sounds like a trophy for piloting hot air balloons to me, but I have just learned now that it is a top award for European Association football players. We call that game soccer here and it is less popular than Gridiron football (a completely different game) or baseball or basketball. At the professional level, it is less popular than hockey. So, why would you expect readers in the U.S., which is the most populous English speaking country by far, to know about Messi and his prestigious European award? The core content policy Verifiability requires references for all content that has been challenged, and there are no exceptions for either famous European soccer players or famous American baseball players. Cullen328 (talk) 01:34, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Italicisation on title?
Hi, I'm going to create an article for some albums, how do I make sure that the title (like the one that's shown at the top of the page, e.g., for this page is Wikipedia:Teahouse) is italicised like this? Thanks X-750I've made a mistake, haven't I?01:57, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, X750. There are several ways to accomplish this. For the purpose of articles about albums, the most straightforward way is to start out the article with Template:Infobox album, which automatically italicizes the title, and prompts you to provide standard content about the album, displayed in a standardized way. Cullen328 (talk) 02:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy link:LaptopMD@Arthurlmd: Welcome to the Teahouse! The article was removed after a deletion discussion because it was considered too promotional and did not appear to be notable at the time.However, if you'd like to create it from scratch and start again, have a look at H:YFA, but be absolutely sure to follow the policies surrounding paid contributions as you are affiliated with the company. Failure to do so violates the Wikimedia Foundation's terms of use, so this is a big thing to keep in mind.Let us know if you have any further questions. Happy editing! Bsoyka (talk) 23:20, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Arthurlmd. I strongly recommend against using a paid Wikipedia editing service. Most of these outfits are scams and they simply cannot assure that the article will not be deleted again. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies carefully, because any attempt to recreate this article must fully comply with that guideline. Also read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure. As the founder of the company, you must make that disclosure. This is mandatory and non-negotiable. Cullen328 (talk) 00:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
thank you , so what do i do ? we are real company and im a real person. 3 locations and 0o employees, we are mentioned on all New York city tv stations (NOT PAID). cnn, wall street journal, MSN, NBC, Inc, etc..etc.. nothing is paid for, they all come to us because of what we do . google my name, google our company name.. its all there . Arthur Zilberman (talk) 21:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
hi ip user and welcome to the teahouse! you don't need to post multiple times, a volunteer will be able to help you when we're free. anyways, please read Your first article to get started. to be able to make an article about a musician, you need to first prove that they can meet the notability guidelines for musicians using reliable sources that are independent of the subject: it's not just about someone being popular. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 04:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
I was about to say something similar, but you said it before me. I'll also just add that it doesn't look like the musician Ali Sabri meets Wikipedias Noteability Guidlines for musicians. On Spotify he has just 9 monthly listeners, and from a quick Google Search, there doesn't appear to be any signifigant news coverage on them. Also non of the links the ip user gave that they say are news on Google about this person go to actual news articles. One of the links is for an article about Ali Sabri on WikiAlpha, a site that appears to be alternative to Wikipedia with a very leniant deletion policy in regards to notabibility. The other links are for the musicians page on Apple Music and Google Search results for the term "ali sabri musician". Greshthegreat (talk) 04:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Two New Mexico wildfires recently merged, but InciWeb doesn't list a complex fire. Should I make seperate articles for each fire and/or one about a complex fire?
The currently burning New Mexico wildfires, the Hermits Peak fire and Calf Canyon fire recently merged with one another. InciWeb however has them listed seperately and gives the same acreage for both, but does not have a complex fire listed. They are definitely worthy of at least one or more articles about them, as the two fires have collectively burned 56,478 acres as of April 25, according to InciWeb. Should I make two seperate articles for each wildfire and/or one about a complex fire? Greshthegreat (talk) 04:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
If you can find a source or sources that confirm that fires merged, my guess would be to make a single article about the complex fire. BlueNoise (talk) 05:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Greshthegreat. InciWeb is a governmental source and certainly a reliable primary source. But independent, secondary sources are preferred. Major newspaper articles that provides a detailed analysis of all of these related fires are the best while the fires are burning. If such sources describe these various merging fires as a "complex" fire, then that is a good approach to take. It is easier for busy editors to deal with a single article about a complex fire, than edit several articles about individual component fires. But only if reliable sources inceasingly describe the fire system that way. I hope that this helps, because I too live in wildfire country. Thanks for your contributions to our wildfire coverage. Cullen328 (talk) 05:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Depicting of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) in pictures in the biography page of the Prophet (PBUH).
I assume you are referring to the article Muhammad rather than the main page you linked to, which does not appear to have any such images. This has been discussed many times before, and the pictures will not be removed as Wikipedia is WP:NOTCENSORED. This is explained in detail in the big yellow box at the top of Talk:Muhammad and under FAQ Q3 you will find a method by which you can avoid seeing such images. - Arjayay (talk) 10:02, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Exactly the same reply as above - the person does not appear to be notable enough to have a Wikipedia article. If you think they are, please find 2 reliable, independent sources that provide significant coverage to the subject, not just passing mentions, or trivia - Arjayay (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
How do I save a sandbox page?
I have written a draft for my article. But I need to go back and add more, edit etc. There is no save button on the sandbox page and so every time I lose everything. How can i save it? Robert Nurden (talk) 06:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Robert Nurden, you use the button which is misleadingly labelled "Publish". That button does not publish anything as an article, it does what most people would call "Save". Our legal team insist on it being labelled "Publish" because, when you use it, you are releasing most of your copyright in the material that you saved. (If this strikes you as daft, you are not alone.) Maproom (talk) 07:18, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
If not clear, the editors are referring to your Sandbox. The general Wikipedia Sandbox is blanked several times a day. David notMD (talk) 10:34, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
hi MickeyMouse143! I've added the button (and the draft AfC template) to your drafts. I'd advise you to work on them first however. none of the articles have sufficient citations, which are required for an article to be published. you would also need them to meet the general notability guideline, which states [a] topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 10:43, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Both of your drafts now have a blue rectangle with the words "Submit the draft for review!" However, do not do this yet, as neither is in a form that can be approved. At Cirrhilabrus there is a list of species. The ones in blue are articles. You need to model your drafts on those - including references - before submitting. David notMD (talk) 10:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
How to get more editors to fix poorly written articles?
Hello! I know it is important to have up-to-date, reliable, accurate information about history in Wikipedia. As an Indian myself, I can assure you how painful it is to see topics related to Indian History being underrepresented. To properly find sources, and extend these articles, I would suggest asking everyone who you know and influencing them to come edit Wikipedia, and make them help you edit these. You can also contact professionals (professors, historians and conservationalists) and gather their knowledge.
However if this is not enough, you can send out a Geographically-specific notice, or conduct an editathon in your city, district or UT.
Is there a way you can send updates to someone in Wikipedia to update a page for you with purely factual information - if you have a conflict of interest? CJK1979 (talk) 12:42, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Fabulous I will take a look. Thank you so much for responding so quickly. This is the first time I have ever done anything like this :) CJK1979 (talk) 12:49, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Arjayay I have taken a look. I'm sorry for being stupid, can I just clarify that If i copy and paste my document which includes the updated factual info into the talk page, and then publish it. Will someone then review it and update the page? And if they have any concerns I take it they will let me know? CJK1979 (talk) 12:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi CJK1979 - In theory yes, but many editors are reluctant to change an entire page, as it is difficult/hard work to spot all the changes, check they are properly referenced and presented neutrally. It is far better to make incremental changes, in the form "Please replace XXX with YYY" or "Please add ZZZ between PPP and QQQ". - Arjayay (talk) 13:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Ok super so maybe if I do it section by section to make it clear, over a couple of weeks - does that sound like a better idea. Also is there any guarantee to how quickly this will get done? sorry for all the Qs CJK1979 (talk) 13:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi there. An article I wrote about an online game was rejected due to lack of references.
I realize that most of the article, about gameplay, indeed lacks references. I'm not really sure what to do about it though. I play the game a lot, and I wrote it based off my knowledge of the game. The game's wiki isn't an independent source, so I'm not sure what I can really reference for that section. Any advice is appreciated! Thanks. ~~~ GreenBeret1439 (talk) 13:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, GreenBeret1439, and welcome to the Teahouse! Adding information based off your knowledge of the game typically counts as original research in Wikipedia, which is not allowed. However, the guideline for plot summaries indicates that the work itself is assumed the primary source for the plot summary, which is acceptable. (See WP:PLOTCITE for further information.) You will still need to make sure that any quotations and all parts of the article not about the gameplay are referenced, though. Hope this helps, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 14:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi GreenBeret1439, I can add a couple of tips that helped me with sources in the past. One is to put this little template somewhere temporarily (like your userpage) and click on the links it generates. That will help you find some of these independent reliable sources that you need. {{Find sources AFD|title=Conflict of Nations: World War III}}
A second idea is to look at existing articles for games similar to the one you want to write about and see what kinds of sources they have for what kinds of material. I expect you’re going to need to find things like a magazine that reviewed the game, a newspaper article about how the game has become really popular. For example, look at Eve Online. It’s got info like why the game is significant (sourced to a magazine top 50 games list), how it has impacted the real world (an article about a museum exhibit based on the game), who owns and distributes it + number of subscribers (business press articles), how gameplay works (sourced to game’s own materials), tournament events (news articles), how it was developed (news interviews with the creators) etc etc. If you can’t find anything like this for your game, it probably isn’t significant enough yet to write an article in an encyclopedia but you can also patiently wait until there is news coverage and then try later. 70.67.193.176 (talk) 15:43, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi IP, the article you linked is likely not notable, if you think it is, please find 2 reliable, independent sources that provide significant coverage to the subject. Justiyaya10:07, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Great question! EvergreenFir gave you a lot of good resources. You can also get a set of editing suggestions on your homepage; if you don't already have this turned on, you can do so by going to your Preferences, scrolling all the way down on the "User Page" tab, and selecting the "Display newcomer homepage" checkbox. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 17:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Issues with page
Titles on pages on Wikipedia mobile are in bold, as well as subsection titles, don’t know if other people who are on Mobil are experiencing the same issues but just letting all of you all know. BigRed606 (talk) 16:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Im making an article right now and whenever I read it I notice that the title says, Draft: (article name) . Is this only gonna be there until it gets approved? :/ IPopCornWasHere (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The page for Paul Andrew (designer) is quite outdated. This final sentence in the first paragraph:
In February 2019, Andrew was named Creative Director of both men’s and women’s categories at Salvatore Ferragamo after having served as Women’s Creative Director since October 2017.
Should be edited to read:
In February 2019, Andrew was named Creative Director of both men’s and women’s categories at Salvatore Ferragamo after having served as Women’s Creative Director since October 2017 and consequently elected to shutter his eponymous shoe brand. After leaving Ferragamo in May 2021, Andrew relaunched his namesake brand in February 2022.
Jennifercoxpr Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume that the "pr" in your username means that you represent Mr. Andrew; if so, please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures. Regarding your inquiry, please direct this suggestion to the article talk page, Talk:Paul Andrew (designer), in the form of an edit request(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 19:46, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you - yes I handle PR for Mr. Andrew, which I have disclosed on my page. I have made suggested edits in the article talk page but will do so again... As his article is more than a year out of date we are just attempting to make it current. Jennifercoxpr (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Jennifercoxpr I now see your edit request; I might suggest that you slim it down to just one or two changes at a time- a lengthy request may intimidate the volunteers that review them, or it may be harder to find a volunteer willing to invest the time in a long request. 331dot (talk) 19:53, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
... but the (empty) document was created not by me, and it was created in Arabic (which I don't speak), so I can't read the editing prompts. "Hayhohe11/stadium" is the document. Maybe suspicious? Hayhohe11 (talk) 02:29, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Global contribution check turns up nothing but this. I'm sorry, @Hayhohe11, but the page does not appear to exist, and therefore cannot be deleted. If, for whatever reason, the page does exist, please write {{g7}} at the top of the page if you are the only contributor, which will alert an admin that you are the only contributor and wish to delete it. casualdejekyll02:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I think I understand: I was somehow sent a welcome notification from Arabic wiki which I clicked in and ended up starting the creation of a "sandbox" page there, which auto-filled the title in Arabic which translated to "Hayhohe11/stadium." Whew! Hayhohe11 (talk) 03:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hey all, I'm working on an article about a newly signed NHL player. It's at User:Scriptwriter/Ryker Evans if you'd like to take a look.
First, I'd like to make sure that he's notable enough to have his own article. I would think this is the case but I figure it won't hurt to make sure. I can always hold the article if necessary, but he was a high draft pick and most of the other players on his new team have pages of their own, so I figure he's a safe bet.
Second, I plan to cite an article about him in at least two different places in the entry, once under "Early life and family" and once under "Regina Pats" (which I haven't started yet). What's the best way to do an ibid-style citation on a web reference?
And third, I'll listen to any style suggestions people might have. It's been years since I created an article from scratch, and never one this complex with tables and the like. Thanks. Scriptwriter (talk) 00:13, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I have used Wikipedia to edit an article before, but I'm not sure how to use SuggestBot. I've seen the article guidelines, but I still don't get it. How would I do it? PoliticallyPassionateGamer (talk) 02:33, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, PoliticallyPassionateGamer. You do not really "use" SuggestBot, except to adjust its settings if you want. The bot monitors your edits and your preferences, and sends you lists of suggestions of articles that you may choose to edit. If you choose to edit some of them, that's fine. If you choose not to edit them, that's fine too. Cullen328 (talk) 05:17, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
How does a non-admin close an AfD with the result delete?
Hello, Iamreallygoodatcheckers. Your section heading contradicts your question. Wikipedia:Non-admin closure makes it clear that non-administrators should not try to close discussions that require administrator's tools to implement. Requesting is another thing. You can certainly reach out to an administrator who actively closes AfDs, and say, "Hey, the consensus looks pretty clear here. Will you close it?" Cullen328 (talk) 04:32, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Appears you did a non-admin disclosure at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sender (band). While seven days had passed between nomination and your action, proposing a Speedy keep would have been a better action. There was no need for haste for an article decision about a band that disbanded in 2014. David notMD (talk) 07:42, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Tool to check how much of a specific page was written by a specific editor?
I remember the existence of a tool used for GA attribution which checked roughly how much of an article was written by a specific editor.. Am I misremembering? Which tool is this? (ping on reply please) casualdejekyll02:48, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello casualdejekyll! Just to add to the above correct info, you can also see that same information as part of the Page statistics for articles. To view those go to the article you're interested in & click View History - Page statistics. Authorship pie chart as well as other interesting data will be listed. - Hope this is of help! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 08:21, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
can i use TV channel Youtube video as person notifiable as a reference source in edit?
I have question about the notifiable person on internet i am creating article Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft%3AMaxordan
If a person appears on TV Channel game show in past 2016 and now in 2022 the channel is close or platform completely change and the reference link is removed from official website but the videos are available in Youtube from TV channel show page
can i am able to use the Youtube video link as source of person notability?
can i also use IMDb Show page and public profile for notability? 91.73.217.133 (talk) 09:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. Perhaps someone is familiar with Russian sources? I created an article, but the reviewers refuse to look at it. The sources are all Russian, except for one source - American Forbes. If someone could see the draft, I would be very grateful!31.40.143.16 (talk) 08:39, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
31.40.143.16,
I do not see any problem as long as all the sources are reliable and trustworthy. However, if you yourself do not know Russian, and used Machine Translation (GoogleTranslate, etc) , then there is a possibility of change of words, or meaning. Even if you did not directly paste the translated version, it still might have had some changes. Regards, Narutmaru . To contact me, visit my Talk Page.09:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)— Preceding unsigned comment added by Narutmaru (talk • contribs)
Welcome to Teahouse! I would recommend getting in touch with WikiProject WP:RUSSIA and or contacting some of the available translators to ask for feedback/review of your article's sourcing Wikipedia:Translators available. Currently the article is a mix of a biography, and info about Positive Technology. The notability of Positive Technology does not confer to the director per WP:INHERIT. We are all WP:VOLUNTEERs so there is no rush either to review drafts. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:20, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@Daniel Case: Здравствуйте! Мне посоветовали обратиться в участникам, которые знают русский язык. Я нашёл Вас в разделе, в котором есть списки таких участников. Могли бы Вы взглянуть на мой драфт и посмотреть источники, а также текст статьи. Буду очень благодарен Вам, если поможете! Спасибо!31.40.143.16 (talk) 12:16, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Is it possible to sort editing suggestions by articles pertaining to LGBTQ+ topics?
