Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1153

Archive 1150

Archive 1151

Archive 1152

Archive 1153

Archive 1154

Archive 1155

→

Archive 1160

A Few Questions

I was Wondering If the Current Storm that The National Weather Service Issued Caled 91W Which Is Heading Towards Taiwan available For Me to make it. And Aswell About Joining wiki-project Storms Since I don't know how to Put Myself Into the Member list. Capricorned (talk) 21:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Capricorned, welcome to the Teahouse. You can add yourself to the list by going to this page and adding your signature below the other participants by placing # ~~~~ at the end of the list of names. WP Weather certainly used to have specific guidance for determining if a weather-related topic is notable but i can't find it right now. If you ask at their talk page they'll be able to help you out with this probably better than we can. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 22:17, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

the Storm Existed On May 19th - 20th Capricorned (talk) 22:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC) Thank You Zindor, I Appreciate This GreatlyUser:Zindor ~~ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Capricorned (talk • contribs) 22:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

The dates are a good fact, you can add that along with a citation to a reliable source into your draft. Zindor (talk) 22:31, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Sandbox List help

Hello, in my sandbox I'm creating a list of all current heads of state and government for myself just for fun. I need help figuring what I'm doing wrong, I've never made a list before and its not all aligned in the order I want. If someone with more experience can help me fix it I would really appreciate it. Thanks! Orson12345 (talk) 19:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: User:Orson12345/sandbox I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 21:23, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you!--Orson12345 (Talk • Contribs) 21:58, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

@Orson12345: This has been answered at the help desk. Please ask your question either here or there, and not both to prevent duplication of effort from volunteers. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

British Certificate of Travel

Draft:British Certificate of Travel

Hi all, this submission of a travel document was recently rejected because the editor stated that there is a page containing all documents issued by the British authority. I am not totally convinced by this reason since the same document issued by other countries are all hosted in their own article rather than being contained in a list, there is also a comment from another editor recognising the notability. Is there a test we can put this article through to win its right of a dedicated page? FHTA8817 (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Your submission has not been rejected; it has been declined. You can still submit it. (I don't work in AfC, so I don't want to say something wrong about the other stuff)

Asparagusus (interaction) 16:38, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

You can read the full appeal in my user talk. FHTA8817 (talk) 15:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

I reviewed the draft and think the article can be fairly uncontroversially moved to mainspace, since I just added the {{primary}} hatnote to address the sourcing concerns. But it has to be moved over an existing redirect. Anyone want to make the administrative move to save the edit history? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 23:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

@FHTA8817 @Timtempleton I made a non controversial technical move request at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Technical requests. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:47, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Shushugah:! FHTA8817 - your article is now live. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia blocking everyone?

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Why is Wikipedia blocking everyone?

 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:14, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I was blocked and I have never edited anything before, in fact I wasn't going to, I clicked by accident the pen and a red text below appear saying that one particular user had blocked me. Then I thought “what could I've possibly done to get this punishment?” I started reading the help section, and it happens that

1) the publisher of an article doesn't want anyone to edit it, so he/she blocks every single IP, or perhaps just bock a rage of IPS for some reason. So, don't worry.

2) you had a disgusting attitude in the past, and you have been blocked for a while.

So, try to edit another article to figure out what happened. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 109.60.51.183 (talk) 13:57, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello @109.60.51.183: and thanks for stopping by to ask this question. I've tried to do some investigating, but I am so far flummoxed about the source of your issues here. According to your editing history, the question above is the first time you have tried to do anything at Wikipedia. You've Never tripped an edit filter, and you've never been blocked. Can you please clarify what kinds of problems you are experiencing, so we can get to the root cause? Did you experience trouble while logged in under a specific account? What was the account name? Do you access Wikipedia using different devices with different IP addresses? What prior IP addresses might you have used? Were you trying to edit articles that have been protected from editing, due to high levels of disruption? There's a lot of possible answers to your questions, but without some additional information, I'm not sure how to help. --Jayron32 14:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@109.60.51.183: – IP addresses can be static (an IP address assigned to one device) or dynamic (an IP address temporarily assigned by your ISP that changes over time).

If you're talking about the latter IP address, then it's possible an editor using this IP address was previously blocked for their actions. You'll notice on the contributions page for an IP address, it's stated that "This is the contributions page for an IP user, identified by the user's IP address. Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users."

If this is the case, this isn't your fault – it's just a virtue of non-static IP addresses, and bad luck that someone before you used it to vandalise Wikipedia.