Hello,
As a member of the LGBTQ+ community, I have a vested interest in the upkeep and refinement of articles documenting LGBTQ+ history, literature, music, people, and videogames. Is there a way to find these articles easier than endless scrolling on the editing suggestions tab on the homepage?
The article you wrote about yourself, Lil sad frosty? It was deleted. It didn't even resemble a Wikipedia article. What should you do? First, become successful and famous. Then there'll be plenty of good material about you, and other people will want to cite it and write an article about you. They'll write the article, and Google will index it. -- Hoary (talk) 11:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because this article dose no harm to anyone. This article doesn't brake any rule's. The artist is a upcoming artist who is very passion it about music and becoming famous. The artist works very hard on his hobby music. Lil sad frosty the artist want's a Wikipedia article about him and his story so people can go read and learn about him. He also worked really hard on the article and he would like the article to be on publish and be on google with his other stuff so people can find it and learn about him when you look up lil sad frosty. It would also make his online presents and his google profile look way better. Lil sad frosty worked really hard and knows he deserve's it and it would help you gain more user's on Wikipedia! So it's a win win. It help's me and you so everyone's happy here!
This article should not be speedily deleted for lack of asserted importance because this article dose no harm to anyone. This article doesn't brake any rule's. The artist is a upcoming artist who is very passion it about music and becoming famous. The artist works very hard on his hobby music. Lil sad frosty the artist want's a Wikipedia article about him and his story so people can go read and learn about him. He also worked really hard on the article and he would like the article to be on publish and be on google with his other stuff so people can find it and learn about him when you look up lil sad frosty. It would also make his online presents and his google profile look way better. Lil sad frosty worked really hard and knows he deserve's it and it would help you gain more user's on Wikipedia! So it's a win win. It help's me and you so everyone's happy here!
Lil sad frosty You have a basic misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. It is not a place for content about people who want to be famous. It is a place for articles about people who are already so famous that other people - who don't know them personally - have published stuff about them. "Too soon" applies to your situation (see WP:TOOSOON). So, the deleted attempt did break rules, and was deleted. As for asking the volunteers who serve as Teahouse hosts, we are here to advise about Wikipedia rules and stuff, but not to be authors or co-authors for editors such as yourself. David notMD (talk) 13:11, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Oh, and part of being that famous is that what other people have published becomes references. No references = no article. Look at the article Rapping. Toward the bottom, you will see the names of dozens of famous rappers. Their names are in blue, which means clicking on those goes to the articles about the people. Each of those articles (should) have references. David notMD (talk) 13:18, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@Lil sad frosty: Aside from everything else (including whether you want it published in Wikipedia or in Google--whatever that means), by definition, ONLY ONE PERSON IN THE WORLD can write an autobiography of Lil sad frosty. That one person is Lil sad frosty. Theoretically I could write (I probably couldn't, and certainly won't even try) the finest life story of Lil sad frosty ever written. And it will never be an autobiography of Lil sad frosty--simply because I wrote it, and Lil sad frosty didn't. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:21, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@Narutmaru: Hi. What exactly do you mean by improving features "for public usage"? And how? Also kindly remove excessive spacing from the wikilinks of your signature. Maybe it is confusing the sinebot. —usernamekiran (talk)09:58, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
In the spirit of Wikipedia, use your personal judgment and don't worry too much about what other editors say in such cases. Given that it has strong ties to Germanic languages, using commonly known variations there makes sense (non Romanized characters is exception, but German is Romanized) per MOS:TIES. All that said, the people who created Große Freiheit (album) still made it with an eszett in title, with a redirect from Grosse Freiheit (album) and I won't be opening a move discussion, because there are better things to do and it's reasonable enough. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 11:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
In addition to the above, if one version is used most commonly in reliable sources that talk about the topic, use that. (I am aware that ss and ß are basically interchangeable in German and that the sources may very well split 50-50.) This might be of use in other cases of e.g. regional variations - the typical example in French being chocolatine vs. pain au chocolat. TigraanClick here for my talk page ("private" contact)15:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@AmericanForestry: Welcome to the Teahouse. Go to the Talk Page of the article here, and click "New Section". Then provide the edits you'd like to make and the sources you'd like to use. I will be watching the Talk Page, so if no one else responds to your request there, I will. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 16:41, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I suspect Nyanardsan's decline was not motivated exclusively by the SoundCloud source, Erlovett, so "one very minor issue was flagged" is not a productive way to look at it.
However, I do think the decline was incorrectly tagged "no reliable source" when in fact it should be "notability". I have little doubt that this person exists, and that she’s the head of WPA, etc. based on the article sources. But has this person received sufficient attention from external reliable sources to justify a Wikipedia article? None of the few random sources I looked at show that - some are interviews (not independent), others only have a short quote of JB (example - not significant coverage).
@Erlovett I believe you may be a bit confused as to how to address issues referred to when a draft article has been declined. In this post you state "one very minor issue was flagged," but the reason for your article not being accepted is "submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources" and "submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." There was also one individualized comment made: "Soundcloud is not an acceptable source," and the draft's history shows the only changes made since the February draft decline is removing the Soundcloud reference. While waiting for your next article review you may want to work on making sure there are no references in which Jenny Bilfield is just mentioned amongst many other individuals, and not the main focus of the referenced source, as well as making sure you keep a neutral tone when writing about Bilfield. Best wishes on improving the draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 15:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I did see the other reasons, but the reviewer's one comment being about SoundCloud not being an acceptable source made me think that was the only or main issue. Thanks to your and others' answers, I am clear on what I need to do. I will edit and resubmit. Best regards-- Ed Lovett, New York Erlovett (talk) 21:36, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I did see the other reasons, but the reviewer's one comment being about SoundCloud not being an acceptable source made me think that was the only or main issue. Thanks to your and others' answers, I am clear on what I need to do. I will edit and resubmit. Best regards-- Ed Lovett, New York Erlovett (talk) 21:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
@Erlovett Apologies for very late respond, but I left comment that "Soundcloud is not an acceptable source" does not necessarily means it is the only problem, as I tagged the article with two reasons, problem with reliable sources and also it reads like an advertisement (promoting the person in the article). Also as @The Tips of Apmh mentioned, drafts arent reviewed in specific orders so it is possible for drafts to stay unreviewed for a long time because editors that review it are volunteer and they can choose which one they want to review.
Thank you very much. I did see the other reasons, but your one comment being about SoundCloud made me think that was the only or main issue. I will edit and resubmit. Best regards-- Ed Lovett, New York Erlovett (talk) 21:34, 16 May 2022 (UTC)
Polite request for eyes on new stub/page on the Martin Luther King Fund and Foundation, UKk
Hello! I am a beginner editor on Wikipedia, only having created a couple of new pages so far. Would some kind person sympathetic to the UK legacy of MLK Jr have a look at User: Balance person/The Martin Luther King Fund and Foundation, UK . It may make a stub perhaps? Thanks! All suggestions welcome.~~~ Balance person (talk) 12:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Also, Balance person, please note that being "sympathetic to the legacy" is not relevant, and may even be problematic. There are many things I am sympathetic to which we do not and will not have articles about unless they are written about enough to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability; conversely, there are many things that I am unsympathetic to to the degree that I wish they had never existed, but are sufficiently notable that we have (and should have) an article about them.
What I mean by "problematic" is that if somebody writes an article about a subject they are strongly in favour of, it is likely to be difficult for them to achieve the required neutrality. Please also see WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS: it is not quite the same, but related. ColinFine (talk) 15:22, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Doesn't Wikipedia need an article about the self healer Torkil Olesen?
I have been greatly inspired by the story of Torkil Olesen (born 1937). In my opinion he is a great self healing pioneer and definitely worthy of an article.
His technique is frighteningly simple: Stop moving and stop thinking. Then turn your attention inward. His results challenge belief, but I think he is worthy of mention here in Wikipedia. How old does he need to get, for the community to agree? 80.208.26.122 (talk) 14:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
And also, if someone is both sufficiently motivated to write such an article AND able to write one that will pass muster. Wikipedia doesn't have a committee of writers, who maybe meet to discuss what ought to be written about that hasn't yet, and look for someone to do it. It's all written by volunteers. And it does seem that a lot of what many volunteers write doesn't make it in. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@80.208.26.122, I unfortunately find no evidence that such a person existed. That is a lower bar than what would be required to create a Wikipedia article, which requires that he has "significant coverage" (150 words minimum but this one is fuzzy) in "independent" (not connected to the subject) and "reliable" (has a reputation for fact-checking) sources. (Quotes from WP:GNG) casualdejekyll15:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Torkil Olesen does exist. He is a retired Danish dentist with an interest in self-healing, expressed on his blog https://selvheling.blogspot.com/ The key to him being considered as a topic of a Wikipedia article is not what he has written, but whether people have written (and published) about him. Is he the subject of an article in Danish Wikipedia? David notMD (talk) 17:35, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Sorry but I don't want translation. I want a alternative title for "Bay Dardi" it's a urdu language word which English means cruelty, In this way I want a alternative Title of BayDardi for bengali a native speaker can help. Once again thanks for your trying to help @Britmax: — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2409:4060:e9b:fcdb::320a:370e (talk)
Hello, Britmax, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not quite sure what you mean by a "suitable name". If you are asking about what to use for the title of a Wikipedia article, the answer depends on how the item is referred to in the reliable sources which must be cited, not on anybody's translation. If you are asking for any other purpose, then your question doesn't belong on the Teahouse, which is about help with editing Wikipedia. WP:RDE or WP:RDL might be an appropriate place to ask. --ColinFine (talk) 17:40, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I just added an article about my band, M&R Rush. I provided information and a history of the band, as well as members and discography. The comment the reviewer left was: unsourced? I do not understand what this means or hw to fix it. Schlep57 (talk) 22:03, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Schlep57, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have fundamentally misunderstood what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is not for telling the world about yourself or your projects: that is called promotion, and is strictly forbidden. If at some time Wikipedia has an article about your band, the article will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, will preferably not be written by you, may end up containing material that you would prefer it didn't, and (this is the relevant point here) should be based almost entirely on what people who have no connection with you have chosen to publish about your band in reliable sources, not on what you or your associates say or want to say.
Until you can cite sufficient independent sources to establish that your band meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, it is a waste of everybody's time for you to try working on this draft. ColinFine (talk) 22:13, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Simply, Schlep57, you give no reason for the reader to believe anything that this draft says. Everything that it says should be referenced, to a reliable, published source that's independent of the band. -- Hoary (talk) 22:14, 27 April 2022 (UTC) PS That was an edit clash with ColinFine. I fully agree with everything he says. -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
I have noticed that there is some mistake that I am making while adding pictures due to which it is getting removed. Can someone guide me or help me in adding the pictures. Asad29591 (talk) 19:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@Asad29591: Welcome to the Teahouse. The question is are those images suitable for Wikipedia? It's not an issue if you have the copyright and decide to release it under the licences that Wikipedia uses, but most images (especially those found on the Internet) generally aren't suitable for Wikipedia articles. You would have to demonstrate that the image you want to use satisfies all of the free use criteria. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:16, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@Asad29591 In my view, uploading to English Wikipedia of a small image of the now deceased Mohd Azizan Baba would be acceptable under criterion 1 of our WP:Non-free content criteria. This is becasue, unless other properly licenced images are available that Wikipedia can use, it's impossible for you to take one of a now-dead person that you can then upload under the right licence. The image you added after he died was removed automatically by a bot (software program) for not having the right licensing associated with it. You could try again, following this guidance, and then perhaps asking at this page if you still encounter problems: WP:Media copyright questions.
However, the image of the destroyed shrine doesn't fit under our 'non-free criteria'. Initially, I couldn't see any licence statement (which needs to be either CC-0, or CC-BY-SA) which permits us and other people to re-use it, even for commercial purposes. Creative Commons licences that permit non-commercial use are not sufficient for us to use. But then I found that website's licencing details (see here), and it became clear that they have not released their content and images for commercial re-use. It is a subtle difference, I know, but that was the reason why it was removed, as we need to be confident everything we include on Wikipedia can itself be re-used - even commercially - by others.
Hi, I'm a massive fan of football in general and love to update the Wikipedia pages for footballers. However, I was told that Transfermarkt is not a reliable source as anyone could edit it. So, what websites could I use for reliable, true facts that won't get changed? RossEvans18 (talk) 21:22, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
@RossEvans18: Welcome and thanks for wanting to cite your sources. You can check out other articles on Football topics and see what sources are used there. You can also find a project that is relevent and ask there. One possibility is Wikipedia:WikiProject_Football depending on which flavor of Football you are interested in, there are links on the top of the page there to other projects. RudolfRed (talk) 21:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
adding onto this, the page states that transfermarkt is not usable as it is a user-generated source, which is not usable due to the lack of editorial oversight and since anyone can easily create them. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 01:27, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Is it possible (Or Ethical) to Hire a Professional Wikipedia Contributor
I would like to hire a professional Wikipedia Contributor to EDIT and ADD Content regarding my family history. As an Example there is an article about my family that is very incomplete. See: Earle family. I have done some editing of this article but it needs several additional articles for completeness.
There are 2 very large historical books on the Earle Family and their history.
History and genealogy of the Earles of Secaucus : with an account of other English and American branches https://archive.org/details/historygenealogy00earl which details the New Jersey branch of the family, as well as the Maryland, and Virginia branches.
While these books are genealogy books they have a wealth of history that can be gleaned from them. For instance, the article on Secaucus New Jersey Secaucus, New Jersey doesn't even mention that Edward Earle, on April 24, 1676, “bought the Island of Ci-ka-kus, in the Province of New Jersie, for 2000 Dutch Dollars. Or that he and his descendants owned the Island for many years.
I don't have the expertise needed to do the work myself and am looking for someone who would be interested in helping.
I have searched online and there are "contributors" who can be hired but I don't know if I should go that route.
Don't. Most of the "expert Wikipedia editors" you see on headhunting/want-ad sites such as Fiverr are nothing of the sort, being either scammers, ingenues, or banned users, and they have the exact same conflicts of interest that you do, if not worse. We also take a dim view on paid editing en generale, even if it has been disclosed, since such editing is inherently conflicted. —Jéské Courianov^_^va little blue Bori03:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
That is why I am asking. Is it ethical to hire someone and if so WHO can you trust? If not then how do I find a legitimate contributor that could help me. GlennEarls (talk) 04:09, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
hi GlennEarls! given that wikipedia is all volunteer work, I don't think hiring someone would really work, as given above paid editing is heavily discouraged. instead, you can submit a edit request to the article's Talk:Earle family, detailing what changes you would like to add (but of course, you would still need reliable, independent sources for these). 💜 melecie talk - 04:15, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
GlennEarls, is it possible in theory to hire an ethical paid Wikipedia editor? Yes, just as it is possible in theory to find a zebra in a herd of wild horses that will allow you to tame it and ride it in your local Easter parade. The handful of ethical paid editors tend to work for very large companies for a lot of money. Instead of wasting your money on paid scammers, familiarize yourself with Wikipedia's logical and rational Policies and guidelines, and make or propose the edits yourself for free, disclosing any Conflicts of interest where appropriate. Cullen328 (talk) 04:46, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi Openworks - simply create another sandbox - enter User:Openworks/sandbox 2, or whatever title you want (as long as it starts User:Openworks/ ) , in the search box, enter, and it will say "Start the User:Openworks/sandbox 2 page." - click on that and start editing - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 12:19, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Is it okay to cite mylife.com as a source? It contains dates of birth of many in Wikipedia whose articles have none. Nythar (talk) 06:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, Nythar. The website's footer states: "MyLife aggregates publicly available information from government, social, and other sources, plus personal reviews written by others. This third-party data is then indexed through methods similar to those used by Google or Bing to create a listing. Because MyLife only collects this data and does not create it, we cannot fully guarantee its accuracy". I'd say that rules it out as a reliable source. Cordless Larry (talk) 06:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
At Joe Kolodziej article, I see a lot of material that has no sources. I removed it per WP:BLP but was reverted by Stick2700 who commented: “You can not remove historically accurate information that has been on Wiki for years. […] Work history, is not subject to citations where none are available.” which leaves me confused. Could anyone help me with what is to be done with the article, with a reference to the related policy? —Svārtava (t/u) • 10:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
hi Svartava and welcome to the teahouse! I've added a comment onto your talk page. I believe this applies here: Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—should be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion. (from WP:BLP) and status quo doesn't really mean much when deciding to keep or remove it. 💜 melecie talk - 11:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Actually, that whole article is a virtually unsourced mess and could probably be deleted altogether. (I have zero interest in the topic--even given the fact that the subject happens to be Polish--but it's an unvalidated puff piece.) Uporządnicki (talk) 11:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Google search only turns up the fraud case where they were accused of identity fraud and there was a subsequent story on Twitter about their release claiming they have an extensive criminal history. Not sure how extensive because I can't find anything else about the subject. Clearly not notable as the article only references two primary sources and the only independent sources I can find are about the fraud case. I think that's good enough rationale for at least AfD. --ARoseWolf13:02, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Agree that there looks to be a COI/paid editing, not least because their userpage says I work with hockey player agents. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:34, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
I am not paid to edit. The idea that you are all saying what is on Wikipedia is accurate is hilarious. Anyone can come here and make a page on anything they want and make up things about people that are either completely untrue or inaccurate. I am the subjects son. Everything is accurate on the page, and neither my father or I created it. I edit is for accuracy because people like to slander him. When I put citations in, you just delete what is cited? What Google does not turn up is that any case that was made nearly 20 years ago was overturned. Yet you want to cite something that is factually inaccurate? For years, this Wiki page was used to damage a reputation, and now all of a sudden when it is correct and accurate, some new users who were never even aware before think its ok to do what ever they want? And what happens when someone else creates a new page to damage this man? All the faceless nameless people here who can not be held responsible for their actions will do something? The article should be left as it was with the citations and more to be added. Cleaning up of grammar can be done as well. Stick2700 (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Stick2700, Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry but you have a very skewed idea of what Wikipedia is and how material is added to the encyclopedia. I suggest you read our policies. No one here has mentioned accuracy of the article one time. We have stated that it is promotional in nature (words like "prolific" are red flags), that most of it is unsourced therefore not verifiable and because primary sources are used to source portions of the article it appears as if the subject is not notable per our standards. Wikipedia is not concerned with what you say is accurate about the subject, that's orginal research. Nither, you, your father or anyone associated with your father own this article and can dictate what the article can say or not say about the subject (WP:OWN). Wikipedia is only concerned with what reliable independent secondary sources say about the subject. Because you have a clear COI with the subject I suggest you not edit the article further and only make edit requests on the article talk page going forward. Please listen to our advice here. We are not against you but we must ensure that all information included in the article is properly sourced, and not to you. --ARoseWolf15:16, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Look, I really don't care what your suggestion is concerning this article. You came here 2 years ago, I have been working on this page for more than a decade since the slanderous page was discovered. Information from the 1980's when he was labeled a prolific scorer, is not available on the internet. It predates the internet. So please tell me how to source that information. As I said, sources were and will be added. COI is determined by what when things are sourced? You mean like sourced from other Wiki pages that I did not start or edit? Your own pages are not good enough? Other websites that confirm work history? Other news sites? What is the criteria other than your opinion? My father asked this page be deleted more than a decade ago, and you people told him to not so gently go away. So, now before someone else starts another page about him, and it will happen, maybe all of you should get off your high horses and leave the page to be worked on as it was being worked on before these nameless faceless people got involved for no reason. Stick2700 (talk) 15:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikipedia is tertiary. I'm sorry but it can not be used as a source for notability of a subject (See P, S, T for more details). --ARoseWolf15:35, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
I tried replying to Cullen, but it is disabled. My hostile remarks come with Wiki people taking it upon themselves to act first without asking questions. Wiki has ruined peoples lives with inaccurate information. Sourced material on many, many articles is missing. I will restore the article and attempt to source over the next few days. IF that's not acceptable, then delete it. The accusation of doing something for pay or for improper motives was completely uncalled for. If you want accuracy, it is your duty to protect people, the idea that anonymous people can come here and edit what ever they want is absolutely insane. This person who started this today, who we traced his IP and now will be getting a visit from Police, is the person who should be getting the talking to. Up until today, this page was relatively quiet except for a once in a while edit or vandalizing. Why it got so much attention today, is just unbelievable. Stick2700 (talk) 16:17, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
You have a conflict of interest and should not be editing the article directly. If you attempt to restore the unsourced material that has been removed, you will be reverted. You've already been warned about this. Use the talk page - Talk:Joe Kolodziej - to suggest edits, with appropriate sources. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:30, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Stick2700, sources need not be online. If you have copies of newspaper or magazine articles, they can be cited. What is required is significant coverage in reliable, independent sources. Your hostile remarks are not helping your cause, and what you say indicates that you have no idea how Wikipedia works. Asking people to leave the page alone pretty much guarantees that more editors will get involved. The end result will either be a better article or a deleted article. Cullen328 (talk) 15:41, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
@Stick2700 I am confused by your comment that you traced the IP of the person who made the original post, and that person "now will be getting a visit from Police." Did you contact the person's local police department, state that the person made a comment on Wikipedia that you dislike, and then a police employee told you an officer would visit the person? That seems rather unlikely, so if you could clarify the meaning of your comment about a visit from the Police I would greatly appreciate it. Karenthewriter (talk) 16:57, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The whole article has been nominated for deletion anyway. I suspect it will be deleted. And then, as I understand things, if someone comes and tries to create a new article with the same title, that someone will encounter a notice that such an article was deleted. What you had before most of it was just edited out might have removed the offending material, but it added basically a CV such as one might send with a resume--totally unnecessary for the problem you are--perhaps rightly--addressing. But if you do try such an article--or any article at all in the future, you must studiously avoid such phrases as:
... largest and well known brands ...
... prolific goal scorer ...
... widely considered one of the most influential ...
... represent the top amateur players ...
...viewed by many as to the the creation of a completely new...
After being credited for ...
... as a key member of ...
... were credited with being ...
... Turning a failed publication into the largest most read ...
As for future edits, Uporządnicki, I will try to refrain fromusing those types of phrases. Can you ensure every other Wiki page has those same types of phrases eliminated? Stick2700 (talk) 17:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Sure. I traced the IP. I sent the IP and trace information to the Michigan State Police who have an ongoing Stalking and Harassment investigation. If the person is found, they will be charged, and given their day in court. Like the person who started this page was, and that person was convicted, did time and released.
What Wiki doesnt know is that some people not only post hateful and inaccurate things here, but they post them in other places. Like photos of my fathers house taken from a car driving by my daughters room, at he grandfathers house. The subject of this article. Imagine that invasion of privacy and threatening behavior. Stick2700 (talk) 17:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
You do realize that publishing false information is illegal in the EU right? My father is a resident of the EU. There is no threat. There is an ongoing investigation for stalking and harassment. You understand that if you have information and do not provide it, you are obstructing justice? I simply gave the information I have. I didnt make the law. Stick2700 (talk) 17:57, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
That's kind of a recklessly overbroad statement. Yes, Wikipedia has an internal rule of "no legal threats." That's not to say Wikipedia is above the law. Notice how diligent it is about not crossing Copyright law. And if something false is recklessly published here and ruins someone's life, I find it hard to believe that SOMEONE couldn't be held liable--whether it's Wikipedia or whoever wrote the "information." (And people HAVE published malicious fiction here; look at this famous example.) As I see it, the problem here is, first, someone who is--possibly with cause--angry has let his anger cloud his reason, and second, he has beyond taking steps to remove damaging material, and has taken to adding kind of over-the-top stuff--at least as far as articles in Wikipedia are concerned. Uporządnicki (talk) 18:45, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
The EU does not have jurisdiction over Wiki, but the EU does have the most strict privacy and defamation laws in the world concerning the internet and printed materials. Very high profile people who have made incorrect, or improper statements have paid increasing fines, some in the millions of Euro's for going after a rival publicly or making an inaccurate statement. Wiki being used, and viewed in the EU does subject itself to EU laws. Other information about my fathers projects are on EU versions of Wiki in different languages, which make those particular projects subject to direct EU jurisdiction. The point of this is not legal action for or against Wiki, the point is, that people have a right to their information, no one else has that right, not Wiki not Webster's or any other information site. Stick2700 (talk) 07:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
@Stick2700, tracing an IP address might get you a user's city, or maybe the nearest point-of-presence location of some of the ISP's networking equipment -- but you won't get a street address of a logged-on user without a court order or a judge's cooperation. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
I understand this. There is an ongoing investigation with the Michigan State police, they can do the tracing. We have an idea of who it is based on general IP location, and they were dumb enough to actually leave a full voicemail for detectives to match. This is how one other was caught and charged with stalking as well as cyberstalking. While I understand to many, this may not look to be a big issue. I can assure you though when the picture of your daughters bedroom window taken from someone's car shows up on a hockey message board with a link to a Wiki page full of edits, it can become more than unsettling. Stick2700 (talk) 07:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Article for review to resubmit: opinion of editors
I want to get my article approved on Wikipedia. I have edited it again after first review. I need help to ascertain if the sources/ references are credible enough and whether this article will pass the review. The link to article is here. Draft:Emmanuel SikoraIfra86 (talk) 11:55, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Ifra86, I don't understand the second sentence, He is widely recognized as the classical opera composer as resident of Cortland, New York. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks, I fix it. Should I publish it now? Whats the opinion of editors? Please help me get through this. Ifra86 (talk) 06:53, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ifra86, I am not a reviewer, but in my opinion the comments that were placed in the draft still stand. There are too many sentences that state facts, with no source to back up those statements. There is a cn tag in the draft. I doubt that it will be accepted in its current state. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:04, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I'm back again. I've read WP:YOUTUBE and all of the associated WP links, but I'm still unsure. I've used NASCAR's official channel stream upload of the 2015 Kobalt 400, as it is the only detail I can find about why Tony Stewart was issued a pass-through penalty (a tire rolled out of his pit area) which was mentioned by the commentator at around the 1 hour 10 minute 5 seconds mark. Should I leave it as is or is it copyright infringement? X-750I've made a mistake, haven't I?11:44, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello X-750! Yes, care needs to be taken with YouTube links but they can be used as references as long as they meet the standards laid out. As it is the official NASCAR YouTube channel, according to Reliable sources/Perennial sources for YouTube: "Content uploaded from a verified official account, such as that of a news organization, may be treated as originating from the uploader and therefore inheriting their level of reliability." so it's considered as reliable as if quoting from www.nascar.com. The other concern with YouTube is if it is a copyright violation but this is uploaded by NASCAR who own the rights to the video & thus are a legitimate source for viewing that material on the web. So you should be in the clear in that regard too. If the exact same video was uploaded by "John Smith" for example, it would be considered a copyright violation as they don't own the rights to post the video. Hope this is of help! LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 12:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Prefixes come before a name, suffixes come after a name, and it depends on what is is and what country as to whether it goes before or after a name. e.g. for Lewis Hamilton, "Sir" is a prefix, and "MBE", "HonFREng" (which is an honorary degree) are suffixes. Joseph2302 (talk) 13:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Operajoven, (1) If that poster is indeed your "own work", as you claim, then you have a connection that you must divulge. (Or is it your own work?) (2) You write for example "2020: [1]Palais Eschenbach". A reference index normally comes immediately after the assertion that it references. This one comes immediately after a space. I don't understand its purpose. (3) The sole paragraph of text is unreferenced. -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello Hoary, I deleted the first paragraph which in fact was duplicated. About the image, should I delete the logo and text? I don't understand could you guide me? thanks Operajoven (talk) 14:27, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The entire first paragraph of the lead is duplicated in the second paragraph of the lead. Furthermore, the lead is supposed to summarize content in the body of the article. But in this draft, there is essentially no content in the body except a list of productions, and the lead is the entire article. CodeTalker (talk) 01:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi all..,
I am new to wiki editing. Want to grow a base here, as I love coding. Did my first draft and submitted, but was turned down. Don't know if anyone can help on how to make it better and acceptable. So I learn, as I desire to draft more articles with time? Here's the link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Miracle_NwaoguShinelight007 (talk) 10:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Sentences such as "Mirrikle blends his spotless genre of Afro pop music with soliciting for women emancipation." are not appropriate. Is this your thinking? Or from a published review? Also, given he apears to have just released his first single, WP:TOOSOON clearly applies. David notMD (talk) 10:33, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Reference #5 is an interview. What a person says about themselves in an interview is not considered reliable. Thus, the text "He was discovered at age Seven years of age as a budding music star. At then, Mirrikle will always rap for his friends. When his friends started rewarding him with money when he rapped for them, he personally knew he had a role in rap music." is not verified by a relable source, and must be deleted. David notMD (talk) 11:09, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Shinelight, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I remember when I was a new editor, long ago, and how I desperately wanted to "make my mark" by creating a new article. But I couldn't find a suitable topic, and never did. (In 20 000 edits in 17 years, I've only ever created a handful of articles).
Creating new articles is not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia. For an inexperienced editor, it is an extremely difficult way, and likely to involve you in frustration and disappointment. You can add hundreds or thousands of times as much value to Wikipedia by making small improvements to some of our millions of existing articles, many of which are seriously in need of attention. Every single time you can clarify an unclear paragraph, find and cite a reliable source for some unsourced information, or remove some cruft or non-neutral wording from an article, you will be contributing more to Wikipedia than you ever could by creating a draft about a subject which does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability. I suggest you have a look at the "Help out" section of the Community portal. ColinFine (talk) 14:04, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Shinelight007, I really love what Colin said above. I'll add something a little personal here that doesn't include wikilinks to any policy or guideline. Those have been provided. By doing as Colin says you will be shining your light brighter and having more of an impact on the encyclopedia for the good. Article creation will come and it will come different for you than it has or will for us. You are a uniquely gifted and talented person. The advice that I can give is to not rush into anything but spend time reading the words and watching the actions of experienced editors here. I am so glad you came to the Teahouse because there are amazing hosts and editors here willing to help you on this journey. Slow down and take your time. I've been working on a draft for the last 8 months or more and it's still a draft. There are so many other tasks that need accomplished. One day I hope you get the chance to write that article on Mirrikle and I believe it will be an amazing article should you get that chance. In the meantime learn and grow as an editor by doing the small improvements Colin talks about. They may be smaller yet they are equally as important. --ARoseWolf14:21, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Theroadislong commented that Mirrikle does not yet meet Wikipedia:Notability (music). Aligns with my WP:TOOSOON. Basically, no amount of revising or seeking references will make Mirrikle notable at this time. If you stop all work on the draft, it will be deleted in six months. Or you can tag it at the top with Db-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} and an Administrator will come along and delete it. I hope you find a way to stay active in Wikipedia, perhaps by improving existing articles. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
COI help
To whom it may concern, there are various edits concerning a company page that the company itself would like to report and adjust. To begin, there has been not only a history of the page being duplicated when published, but also the same issue for the page of the company CEO page. The company would also like to further connect the page with other institute and academic institution pages, for increased outreach. Could an editor review these edits, or may the company proceed with a non-invasive recommendations procedure in the talk section that is in-line with the Wikipedia Conflict of Interest Policy. In short: what is the best way for them to go about it. The edits are non-bias Mittens40404 (talk) 14:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello! Could you specify what article is affected by the conflict of interest? In any case, companies should not be editing their own articles. A good way to go about it is to ask them what they want to be done to the article and what sources they have (which are usually primary, so try to find some good secondary/tertiary sources). Then, you (or another editor) could review their edits and either reject or apply them to the article.
Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what you're asking; articles are primarily made up of words and not all of them have images, so as far as I'm aware there isn't a way to have an article without the words. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
There are ways to turn images off in your browser, for example Chrome seems to have an extension called images-onoff which would let you do that for just Wikipedia. --General Vicinity (talk) 15:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Draftification deletion
Recently my article release from imprisonment was deleted under the guide of draftification, which wasted a lot of my time and made the encyclopaedia worse since it was good content. I would like to know if just anyone gets to delete things this way and if there is any way to dispute it. --General Vicinity (talk) 15:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
General Vicinity, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't see where that article was deleted but was moved back to draft space and then you redirected it. Is that correct? --ARoseWolf15:47, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, General Vicinity, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm sorry you've had a difficult time with your draft (courtesy link: Draft:Release from imprisonment). The good news is that it's not deleted; it is simply in the draftspace, where you can make improvements incrementally more easily. It looks like the reason it was not accepted at the time was that it is not cited by reliable sources yet. Adding more of those will help your draft. If your draft conforms to the core content policies, it can then be accepted and moved to mainspace. Good luck, and happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 15:49, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
How is the encyclopedia worse? The content doesn't support a stand-alone article and is now a redirect to the exact content in a relevant article. Seems like a perfectly normal outcome that improves the experience for readers.Slywriter (talk) 15:55, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
This is not a particularly helpful edit summary [12]. I understand the frustration but that "evil red tape" is policy here and is meant to protect the encyclopedia from the inclusion of non-notable subjects or the duplication of subjects. You found a suitable redirect. Why not improve the article that you redirected to? You can merge anything you had that was properly sourced into the redirected article Imprisonment. --ARoseWolf15:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Status: What I see is that you created content in Imprisonment in a section titled Release, and then put the identical content in a draft of an article Draft:Release from imprisonment, which has been Declined and resubmitted. The Articles for Creation process puts drafts such as yours to experienced reviewers, who select what they want to review. Declined drafts can be revised and resubmitted. If Declined again, I am of the same opinion is ARoseWolf David notMD (talk) 16:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Click on Resubmit and it will go again into the backlog of drafts to be reviewed. Teahouse hosts are not necessarily Reviewers. Asking here does not short-cut the process. David notMD (talk) 16:13, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello and Welcome user with IP 2406:3003:206F:EE2:7560:5C96:7AB1:39D9 - the typo in question has already been corrected, but please do not feel hesitant to fix any mistakes you see here in the future, i know it can be scary but simply correcting a typo won't make the entirity of wikipedia come crashing down, for more information i suggest reading WP:BOLD and WP:CANTBREAKIT i also highly suggest creating an account.
Hello User:Remmni10 you can type the name in the searchbar, hit enter or push the search button and there should be a link to create it, you can also create it in your sandbox or a draft in your userspace i believe, remember to read WP:RS, WP:NOTABILITY and WP:BLP, i do need to warn you that if this person isn't notable enough or isn't mentioned in any reliable sources then your article very likely will get deleted or, if published as a draft for review, will likely be rejected.
If they don't, they are not (yet, anyway) "Notable" in the sense Wikipedia uses the term, and no attempt at an article (not "page") will be accepted. It may be that one day they will, and right now it's just WP:Too soon.
If you think they do meet the criteria, and you have at least three published Reliable sources that are independent of the subject or anyone connected to them (including their college) and discuss them at some length (at least a few paragraphs), you can use these as a basis for drafting an article. See Help:Your first article for details of how to go about this.
Remember that if you yourself have any connection to the subject, you need to disclose this Conflict of Interest (the linked page explains how). A CoI makes it more difficult for you to write objectively about the subject, using only facts that have been published and not ones known to you through personal contact with them, and writing from a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view without praising or evaluating them. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 16:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Your request is very confusing. There does not appear to be a duplicate of that article on English Wikipedia. Are you talking about versions of Wikipedia in other languages? About sites other than Wikipedia? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:08, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
You can do this yourself by going to the search engine located at top right of your screen. Type up the title that you are looking for. If there are "No Results" than you are set to go. Mschulz75 (talk) 17:34, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The article exists on Wikipedia - it would be the result of any such search. They're not asking for it to be deleted, they seem to think that there are multiple copies of it here. Maybe they've seen redirects or maybe they did a Google search and saw copies on other sites. It's hard to tell. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:58, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
I see that many articles on businesses/shops have photos of the storefront in the infobox. There is an article I would like to add a photo to (ZiNG Pop Culture Australia) however because of the nature of the store, all of the storefronts have pop culture things in the front such as Harry Potter and Pokémon. Would a photo of this store be okay under the Wikipedia:Non-free_content policy? It seems to be after reading it, but as it's not specifically discussed I don't want to risk anything without certainty. Thank you for your help! -- NotCharizard🗨18:49, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Two possible issues to consider here: freedom of panorama and derivative work. If the country where the store is located allows freedom of panorama for buildings other structures, a non-free photo of the store front isn't going to be allowed per WP:FREER since a photo could be taken by anyone who who wants to and that person can release it under a free license that Wikipedia and Commons accept. The other issue has to do with whatever elements in the photo are considered eligible for copyright protection independent of the photo itself. If these elements are insignificant or incidental, then they could be considered de minimis and thus only the copyright of the photo matters; if they're the focus of the photo or otherwise predominant elements, then the photo may be considered a derivative work. In this case, it would seem to be hard to justify the non-free use if such a photo in the Zing article in a way that would satisfy all non-free content use criteria. — Marchjuly (talk) 19:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Just a thought here — If I use Google Streetview, I can get it to show me a shop from the street. If it's a bookshop, I may be able to look at the artwork on the covers of some books. Google can afford good lawyers, so I'm pretty sure that they're not breaking the law by reproducing these rather small images of copyright works. (For an example, stroll along Lion Yard, in Brecon, Wales.) Maproom (talk) 20:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
The country (Australia) does have freedom of panorama. I meant that I would use a photo I have taken myself though - so wouldn't that be a free photo under that rule? -- NotCharizard🗨20:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
If you take the photo yourself and Australia allows freedom of panorama for such photos, then that takes care of the photo. The question then is how predominant the other elements are in the photo. For example, if you stand across the street and photograph the store as part of a larger scene, de minimis probably applies. If, on the other hand, you focus in on one or more elements that may be protected by copyright of their accord independently of the building, then de minimis may be harder to argue. One thing you might try doing is looking for similar photos on Commons to the one you want to take use them for reference. Looking at a category like c:Category:De minimis might also be helpful. You can also ask for assistance at c:COM:VPC if you're unsure about a particular photo. — Marchjuly (talk) 20:36, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Okay wonderful, I think the de minimis should apply based on the example photos, I'll have a look at some on Commons as well. Thank you so much for your very detailed reply, it's an issue that I know very little about so can be a bit overwhelming but you explained it really well, cheers. -- NotCharizard🗨20:48, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello. I understand that my first article for submission has, so far, not been accepted. I am finding some difficulty with the formatting of the article. I have a detailed and researched article in Word (.docx) format, that does not translate into the coding for wiki formatting... especially for the addition of photos. We (collectively) have many photos collected from years of articles, biographies of our members, etc., even those that hang on our walls, that are framed and "analog". I have interviewed many of the "original" members, who still maintain first-hand stories of other members. Several have passed, and I want their legacies to continue. This is really the driving force behind my article creation. Not only that, but the history is shared between many within our organizations and a composite of us all, without disparaging any of us. I can do the footnoting and references, I believe, but the Word doc has many links, that I have included throughout, in order to give proper credit where it is due. Thank you. JediBaggins (talk) 19:43, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Master Frodo and/or Bilbo, you mention "years of articles, biographies of our members, etc., even those that hang on our walls, that are framed and "analog"." Were these articles/biographies published by independent organizations (newspapers, magazines, etc.)? If so, and if you have the publication names, article titles, publication dates, etc., that is what could be used to build an article around. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:13, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, JediBaggins. 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. Unless you can find some independent published sources of that kind, your club will not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article on it is possible. ColinFine (talk) 22:00, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi User:JediBaggins, i like your draft article, especially the beginning anecdote. With photos added, it'll be great. As your photos are "analog" they will have to be scanned or otherwise converted to digital (perhaps by taking digital photos of them), before it can be published. Yeah, the critics here aren't liking this for an encyclopedia article, but it would be a good article in local newspapers in communities where any of you have a connection. Or a local historical society would be happy to publish in their newsletter. And further, once it's published elsewhere then it might be cited and quoted from in a relevant article here!
I happen to write and edit articles mostly about historic sites, and it often happens that local historians start to write what they know about a place's history in an article about a town or abour a specific historic site. Then they encounter the buzz-saw. What they don't understand is that publishing locally is complementary to getting coverage in Wikipedia.
And photos can be used, as a kind of exception to the "no original research" dictum here. A photo caption can provide straight forward information about what a photo shows, and does not have to be previously published. Are any of your photos suitable for illustrating any existing article here? If so you could suggest their usage, at the Talk page of the relevant article. You might get a much more positive reception there.-Doncram (talk) 23:19, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello editors good morning my name is Pritam mostly people know as your pritam I am a film critic. I don't have any Wikipedia knowledge by gathering knowledge from youtube I added content and based on my common sense I edited a draft https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Raavan_(2022_film) pasted the link of the film releasing today of bengali superstar Jeet. I submitted review for this article now a yellow box appeared but before that a red box was there should I delete the red box? And how to remove that Draft: sign before Raavan pls say. 2409:4060:2E15:6F13:0:0:328A:C505 (talk) 23:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Wikilink: Draft:Raavan_(2022_film) Don't delete the red box. That explains why the earlier draft version was declined. The "Draft" in the name will be removed when (if) the draft is approved and moved into article space. You should make sure to address the concerns that led to the initial decline, otherwise it will just be declined again. RudolfRed (talk) 23:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Declines need to be left in place. Now that you have submitted the draft, it joins a backlog of more than 3,000 drafts. The system is not a queue. Reviewers select what they want to review next. Could be days, weeks or months before it is reviewed. David notMD (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
This draft has a troubled history. An article about the film was deleted in Nov 2021. Editor User:GentBeaus69 added content and references, all that subsequently deleted because GB a confirmed sock. Now, IP 2409:4060:2E15:6F13:0:0:328A:C505 had added the same content, plus more, as a single-purpose editor, i.e., only working on this article, and showing skill not expected from a new editor. The content and referencing may be valid, but this is possibly the work of a sockpuppet. Comments about this made on draft. David notMD (talk) 00:35, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
hi Nyonyatwelfth and welcome to the teahouse! since there's you just tag a {{bare url inline}} to the related source like [1][bare URL]. however since in this case the reference doesn't feel appropriate (it's a homepage link and the specific document is cited later in the article), I've just removed it entirely. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 00:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
The page Murder of Carlie Brucia currently redirects to Carlie's Law. The latter never passed the legislature, and the murder case itself drew enough attention to be considered notable, so it seems like it'd make sense to change the "Murder of" page to an article about the incident itself. My only question is whether this would require a separate review process, since it'd be essentially "creating" a new article over the redirect. Would an article created over a redirect need some special kind of review, or am I overthinking it? –Galactic-Radiance(talk)01:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello - The draft for Overtime (Sports Network) was denied and said it was written as an advertisement. Everything written in the article was sourced. There was zero opinion added to it. I'm not sure how I would be able to make the draft any better. There are dozens of articles about Overtime in every major publication (NY Times, WSJ, USA Today, Time, ESPN, etc.) Please help!
Per Cullen, having sources doesn't mean that the tone of the writing is not inappropriate. The tone reads like a press release and not like an encyclopedia article. --Jayron3218:06, 25 April 2022 (UTC)
Can you please offer an example of something written in the article and how could be rewritten more appropriately. There is nothing in there that I see that shows an opinion, or embellishes anything. It simply is written as a fact in a neutral point of view. Bankrupt305 (talk) 16:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
"The company has over 50 million followers across its social channels." Social popularity numbers don't mean much on WP.
"In 2021, Overtime announced a Series C funding round..." WP doesn't care much about funding rounds.
I don't personally see how a founder's previous business dealings (Porter, who sold his previous company for X dollars) tells us much about this company.
"young, up-and-coming" is marketing-speak.
"non-fungible tokens, cryptotechnology, and Web3 community-building..." Am I supposed to know what "Web3 community-building" is, or care? What does that mean in the real world?
@Bankrupt305, Sorry that I didn't give specific examples of how to rewrite. Most of the stuff I mentioned should probably be removed. Cullen and others' advice is good, and writing new articles is hard. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:23, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you all for your time in reviewing. I made changes based on your suggestion. I don't see anything in the article that has a promotional tone. T Bankrupt305 (talk) 19:21, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
I just have to wonder, why are there so many GEOSTUBs on Wikipedia, and why are half of them even notable? I feel like a good one fifth of Special:Random clicks will take you to some random village in Azerbaijan. In my opinion, IAR would have something to say here. Sungodtemple (talk) 02:17, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Inclusionism appears to allow populated location stubs, ditto species, and I think colleges and high schools, but not middle of elementary schools. Thus, more than 6,490,000 articles in English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 05:25, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
It's a weird one, resulting from a rather illogical divide in Wikipedia. In every subject in Wikipedia except place names, there seems to be a feeling that the subject ought to have been interesting to someone before an article is written. But for place-names, it's accepted that if someone lived there, it's notable. As a result, we get strings of AfD discussions that begin "railway siding in Idaho, seems to have had one grain silo at some point but otherwise no buildings, no evidence this is a settlement" but end up with the article being saved because someone tracked down a 1921 newspaper reference to someone's chicken being run over, in which the former chicken owner is identified as a resident of this location. And so we have the article even though the most notable thing that ever happened there was a regrettably-squashed chicken and nothing else will ever happen there because there is now nothing and no one there to do any happening.
But equally illogically, this "inhabited place" rule is interpreted very variably. If you try to write an article about a large new estate in the middle East, for example, then good luck! The place may house 50,000 people have a clearly-recognised name and boundary, but the sources will be largely newspaper articles about local politicians and developers being mutually smug about how lovely their development is, interspersed with builders being smug about the fact it's only 3 years behind schedule, and everyone conspiring to say how gorgeous it is; together with a selection of minor articles covering the criminal activities of the trouble-causing minority that will always be found in so large a group of humans. Because Wikipedia hates anything promotional, all the builder/developer/politician sources will get written off, even if they were unprovoked attempts at journalism by unconnected journalists, and the rest will be written off as run-of-the-mill stuff not primarily about the location. And so the article is doomed. And so we have articles about railway sidings in Idaho where once, probably, it's possible someone lost a chicken, but we lack articles about huge estates in non-US parts of the world. Elemimele (talk) 05:59, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Majinthehouse, some IP number edited the longish (and utterlyalmost completely unreferenced) section Tiswas#Missing_episodes and messed up the formatting. Because the formatting was a mess, I reverted the edits. Please suggest a correction on Talk:Tiswas. Please cite your source(s). Thank you for your trouble. -- Hoary (talk) 07:48, 28 April 2022 (UTC) corrected Hoary (talk) 09:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Currently working on the staggered fermion article (got a draft ready; its a key topic in lattice field theory), but I suspect that I need to create a separate article on Dirac–Kähler fermions, although I am debating the necessity of this on the basis of notability.