If you want a more permanent way to contribute, I'd suggest creating an account – see Why make an account? for more details.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 14:54, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@IP, creators of an article cannot prevent others from editing it. Only admins can protect articles. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 16:08, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Every now and then if I forget to log in and try to edit on my phone when outside of my Wi-Fi range, it'll say the IP address where I am has been blocked for disruptive editing. I suspect that's what's happening here. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Assistance with my AfC Drafts

Hi there, please i need you guys to help me review or edit my draft as its awaiting approval am overwhelm already.link here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Asuquomo George Nyiam (talk) 16:33, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

3,124 pending submissions waiting for review. Just be patient and yours will be reviewed soon. Abdulraheem Gouda (talk) 16:39, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

George Nyiam, while you're waiting, you can increase the chance of Draft:Asuquomo being accepted, by improving the referencing. A reference should follow a statement, to confirm that it's true. References numbered 1, 2, 4, 5 and 6 don't follow any statement at all. Maproom (talk) 21:52, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Status - Declined and resubmitted. I agree that reference placement is poor in many instances, as the refs are after his name rather than after factual statements that they are intended to verify. David notMD (talk) 01:00, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Are there any reporting mechanisms for "stalker-like"/unfriendly behavior on Wikipedia?

Hi,

I have been a wikipedia user for a long time now and I have contributed on and off over the years whenever I have had the time, because I do genuinely think it's a noble effort, and I do have specific areas of in depth knowledge that are niche due to my background -- though I would not call myself knowledgable on all the guidelines, and have most definitely made mistakes that needed to be fixed etc..., I am more than happy to learn and have always tended to try to ask for clarifications so I can improve. But as I have had a bit more time in to be around here the past month, I can't help but notice that one specific account has been watching my activity closely, which I wouldn't have minded but they tend to have a very curt -- almost aggressive -- tone of voice in all of their interactions with everyone, as evidenced by their talk page..,

Today, as soon as I uploaded something on a wikipedia sister page, I noticed they immediately flagged two other items I had uploaded almost 7 years ago for deletion -- again, I am not claiming to be perfect, and those things may indeed need to be deleted -- but the tone and laser focus of them following me around multiple wiki-sites by the same user..., just feels very unfriendly and almost, dare I say... "predatory"..., any advice?

My experience here has otherwise been largely positive, but this is making me feel insecure and demotivated to even try to contribute anything. SleepyWhippet (talk) 22:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

SleepyWhippet, try WP:BITE and WP:CREEP. 50.204.185.134 (talk) 23:10, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm still not sure how I can protect myself, having read those. Feels like they should be reading it. SleepyWhippet (talk) 23:15, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, SleepyWhippet, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry to hear that you feel you've been targeted and that you've noticed another editor is unfriendly in their interactions. When a specific user is making a point of following another around and harassing them we call this hounding, however i've taken a look at some of your contributions and interactions with other users and unless i've missed something i'm not seeing this. I think perhaps you're reacting too prematurely and that they might have just looked at your contributions and made some corrections, and by the looks of the Commons deletion nominations, valid ones. The best course of action it would seem would be to continue editing (you're doing a good job) and if the editor persists in directly interfering with your editing then contact an administrator and ask what they think. Sometimes editors can be curt to others, and i think i've worked out who you're referring to, but in this case i believe there is a specific context to those responses that you're not seeing as a third party, and also their bluntness is quite normal for them. TL;DR relax and see if this carries on. We're also here too if you need help Zindor (talk) 23:30, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Just to add, if this is issues stemming from the Articles for Creation process, you may want to start a discussion at WP:AFCHD where other reviewers can help with navigating the process.Slywriter (talk) 23:35, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

@Slywriter@Zindor thank you both for your advice -- I have to say Teahouse has always been helpful and friendly :) SleepyWhippet (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

@SleepyWhippet: If you feel harrassed or disturbed by the behavior of one or more users, WP:ANI is the place to report it to see if administrator action is needed. However, it is commonplace for people patrolling Wikipedia, if they notice something odd or questionable that you did, to look at your other contributions. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

idk

Follow up to previous question, how do I make a redirect link? NonPopularPerson (talk) 00:26, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @NonPopularPerson! you can create a redirect with this format: #REDIRECT [[Wikipedia:Teahouse]] in the very first line for a page redirecting to this. more information can be found over at Redirect. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:36, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@NonPopularPerson Scroll down a bit at WP:MAKEREDIR and you'll see a helpful Create redirect thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:11, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

How to save?