Pros:
Important theoretical form of staggered fermions (in fact it's their continuum limit). Acknowledged in the (admittedly stub) Kogut–Susskind fermion article (which is equivalent to staggered fermions; still waiting on that merger).
Does not fit into the staggered fermion article itself as it just makes much more sense as a separate topic and is a complete switch of tone. So would significantly hinder the flow of that article.
Original paper by Kähler from the 60s is well established (as is the lattice follow-up from the 80s) and has garnered reasonably many citations (Kähler's papers has around 400 citations, which is not much in the grand scheme of physics, but its a solid amount in theoretical lattice field theory where few people work and it does not get large boosts from direct application papers). Plenty of other papers on it exist besides these two, based on them.
New papers on Dirac–Kähler fermions do occasionally come up on arXiv.
Should exist on a comprehensive Wikipedia. That is to say it should be here eventually.
Does come up as an entire subsection in the classic textbook on Lattice QCD by Montvay and Munster (one of five textbooks on this subject; its only mentioned in others).
Would be useful for any researcher using staggered fermions as a theoretical foundation (of which there are plenty; its one of the dominant fermion discretizations in the lattice field theory community, together with Wilson and twisted-mass fermions).
Such science topics will low key stay relevant far into the future; staggered fermions will continue to be important.
Cons:
Not really that many citations compared to some other topics.
Not the most fruitful topic for direct future research; Dirac–Kähler fermions do not seem to have much utility beyond forming a theoretical foundation for staggered fermions. Hence the relative dearth of follow up research into them in the present.
Thanks @Cullen328:. @OpenScience709:, the lattice field theory is not exactly my topic area (I only know a Dirac fermion) but on the basis of what you write I would say the topic is probably notable (it would be certainly notable if there is a good review article, but if not a subsection of the book would work). The question is about your priorities and whether you would find it fun to work on the topic. Ymblanter (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Thanks! Since I already have a draft for the article done, I might as well create the article once I get the staggered fermion article done as well. Also, nice to make your acquaintance Yaroslav. OpenScience709 (talk) 19:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
I am trying hard to to get my article approved on Wikipedia. I have edited it as suggested by reviewer. Please please help me to publish it asap. The link of the article is Draft:V. K. Ahuja
K baishya, two questions for you. First, thousands of drafts are awaiting review. Is there some reason why this draft should have priority? (Is there some requirement "to publish it asap"?) Secondly, the photograph of Ahuja is described as your "own work". Thus you took the photograph. Clearly it was taken with the cooperation of Ahuja. May we infer that you know him? -- Hoary (talk) 06:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Sir, the ans to the first question is yes. Professor V. K Ahuja is a renowned academician in the field of Law. He is the professor of Law in Delhi University which is a public central University and Institute of Eminence and has joined as the Vice-Chancellor at National Law University and Judicial Academy, Assam, almost a year back which is also a public University.
Secondly, by mistake it was described as my own work because I am a new editor. I have modified the same and sourced it. Thank you so much for your feedback
K baishya, it's really not necessary to address others here as "Sir". (We're all just harmless drudges.) Why should a draft about a renowned academician in the field of Law take priority over drafts about other subjects? Meanwhile, the photograph is more of a mystery. Its page at Commons now says that the uploader is the copyright holder but also that it comes from this web page, a web page that says nothing about copyleft or the public domain, and in which the photograph is a mere 150×150 pixels. -- Hoary (talk) 08:30, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
K baishya, if you want a reviewer to consider your draft, you could make things easier for them. The main issue any reviewer will consider is whether the subject is notable, as attested by several reliable independent sources that discuss him or his work at length. As things are, a reviewer may look at the first six sources cited, find that none of them helps with notability, see that there's another 38 to wade through, and decide to find a better use for their time. If you want to expedite approval, I suggest that you pick four of the citations that do most to establish notability, and get rid of most or all of the others. (You'll be able to add them back afterwards if the draft gets accepted.) Maproom (talk) 07:11, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you so much sir for your suggestion. I will definitely work on it.
On your Talk page you have been asked several times if you have a personal or paid connection to Ahuja, but have not replied. IT IS ESSENTIAL that if you do not, you make a statement to that effect on your Talk page. If you do, then WP:COI pr WP:PAID may apply, and you must comply. Also, is it possible that you edited the article under the account Kaba21, and while not logged in, resulting in edits by IP addresses 112.196.170.52 and 14.139.213.157? Using more than one account on the same article is forbidden (see WP:SOCK) and grounds to be blocked from all future editing. If this was done in ignorance you should confirm on your Talk page and state that you will use only the K baishya account going forward.
Much of the text, before I did some editing today, was near-identical to this web page mentioned above by Hoary. It still may be close-paraphrasing and thus a copyright infringement. Revise in your own wording, and perhaps delete some of the less important information, so that is is less of a copy. David notMD (talk) 10:12, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for editing the article. I don't have paid connection to the subject. He is known to me professionally as he is popular among the legal fraternity of India because of his contribution in intellectual property rights. My apologies if i have done multiple edits inadvertently. I am new at wikipaedia. Thank you once again for your feedback and response.
I am trying to get the article Lucy McCarraher published. Although it has the same amount level of referencing of two other articles I have published (more than than some biographies I have seen) it keeps getting turned down. I'm not sure what else I could be expected to supply.
Well, are there reliable sources that go into detail about her or her work? If there are, cite them. If not, perhaps there's no chance for an article. I look at the lead, and infer from it that her major claims to notability are that She is a co-founder of Rethink Press,[1] and founder of the Business Book Awards.Rethink is merely a redirect to Rethinking; there's no article here about Rethink Press, Business Book Award, or Business Book Awards. I get the impression that she's just not particularly notable. -- Hoary (talk) 11:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
What steps are required in adding/uploading an image to the infobox template? Also, what specific policies should I reference and adhere to? JetGreen40 (talk) 22:17, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
A widely varying number, JetGreen40, largely depending on whether or not the image you want is already at Wikimedia Commons (or perhaps English-language Wikipedia). So, is the image at Commons or (English) Wikipedia? -- Hoary (talk) 23:20, 27 April 2022 (UTC)
Example image, also please don't use thumbs like this in infoboxes haha~ hi there! if the image is already present in either Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons, you can plug in the image's name (without File:) directly to the Image field in the infobox (assuming you're still using VisualEditor). so for example you can input in Cherry blossom sunset (13069579044).jpg to produce the image to the right. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 00:09, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
if it's not yours but you can verify that it's in a suitable free license, also head to Wikimedia Commons.
the tricky part is if it's not yours, and not free (if you can't find the image license, assume it's copyrighted). in that case, there is a guideline on fair use media that you would have to read first. you would have to justify why the image should be used, why there are no other free use alternatives that can be used, and then head over to Files for upload to upload it. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 02:16, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
@JetGreen40, "is it yours" means "do you own the copyright". The most common way to own the copyright is if you took the picture yourself. Images that you find on social media sites, or elsewhere on the internet, are usually copyrighted (and you will not be the copyright owner) 73.127.147.187 (talk) 11:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, all. Recently, I've tried to go beyond simply reverting acts of blatant vandalism and have decided to use the features of Wikipedia more. One of the things I've tried doing is using Twinkle to warn and welcome users. This comes in handy, but I'm still relatively new to when I should carry out warnings, best ways to spot any (I've already started using the recent changes page), and how to spot acts of vandalism that might be a bit subtle. This is when I've started utilizing talk pages, communicating properly, etc. and I'm afraid that along the line as I learn how to properly volunteer I'll mess up and take it personally. I understand that mistakes will be made, but while I'm still learning the ropes, does anyone have advice or warnings on how to properly assist in preventing vandalism and the welcoming of new users as an autoconfirmed, ordinary user? Anything is appreciated. - Cheers, KoolKidz112(hit me up)20:06, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, KoolKidz112, and welcome to the Teahouse! Sorry it took so long for anyone to get to your question; I'm not an expert, but I'll do my best. A lot of the issue is down to personal judgement. The Welcoming Committee welcomes users who have already made constructive edits, which could mean "editors who try to make constructive edits"; sometimes an editor tries to fix something but doesn't succeed, or doesn't know to provide sources. As long as an editor looks like they're trying to contribute constructively I'll welcome them. If there was a problem with an edit, I'll add a note explaining what it was (and why it may have been reverted; example edit and note). In addition, if there's anything to explain to an editor you're warning that the template doesn't cover, use the "Optional Message" portion of the Twinkle warning system freely. If you're not sure what their intentions are, you can always leave a note explaining what you did (if you did anything) and asking them to communicate with you or go to the article talk page (example edit and note). Even if an editor goes on to make unconstructive edits, being nice to them can't hurt. (Related: this thread, especially ARoseWolf's response.) If you're interested in learning more about combating vandalism, you might want to look into the Counter-Vandalism Unit. Someone more experienced may have better suggestions, but hopefully this helps a little! Perfect4th (talk) 14:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
About previously deleted versions of an article
If I look at for example Günter Bechly, I see a kind of deletion-log, info about old deleted versions.
@Michael D. Turnbull No, that is just the active/only afd. I know that there were 2 WP:G11 deletions (so no afd-discussion in the archives), one 2021 and one 2022. The deleting admin told me, and this was visible as a "warning" when I started the draft like at the Bechly-link. But can I see this deletion-history as a non-admin somewhere now that there is a mainspace article? It seems to me that I should be able to. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:16, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Is there any way to edit the references tab? or is there no way? I want to edit the references tab because i want to add the icon-looking thing, like the green lock beside a reference? (Sorry if it makes no sense) Leahnn Rey (talk) 14:17, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Leahnn Rey: Welcome to the Teahouse. The references are consolidated with either {{reflist}} or <references />, so you'd have to go to the inline citation that you want in the body of the article. There should be a linked arrow (^) to the left of each item that allows you go up to where it is used. What you want to do is done as a template parameter, so once you've identified the citation, you are going to need to edit the citation and look for the appropriate keyword to use (Template:Citation#csdoc_access_level has much more information). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Leahnn Rey My understanding is that when you create a ref that provides full access to the text, the green icon is added automatically. For example, I added many science journal articles to Vitamin A. Some of the journals provide free access to the complete text and got the green. David notMD (talk) 15:36, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Regarding citing sources.
Is it acceptable to cite sources where certain information is heavily implied that anyone reading the cited source could understand that it is legitimate? Or must the citation always explicitly prove its legitimacy?
The following line in the Jan Levinson article needs citation: "Her counterpart in the British version is Jennifer Taylor-Clarke" (2nd line in the article). To my knowledge, there are no references to this line except for personal blogs and fandom sites (that often only mirror Wikipedia)
hi Fenharrow and welcome to the teahouse! the citation should always prove its legitimacy. blogs and the like are not permitted due to the policy on self-published sources that states that they're not allowed as anyone can post one without any guarantee of editorial oversight or fact-checking. that goes regardless of whether said source is trusted: even if we ignore WP:CIRCULAR, citing wikipedia itself (and similar sites) probably won't be able to be usable due to its user-generated nature despite being truated by probably millions around the world. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 11:31, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
A Wikiproject or Request Portal for Data Visualizations?
I'm trying to build on my data visualization skills with matplotlib and would like to make charts/graphs for Wikipedia as I explore the included functionalities more. Is there a systematic/simple way to find Wikipedia articles that would benefit from a chart (e.g. like a category, request portal, Wikiproject taskboard?).
I see that there's quite a few resources for charting and graphing on Wikipedia (Wikipedia:How to create charts for Wikipedia articles), but not really any kind of simple way to look for pages where other editors have made requests for data visualizations/charts/graphs.
Hi Cyali and welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest you take a look at the documentation at Template:Chart requested, which includes a number of suggestions for how articles may be tagged to indicate they would benefit from charts and/or graphs. You can then look at the places these templates have been used. Thanks for wanting to improve articles that way. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Can I have more than one section at a time uploaded on the talk page of an article?
On the talk page for the Argentinian band Siamés, I created a section to discuss an issue with sourcing who all the members of the band are, which is currently pending responses.
However, I noticed something else that I wanted to talk about in the article, that being the genre prescribed to the band in the lede (Electropop). I don't think it's particularly accurate, and there are numerous secondary sources indicating that Siamés is predominantly an indie rock band.
Are users allowed to have more than one section in the talk page?
If you wish to discuss multiple issues about an article, and you think it's helpful to split it into separate discussions, then yes, you can start as many new sections on the talk page as you need. If you use the New Section button, or the "edit source" near the section header, it will show you just that section to edit. If you use the "Edit source" tab at the top of the talk-page, you can see, and edit, the entire talk-page, with all sections present simultaneously. I hope that helps! Elemimele (talk) 17:45, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Moving draft articles into mainspace over redirects
Hi all. I’ve been on Wikipedia for about three years now, in that time I’ve created a decent amount of draft articles and moved them into mainspace. I want to move Draft: The Nun 2 into mainspace since production has commenced according to sources I’ve cited in the draft but there is a redirect in the way, could an administrator move this for me please? Thanks heaps. KaitoNkmra23(talk!)19:11, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Mr JNXN. WP:RSN is a better place to ask about reliability of sources. Before asking, it's worth searching the archives of that noticeboard, to see if they have been discussed before. ColinFine (talk) 22:57, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Are you concerned that you've been banned from editing Wikipedia? If so, you don't currently appear to be blocked. But your IP address belongs to an educational establishment, and these often run into difficulties because they are shared by large numbers of users. You will find messages on your talk page complaining about unhelpful editing, and threatening blocks, which are quite probably responses to editing by other people who happen to be at the same institution and sharing the same IP address. To get round this problem, you can register as a user with a user-name, and then it won't matter what your IP address is. You will be recognised as you, and you'll have your own talk-page, and only get blocked if you, personally, do something outrageous! It also has the benefit that your actual IP address will remain private. I hope this answers your concern. Elemimele (talk) 17:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
I moved the article Four Player Chess to improve the name. I believe there are double redirects, but they aren't terrible and I believe bots will fix that. Can someone more knowledgeble tell me if there is anything that needs to be checked (or fixed?). For what it's worth, the move is correct, though it could have stayed at Four-player chess or even be 4 Player Chess. Anyways, thanks! Bedfordres (talk) 17:12, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Bedfordres, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, generally although you are encouraged to be WP:BOLD, it is good practice for you to go to the talkpage of the article and initiate a conversation for the sake of consensus, It is good practice for you to ping major contributors to the discussion as well, rather than a unilateral move. Whilst I have not looked into it with detail and just saw your rationale for the move, I would like to tell you that you move to a different name if the new name is the actual WP:COMMONNAME as indicated by the quality of the sources used. Celestina007 (talk) 17:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Celestina007 Thank you for your reply. I don't think there is any one name. I think that four player chess is more likely to be looked for than the version with the punctuation. I wasn't aware that you need to put something on a talk page, though that makes sense. Do you want me to put something on the talk page after the fact? Bedfordres (talk) 17:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Bedfordres, not necessarily but it is good etiquette if you indeed explain your thinking and explain your actions. But If you don’t you wouldn’t be violating any policy it just portrays good etiquette. Celestina007 (talk) 17:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
I disagree with this move and have undone it. "Four-player chess" is not a proper noun and should not be capitalised as if it were. See WP:NCCAPS. —Wasell(T) 🌻 05:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Article rejected ... because of lack of reliable and verifiable sources: Significant coverage...
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). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia.
Not sure if it is possible to have a quick call to see exactly how to overcome this.What other sources count?
Hello, Jmukiri This is about Draft:Caroline Bosire. Independent sources are those that have no direct connection with Bosire, and the sources must devote significant coverage to her. Things published by organizatiins that she is affiliated with are not independent. Her defending her PhD thesis is not independent. Passing mentions are not significant coverage. Cullen328 (talk) 23:03, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello Jmukiri, and welcome to the Teahouse. Presumably, this relates to Draft:Caroline Bosire. There are three separate requirements that a source must meet in order for it to contribute to notability. First, it must be reliable: on the face of it, those two are probably reliable. Secondly, it must be independent of the subject: your second and third links are by, or partly by, Bosire, and so are not independent of her, and do not contribute to establishing notability. Thirdly, they must contain significant coverage of the subject: the aasciences link does not appear to mention Bosire, and so cannot contribute to establishing her notability. ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Thank you for getting back to me. https://www.aasciences.africa/grantees-profile?id=260 I was supposed to put that link. Yes based on my draft, in simple terms.. my links are not "verifiable" so thus cannot be contributed to? Does this not disqualify many people from the global south where that is harder to achieve? in this case very few women are scientist to start out with? honestly would not know how to add more women on wikipedia whose work is important if these are the limitations. Jmukiri (talk) 23:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Jmukiri, the African Academy of Sciences source is her writing about herself and her own work, so that is not an independent source, and is of no value in establishing notability and therefore eligibility for a Wikipedia biography. How would our readers know that her work is "important" if reliable, independent sources do not write about her work in detail? Verifiability is a core content policy. Cullen328 (talk) 00:31, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@Cullen328 yes I understand this in principle but I am asking in practice. What are independent sources or verified sources women scientist from Africa? Like where would I get these sources from? I am trying to learn here? how would you go about it? how are independent sources retrieved for marginalized people? is there sources or guidelines to help with these? Jmukiri (talk) 00:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Jmukiri, the principles, especially the core content policies, govern our practice. Should the standards be different for a woman from Kenya than a man from Kansas? She holds a PhD degree and has had at least one article published in an academic journal, so I do not see her as marginalized. I have a bachelor's degree and did construction work most of my career. Am I marginalized? Reliable sources are published in Africa, including newspapers, magazines and academic journals. We currently have 28 Wikipedia biographies for 21st-century Kenyan women scientists, so the hurdles are not impossible to jump over. Cullen328 (talk) 00:54, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
I appreciate the time that you have taken to review and answer my question. To clarify I have not said that principles or anything should change here. I have not said the metrics or standards should be different. I was simply asking for advice. I am new here. So one of the sources I put was a newspaper article another was from a journal article ? I personally don't know of magazines in Africa that discuss work scientist have done. Do you? I want to find out how I contribute. Constructive not destructive advice.
I asked how you would go about this if it were you, given the circumstances. It is factual that women in Africa in sciences are marginalized, it is factual that they get little to no recognition for their work. Based on those barriers, what ways can be used to get their work on this platform? Maybe there are none, or they are not known... There were other women who I had wanted to highlight and used the same strategy but the articles would all be rejected and that would be time and effort wasted for both me and the person reviewing.
Maybe I am asking the question wrong or something, this is not the way I would like to be communicated to. Jmukiri (talk) 06:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Jmukiri I did a quick Google search, and only see her papers - nothing written about her. The next step, per WP:NSCHOLAR, would be to see if her papers are "highly cited" by others, such as using Google Scholar. I looked her citations up and found this [[13]]. The citation metrics are explained here Wikipedia:Notability (academics)#Citation metrics, but unfortunately it doesn't tell us if 75 (her highest paper citation count) is considered "highly cited" or not. Perhaps another person who is more familiar with NSCHOLAR can help here. TimTempleton(talk)(cont)05:07, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@Timtempleton thank you for getting back to me. I have reviewed past entries and I am assuming some of these new guiding rules are new (as previous sources have sources from their place of work as the reference). Something to think about - How does one get recognized for their work in a society that does not recognize their work. A tricky situation, being an editor is way harder than it seems. Jmukiri (talk) 07:22, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@Jmukiri: don't feel too bad about it! She is early in her career, having completed her PhD in 2016. Very few academics, in any part of the world, would reach the level of secondary reporting or citation or seniority of position to satisfy notability of academics within such a short time of their PhD. The majority of working academics never will, even though their work may be good. Academic careers are not built on Wikipedia. But her publication record appears to be growing year on year, so it's maybe just WP:TOOSOON and one day she will reach the stage of being notable in Wikipedia terms. Meanwhile, academics are also often better known for what they do than what they are. There are plenty of situations where we have articles about the subject a major academic helped build, but not about the individual themselves. If there are articles about agriculture that would benefit from Bosire's work, particularly when she's written review papers that would be good secondary sources for articles here, you could add information and references to those articles? Elemimele (talk) 10:19, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Need to add a middle initial to a profile page title
I need to add a middle initial to the title of the profile of a living person I created. I moved it successfully once but now need to change it back and I can't seem to do it with an admin or page mover. Can anyone help?
Done. A tip, Llmeyers: don't refer to an article as a "profile", a word that has all the wrong connotations. (Often, they do apply to the crappy article in question; I'm happy to say that the article Carey R. Dunne isn't crappy.) -- Hoary (talk) 13:19, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, i've just been on a RC Patrol and have ID'd an IP that has been constantly vandalizing pages, ignoring warnings and is posting insulting messages on talkpages, is there anywhere i can report this user to the admins or should i wait to see if he will stop or ignore and let someone else take care of matters? you can find the IP in my contribution history, wait he has posted a message to my talkpage calling me a loser.
@Pyrrho the Skipper, the IP's additions to two articles were certainly not good or useful, but isn't there a chance that the IP thought that they were helping by adding useful (albeit unreferenced) information to the articles? If so, those two edits were not vandalism, right? I'm not talking about the comment to @OGWFP's talk page, which was pretty much the same content, but even more obviously in the wrong place. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 04:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Good question, @73.127.147.187: If you squint hard enough, the edit by itself could be considered a good-faith edit, but it could just as easily be considered WP:PATENTNONSENSE, which can be considered vandalism. If they wouldn't have edit warred over that line, and posted insults to Talk Pages, I would not have reported it and would WP:AGF. But the editor who posted here had a legitimate concern, had the higher ground, and felt personally attacked. Add it all up and you have a disruptive user, arguably vandalizing multiple articles and Talk Pages, whether there was malice or not in their original edit. Nevertheless, I'm glad you brought it up, because I always appreciate reminders where I may not have assumed good faith. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 04:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Pyrrho the Skipper I'm really talking about the posts to the two "relationship" articles in ths user's edit history. They looked a bit amateurish to me, but not patent nonsense... I think we can move on now... Thanks. So, you are no longer a skeptic? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 12:08, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
I'll look again. Maybe I was wrong, and if so, hopefully I'll learn from it and be better. I'm glad it was called out for me to look closer, so thanks again. Still a skeptic but I didn't want to be confused with that specific brand of arrogant dogma rude and aggressive type. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 16:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello there, unfortunately Wikipedia doesn’t create pages, rather we publish notable articles written by volunteer editors. It is humble opinion that you reserve article creation for much later until such a time you get acquainted with the inner workings of the collaborative project, and are familiar with our policies and guidelines. Celestina007 (talk) 13:16, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Linking
There is a Wikipedia article about a topic in another language but the English Wikipedia doesn't show/link to it. How to add a link from the English Wikipedia article (Kafir) to the article of the same name in that other language?-BitOfKarate (talk) 05:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, I'm new to this. I have no idea where to find 'add reference' and what to reference? I have added lots of links and information but what constitutes a reference?
Augustus Diamond, at Draft:Jonathan Starkey you've written a lot of stuff about Starkey, but (assuming you didn't just make it up) you need to explain where you got it from, by citing references. Look at almost any Wikipedia article, and you will see little superscript numbers in square brackets. Those are references. Please read Help:Referencing for beginners to learn how these work. Maproom (talk) 16:14, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
@Augustus Diamond, I'll give a specific example of what Maproom is saying. The sentence "Jonathan Starkey was recognised as an extraordinary pianistic talent and immediately accepted into the Junior School of the RNCM, graduating to the Senior School" -- where did that information come from? What is the published source that confirms this specific assertion (or fact), so that anyone reading the article can verify that fact? You must place the citation that verifies this assertion inline in the article, at the end of the assertion.
The same goes for each major assertion in the article. Statements that do not have references should not be included in the article. (Often, one source can verify several sentences. The link that Maproom provided goes into the reasoning and the mechanics of how to put the references into the article.) Yes, writing a new article is hard. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, 5LMGVGOTY. I'm afraid that if "there's not enough info I can use", then necessarily the subject will not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, because that depends almost entirely on published reliable sources. If the subject does not meet the criteria for notability, then no article about it is possible. ColinFine (talk) 14:34, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Watchlist slowdown?
Has anybody else noticed a distinct slowdown in watchlist loading time, a few annoying seconds slower? I have noticed this for the last few days on two devices and browsers, Firefox (PC) and Safari (ipad).
The number of times per day I click on it has meant that I am losing a significant chunk of time staring blankly into space. I'm beginning to drool onto my keyboard. - Roxy the grumpy dog.wooF13:43, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I've noticed it, too, along with a slowdown in saving edits. I don't know whether this is related, but there's been a fairly big, and relatively contemporaneous, explosion of pages at Category:ParserFunction errors and Category:Pages with parser function time errors, seemingly due to "The time allocated for running scripts has expired" errors (mostly on user pages). My guess is that someone messed up a script or template or something. Might be a matter for WP:VPT. Deor (talk) 14:08, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Please i need clarification on what to do i am trying to post a biography of someone and this is the message am getting after submitting for review which i didn't understand
(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). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. ) Aamarafa15 (talk) 15:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
That message indicates that there is not sufficient reference material in the article to indicate that the subject is notable. Specifically, there need to be multiple sources about the subject which are reliable, independent of the subject, and cover the subject in reasonable depth (not just a mention, quote, blurb, or name-drop). If better reference material about the subject is available, use that within the article. If not, it is likely that the subject is not a suitable one for an article at this time. SeraphimbladeTalk to me16:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
CentralAuth says "created on login" - i.e., somebody logged in to Telegu WP with that account IIRC. I would be concerned if I was you. casualdejekyll23:36, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Rusty4321 It'd likely be a good idea as a precautionary measure to change your password (especially if it's one you may have used on other websites). Your account might not be compromised, but I'd argue it's a good idea in case it is. Are you sure you weren't logged in to Wikipedia? You don't have to log into each language version of Wikipedia in order for accounts to automatically be created on other Wikimedia sites, you just need to accidently click a link to that site and boom, you're registered. I've had that happen to me a few times [14]. A lot of the time the notification wasn't automatic, so maybe that's what happened? Clovermoss(talk)00:16, 30 April 2022 (UTC); edited to add a sentence
Hi..I want to ask some topics that I can create pages on and will be good value to the community. I think of topics but most of the times either there is an article on the topic already or the topic will not have good coverage to make one article. Can someone help? Laptopinmyhands (talk) 17:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Laptopinmyhands, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. This is a reply I made to another question here last week, that I think is germane:
I remember when I was a new editor, long ago, and how I desperately wanted to "make my mark" by creating a new article. But I couldn't find a suitable topic, and never did. (In 20 000 edits in 17 years, I've only ever created a handful of articles). Creating new articles is not the only way to contribute to Wikipedia. For an inexperienced editor, it is an extremely difficult way, and likely to involve you in frustration and disappointment. You can add hundreds or thousands of times as much value to Wikipedia by making small improvements to some of our millions of existing articles, many of which are seriously in need of attention. Every single time you can clarify an unclear paragraph, find and cite a reliable source for some unsourced information, or remove some cruft or non-neutral wording from an article, you will be contributing more to Wikipedia than you ever could by creating a draft about a subject which does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. I suggest you have a look at the "Help out" section of the Community portal.ColinFine (talk) 17:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello!
Happy to see you want to write articles, I completely relate to your situation, I was there once! For me, what really helped was WP:Requested Articles. I would really recommend checking it out, and browse the suggestions. Some people have already included references for you! If that doesn’t work out for you, maybe try researching into your local area and find topics which you could write articles about, which is what I did for Wally the Walrus and Piper’s Hole. Another thing that I found is that you don’t always have to know about a topic already in order to write an article about it, when I started John Henry Bell, I had no idea who he was, but I still had a lot of fun researching and writing the article. Any which way, I hope you enjoy Wikipedia and writing articles. HenryTemplo (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello! I am always seeing the page Sonchus and seeing how many Sonchus species have not been covered. I am always trying to create those articles and I think it would be great if you helped with that. If you don't want to do that like HenryTemplo said is to look at the WP:Requested Articles or I might join a WikiProject. Have fun! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔) 22:58, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Someone is marking my photos for deletion for copyright issues.
These photos have no copyright issues. They are either taken by me, or by my friend Ghada, when we were there. Those 'violations' pointed to on Google maps were also taken by me or her...
Hello, Teacher Samara. The photos, and the proposed deletion, are all on Wikimedia Commons, not on Wikipedia, and you'll need to take it up there. I think the problem is that you also loaded the photos to Google, and so they appear on the web. I see that you have replied to the messages on your Commons user talk page c:User talk:Teacher Samara: the box to which you are replying says If you are the copyright holder and the creator of the file, please read Commons:But it's my own work! for tips on how to provide evidence of that.ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Teacher Samara, please be aware that you cannot upload photos that your friend Ghada took. Ghada holds those copyrights. You can only upload photos that you took. Cullen328 (talk) 23:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Unclear inputmode and other problems in the input window for a new topic to the Teahouse.
My computer: Windows 8.1 and FireFox (latest version)
After I clicked on [Ask a question] and the window opened:
1. When this window opens then, to me, it is not visible in which input mode (I mean: "Visual Editor!" or "Source") this window is.
I would appreciate, if even before/above the title field there were these two buttons
[Visual] and [Source], and it would be visible, at first glance, in which input mode the follwing input fields are.
2. Between the "Title" field and what I call the main field (in which there is the Word "Description") there are two kind of buttons ( [Visual] and [Source] ).
I write "kind" because, by first sight, they are not recognizable as buttons.
Above and below each is a horizontal line, but that's all; they don't look like buttons. Only by moving my mousepointer across them, it became visible, by the type of icon my mouspointer became or remained, that they must be buttons, and that one is currently disabled, probably because of the current input mode. So there is a lot of trying and guessing necessary.
3. The Word "Description"
In what I call the main field (in which there is the Word "Description") there is this word "Description". I tried to delete it, but it was not possible. I also tried to copy it (with [Ctrl]+[C]) to delete it as a whole, but this was not possible either.
Only after I had inserted something into this field this word disappeared. For those who are used to this window, this behavior may be comfortable. But for someone who is there first, it is not obvious that this behavior will take place.
4. The name "Add topic" of the button
I was missing a button which "says" [Send].
To me, who is not grown up in English, it was not obvious that [Add topic] ment [Send].
There should be a button near the top that says “Submit your draft for review”. Speatle (talk to me)please ping me when replying to something I said. 21:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
If you're asking about notability standards, the same for anything else. They must have significant in depth coverage outside of the fictional universe the character is in. Wikipedia:Notability (fiction) specifically addresses this. PRAXIDICAE💕02:53, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I tried to report a bug, but Phabricator INSISTED !! on accessing my user's data including e-mail, otherwise it would not allow me to report a bug.
I consider such behavior very user-fiendly - just like almost all the many commercial sites insist on cookies and/or registration including all personal details.
I don't have e-mail.
Why does Phabricator has to check all my user data just to allow me to report a bug!? I want an answer !!
Why does Phabricator has to insist on an e-mail.
It already insists on the reporter to be registered (with a user name) and being logged in.
Why is this not enough? I want an answer !!
@Steue: I've never used it, but according to [16] the email address is required for verification. You can try asking at [17] to see if there is any alternative. RudolfRed (talk) 22:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
First off, my apologies if this is the wrong forum in which to bring up this question. If not, please point me to the right place to do so. I am just looking for some advice here. Two days ago, I made a few edits to some closely related pages on Wikipedia. However, they were very quickly reverted by a user who has made most of the past edits to each of those pages. They did not offer much in the way of an explanation as to why, only stating in the edit summary that they were reverting the page to its "last good version" (which seems to be the defense that they use to roll back pretty much all changes made to these articles). As such, I reinstated my changes, making sure to spell out even more carefully the reasoning behind my edits, and clearly state why I believed they were both relevant and necessary once again. Within minutes, the same user reversed those changes once again. At this point, I headed to the article's talk page, where I found that the only topic of discussion in the past centered around this very issue. A different editor faced the same situation, brought up the problem in the section I visited, and the user mentioned above responded with a short but negative message. I responded in this section, asking for people to share their opinions. Soon thereafter, another person offered their view and suggested a compromise solution which incorporated elements of my change as well as the original page, which was what the earlier user had been insisting on all along. They promptly went on to implement this compromise, which after some thought I agreed to as well. However, the editor I have been mentioning quickly reverted this edit as well. I also protested the undoing of some edits I had made at one of these pages which were irrelevant to the discussion at hand, and which nobody had ever vocally taken issue with. However, seemingly out of spite, the same member once again rolled back my other changes, this time with no explanation at all. It was at this point that this person left me a message on my talk page, accusing me of "edit warring" and threatening an immediate ban from editing. I sent back a notice to that user's talk page right away, explaining once more why I made the changes, and demanding their attention. When I did not receive a response for over 24 hours despite their speed in previously undoing my edits, I reinstated only the edits over which there was no controversy, keeping the rest of the page as they had left it, hoping for a swift resolution through dialogue on that article's talk page. Within minutes, those changes were undone as well, with the threat coming in the edit summary this time, but still with no reasoning given as to why it was done. I have refrained from completely reversing those reversions so far, as they are a far more experienced user than I am. However, I feel as though I have no other choice, and if they have an objection to the edits made by myself and others, they should be made to explain themselves and then discuss the issue later on through the talk page, rather than simply stonewalling the issue. Am I wrong to feel that my edits should be kept in place instead, at least until someone is able to raise a point as to what detriment they have caused, however flawed the logic in their reasoning? This is especially true because it is also the case that, insofar as a consensus exists, it is almost completely in favor of the changes that I have attempted to implement along with numerous other people, given that this person is the only one who did not support doing so. A Red Cherry (talk) 23:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Question about strange sources in an approved article
Good evening. Please tell me why the sources in this article were approved by Wikipedia? In this rather voluminous article, there are only 2 sources, each of which is not reliable (or am I mistaken?). Explain, please.
0Renovate0 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It is difficult for us to speak to something on the Spanish Wikipedia, as each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. You should ask your question on that version of Wikipedia to get the best answer. There should be a Help Desk area(though I do not know what it is called in Spanish). I can say that Wikipedia does not "approve" or "disapprove" sources(except in rare cases like the Daily Mail which has been banned as a source), but editors arrive at a consensus as to whether or not a source is appropriate to use. 331dot (talk) 11:31, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Your link is to the Spanish Wikipedia, so for details you will have to ask there (each Wikipedia language version is a separate project with different standards for sourcing). I would call that article WP:FANCRUFT. On English Wikipedia we have Sonic Robo Blast 2 as a re-direct to a list of unofficial Sonic media, with only a small comment. Incidentally, there is no "approval" mechanism in general for sourcing as anyone can be WP:BOLD and add content to Wikipedia articles. However, we do maintain a list of reliable sources and editors do often remove material that is not reliably sourced, as part of our WP:BRD process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Maurice Magnus and Fictiouslibrarian, you are both engaging in an edit war, and you both need to stop doing so and discuss the matter (as you have started doing). The purpose of discussion is to achieve consensus, and that in turn requires a willingess to listen to others' arguments: if you go into the discussion with an attitude of "I'm right and you're wrong", it will not be productive. If you really cannot reach agreement, then please follow the steps in dispute resolution.
And in answer to your last question, Maurice, no. In editing Wikipedia vandalism means editing in a way which is intended to damage Wikipedia. That does not appear to be the case here: you have a content dispute. ColinFine (talk) 13:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@Sarath Shibu With sources like [18][19][20] you probably can. However, you have to do it right or the article will not be accepted. It is essential that you learn how to add references correctly, see WP:TUTORIAL. If you don't, you are wasting your time.
You have created Draft:Izin Hash. Given that it contains very little content and no references, in its current state it has no potential to be accepted as an article if you submit it for review. His career to date is that he is a child model in advertisements for products. Personally, I doubt that meets Wikipedia's definition of notable. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello and welcome. Wikipedia does not have "pages", it has articles. Wikipedia does not charge for its use- but it is not a means of promotion or a place to just tell about the existence of a topic. It is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Writing a new article is the hardest task to attempt on Wikipedia, and it's good to first gain experience and knowledge by editing existing articles, so you get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. If you create an account, you may also use the new user tutorial. If you still want to attempt to create a new article, you should first gather at least three independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about the topic- and not based on materials put out by the topic such as press releases, announcements, or interviews- and then visit Articles for Creation to start the process. If you are associated with this topic, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing. 331dot (talk) 13:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello and welcome. As stated in ther above post we here at Wikipedia are nonprofit. We do not ask for any money for the use of this site. I encourage you to follow the above links to the articles they will help you. Happy editing. Mschulz75 (talk) 15:11, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello 2A01 . . . F9D7! A category for Mononymous musicians probably doesn't exist simply because no-one's thought of making it before (or they have, but decided it was too much work). Every editor "working" on Wikipedia is an unpaid volunteer who does whatever they choose to do – none of us get tasks assigned to us.
If you think such a category is a good idea, be Bold, and go ahead and create it: once it exists, others might agree it's a good idea and contribute to applying it. The worse that can happen (and I don't think it would) is that someone disagrees with having it so much that they Revert it, in which case you can Discuss it with them and maybe change their mind: this is the standard procedure of WP:BRD by which a great deal gets done (and sometimes undone) here. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.88.97 (talk) 14:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@Demonlord189: Hello Demonlord! THe answer is it depends. Depending on the context, a GIF may or may not be allowed. An example of when a GIF would be allowed would be to showcase gameplay in an article relating to a video game where a picture wouldn't do very good at providing enough context (for example, the GIF used on the article Baba Is You). However, a GIF such as a meme GIF isn't allowed. So it would depend on what you want to add a GIF to. ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654516:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
I posted this question to the Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind talk page and was referred here to see if an experienced editor could weigh in. I have looked over WP:NONFICTION and did not see anything about books with multiple language editions.
Would it be within Wikipedia guidelines for books to update the cover art image of the book found at the top of the page? The current image is for the Hebrew first edition. The cover art for the English edition already exists on Wikimedia Commons but it is not the artwork from the official English first edition from Harper Collins. The artwork from Harper Collins is the image most readers of this page will likely be familiar with and be able to read, and the one used by the author on his personal website. If the current artwork is preferred, would it be appropriate to add the cover art for the English edition elsewhere in the page? LightBulb22 (talk) 15:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, LightBulb22. If the copy in Commons is truly freely licensed, then no, a non-free image may not be added, according to WP:NFCC, and the existing non-free image should be removed and replaced by the free image. But I don't believe that File:Sapiens-uma-breve-historia-da-humanidade-livro-yuval-harari-320001-MLB20265211115 032015-O.jpg is validly licensed, and I have nominated it for deletion. If it is deleted, then I can see no argument against replacing a non-free image by a more appropriate non-free image in the article. ColinFine (talk) 19:52, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@ColinFine Thanks for the reply! The question was two fold and I didn't word it clearly so allow me to ask a follow up. The current main image on the Sapiens article is the Hebrew first edition cover. Would it be appropriate to either update the main image to the Harper Collins english first edition cover referenced above if it could be obtained and uploaded in the proper way, or if the Hebrew version is the best image for the article since it was the very first edition published, could the English first edition cover be added to the page? The English first edition is the image used by the author on his website and also the image most readers of the English Wikipedia page will be familiar with and be able to read the text on. There doesnt seem to be much guidance on this topic for books with multiple language first editions. I noticed that the image File:Sapiens-uma-breve-historia-da-humanidade-livro-yuval-harari-320001-MLB20265211115 032015-O.jpg that you nominated for deletion is being used on several other global wiki sites for the book image in other languages. Thanks! LightBulb22 (talk) 18:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)
You did word it clearly, LightBulb. I replied that (assuming that the image from Commons is invalidly licensed and will be deleted) you may certainly replace one non-free image with a more appropriate non-free image. It is an editorial decision which image is most appropriate (and therefore one which you are precisely as entitled to make as any other editor), but I can't see how the cover of a foreign-language edition can be more appropriate in an article about a book, unless possibly if the history of its publication in different languages were particularly noteworthy and discussed as such in the article. ColinFine (talk) 09:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC)
Not enough reliable sources for my article. What I can do?
Good evening. I wrote an article about a video game and when I checked the list of articles I didn't find any verified sources about this game. But the existence of the videogame is obvious and confirmed in many social networks, as well as in quite convincing and conscientious resources like GameJolt. What can I do in this situation?
My article: Draft:Sonic Omens0Renovate0 (talk) 13:07, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Unfortunately, the answer is "Don't write the article." This sucks. We all know the feeling when your work goes to waste, and it sucks. casualdejekyll13:20, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@0Renovate0: Game Jolt appears to be billed as a social community platform, which suggests that a lot of its content is user-generated, which lowers the reliability of the source. TV Tropes also suffers from the same issue, so that will see very little use as a reliable source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
The other possibility would be to post your article at one of the numerous other wikis. I know that still sucks, but perhaps it sucks less. Fabrickator (talk) 22:11, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. Yeah, I saw this article, but I'm not sure if the site is reliable. As for publishing on other wikis - I'll think. 0Renovate0 (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
@0Renovate0: Let's clarify here; wikis are virtually never suitable as citations to Wikipedia, as most of them are user-generated. There are other wikis out there that have different policies than Wikipedia, which may allow your content to be posted. Usually FANDOM wikis cover many of these niche subjects. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:47, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
Stop. You have created a non-article in your Sandbox (no content, no references) submitted it twice - wasting the time of Reviewers - and now Rejected. Articles (not 'pages') need to be about notable topics, meaning having reliable source references published be people other than you. David notMD (talk) 01:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Getting my wikipedia article page to be seen when searching on Google
Hello there! I recently created a new wikipedia article page and it is approved. However, when I google it, the wikipedia page is still unable to be seen or found. How do I go about that? Able to help? Thank you! Lee Miao Si (talk) 04:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
@Lee Miao Si: Welcome to the Teahouse, and congrats on getting an article into mainspace. New pages aren't indexed by search engines until a new pages reviewer approves it or ninety days have passed, whichever comes first. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:43, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Hi Lee Miao Si. Tenryuu is referring to Wikipedia:New pages patrol or “NPP”. NPP are a group of users who go around checking on newly created articles to see whether they meet or at least have a credible chance of meeting any of Wikipedia’s notability guidelines. I believe NPP is a very basic assessment for which the goal is to find newly created which clearly are not ready for article status and figure out what to do with them as quickly as possible. You probably just need to be patient since it may take a bit of time for a NPP reviewer to assess the article you created. — Marchjuly (talk) 05:31, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Arthur Zilberman (talk) 23:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)
hello my article got deleted from wiki after being there for years and years, can someone help me restore it or create new one? please
i compensate if needed
i know its illegal to offer money , but im only offering compensation for the time, whoever decides to take on this project. we are real company with 10 employees , multiple locations. mentioned on cbs news, cnn, msnbc...etc.. and all these mentions are free, meaning we didn't pay pr agency, they come to us because we are well know established brand in NYC and New Jersey. Arthur Zilberman (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Also, paid or not, promotional articles are not allowed. Please read the conflict of interest guideline as above. Thefficacy (talk) 05:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
my article was deleted that was there for years, i need help writing new one or restoring old one.
i know its illegal to offer money , but im only offering compensation for the time, whoever decides to take on this project. we are real company with 10 employees , multiple locations. mentioned on cbs news, cnn, msnbc...etc.. and all these mentions are free, meaning we didn't pay pr agency, they come to us because we are well know established brand in NYC and New Jersey. Laptopmd.com Arthur Zilberman (talk) 00:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Arthur Zilberman, nobody has expressed any doubt that LaptopMD is a real company. Perhaps some day a person unconnected with LaptopMD will realize that it is notable according to Wikipedia's (arguably strange) criteria, and will want to write an article about it. Any attempt by you (or anyone else connected to LaptopMD) to accelerate this process will almost certainly fail, and may very well backfire. -- Hoary (talk) 00:32, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
our article was never deleted before, to the best of my knowledge.. this is the first time on feb 2022 . its ben up for 7..8 years or so of not more Arthur Zilberman (talk) 15:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Arthurlmd My suggestion is that you not attempt to pursue this further. If your company truly meets the Wikipedia definition of a notable company, an independent editor will eventually take note of the appropriate coverage of your company in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. Trying to force the issue isn't often successful by those in your position. Please also understand that an article about your company is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 13:15, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Hello, Arthur Zilberman. It is not "illegal" to offer money, just unwise, and probably a waste of your money. In trying to find a way to get an article about your company on Wikipedia when several people have investigated and determined that your company does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, you are making it clear that you entire purpose is promotion - telling the world about your company - and promotion is absolutely forbidden on Wikipedia.
Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Unless you can find several such independent sources, any further time and effort you spend on this will be totally wasted. ColinFine (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
We don't know - if we knew where to find independent sources about your company, they would have been added rather than deleting the article. Usually we can find newspaper articles and such, but they need to be about your company, not just articles that quote someone from your company. No one is going to be interested in writing an article that is just going to be deleted again because it doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion. MrOllie (talk) 13:19, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Arthurlmd, the "several independent sources" are not going to be the ones interested in writing about LaptopMD. The people who are interested in writing will be looking at the "several independent sources" to collect information about your company. The "several independent sources" will be reliable, authoritative websites (NOT your own or those of people affiliated with our company), articles in magazines, or news stories or such things. The people interested in writing will not BE those "several independent sources"; they will be USING them. As for how to find the "several independent sources," it will not be possible to find them before there actually are any to find. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Those are places you were quoted for articles on other topics, they do not provide substantial detail about your company. MrOllie (talk) 15:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)
Tshepiso Mogotsi, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, this is a good question, simply put, an article is considered notable if multiple reliable sources, (please do ensure to see WP:RS in your spare time) extensively discusses the subject you intend to write about. Hey are you familiar or in any way acquainted with the organization you intend to write about? Celestina007 (talk) 13:11, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi, {{u|Tshepiso ! On a quick search, all I found is a FB page and a single blog post from 2017. Looks like a noble undertaking, but unfortunately not enough coverage to base an international encyclopaedia article on, nor even to support a mention at Maun, Botswana. If you're interested in writing about them, are there local newspapers that would accept a freelance article? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 00:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Syarafina Nur Sabrina Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you are referring to Draft:World Crossover: Chapter 1, it has unfortunately been rejected and will not be considered further. Wikipedia is not a place to post the plot of a story, especially if it is of your creation; it is a place to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about a topic, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. If independent sources with a reputation of fact checking and editorial contro like the news or book reviewers write about your story, that is something that can be in an article, but not just the plot. If you just want to tell people about your story, you should use social media. I might suggest that you read about the Five Pillars of Wikipedia and use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia so that you can understand what it is we are looking for. 331dot (talk) 14:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
I know some people like to make sure a web page is saved on archive.org before using it as a reference on Wikipedia, to make sure if the page changes or disappears it can still be seen by people wanting to verify a claim on Wikipedia. Is there a handy plugin or something that makes this as easy as pasting in a URL and the system archiving it and spitting out a reference that I can paste straight into Wikipedia? A bit like how Twinkle makes adding maintenance tags and AFDs really easy? Ascendingrisingharmonising (talk) 14:52, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
@Ascendingrisingharmonising: Welcome to the Teahouse! Internet Archive actually automatically archives any link used as a reference on Wikipedia, so no additional action is needed. If/when the website goes down or something else happens to the content being referenced, then you or another editor can grab an archived copy from web.archive.org. Bsoyka (talk) 15:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Why are so many articles referring to the past tense at the date of publish?, they are factually incorrect as soon as they are posted but still left up? - Wikipedia is becoming a joke. 84.71.195.86 (talk) 17:26, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Greetings IP editor. Of the approximately 126,000 Wikipedia volunteers who edit in a given month most choose to help with projects that are of special interest to them. If you would like to start correcting the articles you feel have the wrong tense used in them it will be a fine way to improve Wikipedia. There are about 6.5 million English Wikipedia articles, and we can always use more volunteers to make useful edits. When I start reading an article on a subject that interests me, and realize the article needs a lot of work, I start researching and rewriting, for I've just found my latest volunteer project. I obtain satisfaction in knowing I'm helping to improve this fine online encyclopedia. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:09, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Hello, I need help by reverting an older version of "Reese's Peanut Butter Cups". I was trying to remake the "Redirect-distinguish" template because it looked so complicated, and I accidentally made it worse. If there's a way to revert it besides the 3RR, that would be greatly appreciated. Mod creator (talk) 20:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
I am currently working on the article Mammootty to make a GA. But when after each edit I will go for a preview. Then a notification is coming like "One or More cite web and cite news templates have maintenance messages and the messages are hidden. Could anyone please help.Paavamjinn (talk) 21:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
Hi @Paavamjinn! The first step is to change your settings to make the errors messages display. Go to User:Paavamjinn/common.css and edit it to paste this code:
Then go back to the article, and you'll see some of the error messages displaying next to references. Go ahead and click on the help message next to those to learn what you need to do to resolve them. I should note that generally these things aren't significant enough to need resolving at the GA level; they're more applicable at the FA level. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}}talk21:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
On most news articles online, the article is updated multiple times, up to weeks after it was first published. Most of the time, the original date of publication is not shown. For example, this Associated Press article — which was published on August 1, 2021 — is dated "July 8, 2021". When using {{Cite news}} and {{Cite website}}, should the date when the news article was initially published be used in the "source date" parameter, or should the date when the article was most recently updated be used? Cyrobyte (talk) 03:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
@Cyrobyte Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you use the date when the most recently updated at the time you read the article and decided it was worthy to be used as a reference to support a sentence in the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
How does the review process on Wikipedia work?
I just finished adding more content to a previously declined article (Draft:Aniebiet Inyang Ntui), And I was just wondering how the review process works, who will review the article, is it the person who declined it or a new reviewer and how I can also become a reviewer.
ElontheWikiEditor, in most cases, the original reviewer will decline to review a resubmission, and will defer to another reviewer. If the same reviewer declines a draft several times, they may be unfairly accused of bias, and that isn't worth the trouble. So, make your second submission really excellent so that such allegations do not arise. Cullen328 (talk) 05:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
ElontheWikiEditor, I can tell you that a draft that contains non-neutral unreferenced evaluative language like Professor Aniebiet Inyang Ntui has made tremendous contribution to the field of Library and Information Science through her publications has no chance of being accepted. Wikipedia articles must be written from the Neutral point of view, which forbids that type of language. Strip every trace of that type of non-neutral language out of the draft. Cullen328 (talk) 05:51, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
ElontheWikiEditor Firstly, you should be addressing this at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. Secondly, since the article was declined, you haven't added any new sourcing to show that the subject is notable. Please read the advice you were given with the first decline. I read every source in the draft, and I can summarize it like this - Ntui was hired as a librarian. While that is a nice thing, it is not enough to meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Please see WP:GNG. Also please see WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE and WP:COI, due to the problematic WP:SPA editing history here. TimTempleton(talk)(cont)07:04, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
How do you reuse a citation using source editing? It's so confusing, I use source scripting and can't figure out how to reuse a reference, If i just copy and paste it makes a new citation, it goes up by one and adds a new reference to the reference list? Leahnn Rey (talk) 05:57, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
This helped, but sometimes i do use visual editing, Let's say i'm using visual editing and i want to make an infobox language,
I want to change the speakers to some number, i add the date and the reference, Once i copy paste the reference, it will just make a new citation, let's say i want to reuse a citation from a paragraph in the page that i made using visual editing, It doesn't work, it makes a new reference, (Sorry if my english is bad, I'm a filipino) Leahnn Rey (talk) 06:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
@Leahnn Rey: if you want to reuse a citation in visual editor, make sure that your cursor is at the spot where the citation should end up at, Click "Cite" in the toolbar, and then select the "Re-use" tab. This will present you with a list of citations already in the article. Just select the one you want to reuse and VE will take care of the rest for you (including generating a name for the citation if it lacks one so far). Victor Schmidt (talk) 09:13, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
I think you don't get the point here, i know that, i use it all the time when i make an article, However, If i make a citation using Visual editing and i want to reuse the citation using source editing (Not switching to source editing) For example: i want to reuse the citation on a template, like an infobox language template, Let's say this reference was made using visual editor: [2], And i reuse it in an infobox language (imagine it as a literal infobox language):
See how it makes a new citation, I made the infobox using source editing by the way, This is the same because if you make an infobox language using visual editing and add a reference to the date, you are actually editing in source editing. Leahnn Rey (talk) 10:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
If i make a citation using Visual editing and i want to reuse the citation using source editing (Not switching to source editing): You've lost me here, Leahnn Rey. Anyway, I quite often reuse references made by other people. I presume that a smallish but non-trivial percentage of these references were made with the visual editor, but I neither know nor care about this. I always use the source editor. I don't know how either the source editor or I might be confused by preexisting references just because these were made with the visual editor. -- Hoary (talk) 11:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
@Leahnn Rey: I think that your issue is that to re-use someone else's citation (no matter how they entered it) you often have to create a name for it where it was originally used. So in the examples here, if I want to re-use your reference #2, I would (in the source editor) have to change <ref>Some reference</ref> into <ref name=Createdname>Some reference</ref>, and at the point where I wanted to re-use that reference I'd put <ref name=Createdname/> Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
need a bracket template
need a bracket template that looks like the one below but has double legged semifinals. is there one? please tell me.
Thandie Newton Booted off Set of New Movie - Notable or Not?
Apparently she was co-starring in a movie, then replaced with another actress, after what the reports say was an argument with the star/producer of the movie. Here are a few references:
Would an editor starting off with TWA be considered NOTHERE?
Hello, fellow Teahouse hosts, a question from… a (semi-active) Teahouse host himself.
As we all know, The Wikipedia Adventure might, at first glance, be considered a nice little tutorial to starting off Wikipedia.
However, if we look at NOTHERE's criteria #12, Editing only in user space, an administrator who is a little forgetful and does not assume good faith may be really quick to block a Wikipedia Adventurer as NOTHERE, citing that they "only edited in their user space".
Any reasonable administrator would see that WP:NOTTHERE doesn't really apply in a situation where somebody is actively trying to learn how Wikipedia works through a common process. If they're taking such little care in their use of the blocking power, I imagine there would be a community response. ThadeusOfNazerethTalk to Me!01:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I honestly doubt that is ever likely to happen, as TWA generates, at least when I tried it out, its own edit summaries, so any administrator coming across the page is likely to know that it's from the tutorial. Also note that the points (they're never called criteria) may indicate a user is not here to build an encyclopedia, emphasis mine. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
3PPYB6, can you point to a single example of an administrator blocking, warning or even making a mildly negative remark about a new user participating in The Wikipedia Adventure? I am an administrator and in my experience, WP:NOTHERE blocks are only given when there have been at least two serious violations of at least two important policies without any productive edits, and that the encyclopedia would be endangered if the offending editor was allowed to continue. Please list the user names of editors that you believe were inappropriately blocked under NOTHERE. Cullen328 (talk) 02:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I have what I consider to be a half decent idea for the Infobox template for Schools. I have mentioned it on the infobox template talk page here: Template talk:Infobox school#Adding A Useful UK Gov Link. I am wondering, is there any way I can get edit access to the template so that I can implement it myself?
hi PRY86400 and welcome to the teahouse! getting edit access to the template would require you to be a template editor, which would require one to be skilled in wikicode, especially in template creation and scripting to get. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 11:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Automatically watching articles I edit for six months
I have it set up to automatiucally watch all articles I edit indefinitely. I want to switch this to six months because I think it will become overwhelming at some point. Is there an option for this or is it either no watching or watch indefinitely?
hi Immanuelle and welcome to the teahouse! when watching an article, a pop-up should appear to the top right where you can change the watch time between permanent, 1 week, 1 month, 3 months, and 6 months. also regarding the script, which one (which message) are you referring to? happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 08:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
You're right, Immanuelle and Clovermoss. It would be great if that preference setting allowed you to choose a different duration. I filed a feature request at Phab:T307283. If you have a Phabricator login, feel free to chime in on that ticket. Don't hold your breath, Phab:T251691 has been in the backlog for two years. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 00:19, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
@Immanuelle: There's this page that kind of explains things a bit more thoroughly about what Phabricator is. It's a good question, honestly, because it's not exactly intuitive. Even I find it kind of confusing! It's unfortunate that there isn't a way to automatically watchlist the pages you edit for a certain period of time. :( It looks like you either have to watch pages permanently like it currently is or to manually watchlist each page by clicking the star symbol on the top right and selecting how long you want to watch it for. At least a feature request is already submitted. Hopefully they'll get to it eventually. Clovermoss(talk)12:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)
Anyone know a way I could get free access to the London Times archives for 1910? (specifically, 9 December 1910) 𝕱𝖎𝖈𝖆𝖎𝖆 (talk) 07:27, 30 April 2022 (UTC)
There are other ways beside's what I will suggest, but this might be quicker than trying to learn things in an orderly, step-by-step manner; I suggest that if you see something on another user's personal page, you could click on the "edit" button on the top of the screen, go to the editing field, highlight and copy the section that you desire to mimic, and paste it into your page. Then edit and personalize it from that point. ВUT - do NOT edit or modify ANY other user's page. Just close the page without editing it. Only opening the edit screen for the purpose of copying the programming content of the page will not change the other user's page. You could also use a Wikipedia sandbox (WP:SAND) to experiment with the content that you are creating. Hope this is helpful to you. Good luck with it. 69.112.128.218 (talk) 11:34, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
hi Makerman88 and welcome to the teahouse! there are also loads and loads of userboxes you can use. you can compile them using {{userboxtop}} and {{userboxbottom}}, or using tables for larger collections (although that's a bit more complicated, but feel free to copy my userpage's code if you'd like to use that, I keep a table-based userbox collection). for userboxes about hobbies and other interests, please check out Userboxes/Interests. happy editing! 💜 melecie talk - 11:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Many new editors want to put in time customizing their User page (and some, their signature), which is obviously allowed, but working on a User page to the exclusion of working to improve the encyclopedia is frowned upon. In extreme cases editors have been indefintely blocked under WP:NOTHERE. David notMD (talk) 12:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
That is interesting and a bit disconcerting. Is this policy (notthere) within the scope of working on a "sandbox" page? 69.112.128.218 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:41, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
IP editor, that depends on what someone is doing in a sandbox. If they are developing encyclopedic content, or testing wikicode, then that is fine. If they are writing hoaxes, adding copyrighted material, attacking or threatening living people or posting massive amounts of gibberish, that is not fine and can result in a block. Cullen328 (talk) 14:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
THEBULL48 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. That is not what articles are for- articles are for summarizing what independent reliable sources say about a topic. If you just want to tell the world your views on world events, please use social media or a blogging website. 331dot (talk) 15:22, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Please need help on submission approval
Hello there, i recently created a new Wikipedia article page, it was reviewed and i have adjusted the article as indicated by reviews, Please help with approval, thank you
Akinmade Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You will need to resubmit the draft for review. I see that you declared a conflict of interest, but your text on your user page suggests that you are a paid editor- if so, the Terms of Use require you make a formal declaration, please read WP:PAID. 331dot (talk) 07:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Looking at the article, the problem is it doesn't show his notability at all. To be considered notable in Wikipedia terms, someone independent needs to write about him. If he's a social media influencer, then some reliable sources, independent of him (for example newspaper journalists acting on their own motivation, without input from him, his agents or publicists) need to write in depth about him, and how he is influencing media. Similarly, as a politician, it is not enough for him to publish his views, or for him to take part in interviews with the press, or be on committees that make statements and issue reports. Someone independent of him has to write, without provocation, "this politician Bolarinwa has done the following things...", and again it should be more than passing references in articles that are basically about other things or other people. If you cannot find such sources, then you can polish the existing text as much as you want, it will still get turned down. This isn't dreadful; lots of great people don't feature in Wikipedia articles. Elemimele (talk) 15:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I would like to make a "line" of "hearts" similar to how you can make a horizontal line and can determine the number of pixels using the template {{hr|10}} for 10 for example. See my talk page for an example, I think it is pretty clear what I am trying to do. Would love it if someone can help me to accomplish this. Thank you. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥13:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
I just want to make a line so that it renders in such a way as to be a complete line across the screen, fit to screen for whatever computer or device someone is using. Like the hr one. {. {. hr }. } } ♥Th78blue (talk)♥17:01, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
By the way, to make a template appear as plain text but not as the actual template, you can either use {{tl}} or surround it with <nowiki> and </nowiki> ― Blaze WolfTalkBlaze Wolf#654517:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Wiki-meetups and events
I'd love to meet some other wikipedians, and I've heard about/read about meetups in the past. Especially pre-COVID. Do any such things still go on? Where can I learn more about these, or when another such event might occur and where? I am based in the United States. Thank you. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥17:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
Th78blue, hello and welcome to the Teahouse, so basically Michael D. Turnbull is correct. I’m speaking for myself now, my honest advice would be for you to avoid such gatherings, (a) you expose your true identity, (b) you shouldn’t be in any gatherings, their are multiple variants of the virus, Infact you shouldn’t be in the same space with more than 5 people, this is just my advice as Celestina. Thank you for stopping by, please feel free to do so more often. Celestina007 (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)
), and found only these 31 uses of them in article space. Each image is, admittedly, really lovely, but all were taken by User:Tagooty, who is clearly an extremely competent photographer and their work is much appreciated here. I suspect they thought it was an OK thing to add, but it really mustn't go into the articles themselves I've pinged Tagooty here so that they are made aware of the concern you raise, and I would respectfully ask them to go back and edit all the articles into which they've placed these unnecessary image quality icons and remove them as soon as they are able to, please. The quality assessments are always available on Commons for anyone interested in seeing and appreciating how they've been assessed. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:06, 22 April 2022 (UTC)
Done @GRDN711 and Nick Moyes: Thanks for flagging this issue and for providing the helpful link to articles with QI seals. Also removed VI and FP seals. Please let me know if I've missed any. Tagooty (talk) 04:49, 23 April 2022 (UTC)
Courtesy link: Draft:Kristine Kelly
Courtesy link: Draft:A S Kabir 💜 melecie talk - 23:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
smileys. What can I say, I ♥ them! Regardless, was just curious as to how to technically go about this as well? I am not yet good with making re-directs, and I assume that is how I would go about making this work? Thanks! ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 22:16, 24 April 2022 (UTC)
Moved to User talk:Stick2700. Nothing more to add here ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)
.jpg)
Note: OP has been blocked for sockpuppetry. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:28, 2 May 2022 (UTC)