Hello! I’m an intermediate Wikipedian, and I’m creating a page for the first time. I’ve made some info, but still researching. Does anyone know how to save an unfinished Wikipedia page? NonPopularPerson (talk) 23:32, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

@NonPopularPerson: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for wanting to add to it. Use the "publish" button to save your work. This is the same as a "save" button but was renamed to make everyone aware that anything that is saved is visible to everyone. RudolfRed (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

@NonPopularPerson: And one way to sound more experienced is to not call an article a page. This isn't a blog. But your user page and the various talk pages are ok to be called pages. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, NonPopularPerson, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't want to rain on your parade, but I'm afraid that, looking at your draft Draft:CodeSpark, you have made the classic mistake of starting to build it backwards. You have started with a single sentence, an infobox and a logo. This is like painting the windows of a house you are building before buiding the foundations or even surveying the site. The absolute first stage in creating an article is finding the reliable, independent sources, that are essential for establishing notability - if you don't, then you are risking every bit of work you have put into the project being wasted, if it turns out that you cannot establish it is notable. Please read your first article if you haven't already done so.

I have another concern, that you have uploaded File:CodeSpark Logo.png to Commons, claiming it as "own work". This means that you are asserting that you control the copyright of that logo (and also that you are granting the legal right to anybody in the world to reuse or alter the logo for any purpose, as long as they attribute the source). Is this really the case?

If it is, then you clearly have a conflict of interest in writing about CodeSpark, and should declare this on your user page, and understand the significance of editing with a conflict of interest. If it isn't, then you should not have uploaded the image.

Adding logos to articles can usually be managed, despite copyright issues; but this is a question that should be postponed until your draft has been accepted as an encyclopaedia article. It is possible that the logo is beneath the C:COM:Threshold of originality, in which case it may be uploaded to Commons and used in a draft, but then it should be uploaded as public domain, not as your own work. See Logos for more information about this. ColinFine (talk) 10:46, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Accidentally approved my own Article for Creation

Hello everyone,

First of all, I apologise for the inconvenience. I think I accidentally approved my own article for creation (Marcelo Kohen) — and I am not sure I am allowed to do that. I have become an autoconfirmed and more experienced editor since I first created this draft. Since it became possible for me to simply move the draft into an article, I went ahead and did it, but now I am wondering whether this is allowed at all. Please let me know how to proceed — the least thing I want is to violate the rules.

Thank you! Pugliese23 (talk) 02:46, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't think there was anything wrong with that. If you have doubts over the notability or article's structure then you should move back to draft space and resubmit for review. 122.170.32.154 (talk) 03:11, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

It's completely allowed, and you've done nothing wrong. The AfC route is entirely optional (though obviously quite advisable), and was made as a way to allow those who were not autoconfirmed to create articles. Your article will not, however, be listed by Google for some months, or until it's been reviewed by the new page patrollers (who are the only people who get away with calling articles 'pages'). More information at Wikipedia:New_pages_patrol. Given the 3000+ articles waiting for assessment by AfC, I can personally understand that many editors will bypass the process; I have, but have then found that the new page patrol people are also very helpful when you need independent eyes on something you've written. Elemimele (talk) 11:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Muhammad Azizul Islam

Hi

I have submitted this draft few month ago and it has declined due to some reason. I have looked my draft done amendment on it. Can any help me that is there any more modification in order to save alow this article on wikipedia as this is my first writing on wikipedia. Please advise me on this. Mshfuz1979 (talk) 23:32, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Muhammad Azizul Islam 💜  melecie  talk - 00:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Mshfuz1979 and welcome to the teahouse! while I am unqualified to check on the sources one-by-one and see if they're reliable, have you found independent sources that mention Islam in-depth (not just a short passing mention, the entire article has to be about them)? you need those kinds of independent, reliable sources that are not from Islam to fulfill notability for persons criteria. additionally, please do not cite from Wikipedia directly, use the sources that an article cites instead. I'm sure that someone more qualified like an AfC reviewer could give better advice, but here's the basics. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:14, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Mshfuz1979, I hope you're aware that it's the quality of the references that counts, not the quantity, in establishing notability. Four reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of the subject will be ample; 52 sources, most of them failing in at least one of those criteria, will just deter reviewers from even considering your draft. Your first reference is to an unreliable source which does not mention the subject. That's not a good start. Maproom (talk) 07:07, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Removed uses of Wikipedia articles as references, and removed some of the references that were to institution websites that made no mention of him. If there are other refs that make no mention of him, those should be removed. All this leaves many factual statements about him unreferenced. Either add references or delete that content. David notMD (talk) 12:29, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Julio Zuleta (baseball player)

Hello. Go to Julio Zuleta (MLB baseball Player) article. Go into edit source, I attempted to enter his Major League stats line as you can see, but does not appear in the infobox as indicated. Thought I set it up and entered all data correctly. Please fix. Thank you and have a good day. Theairportman33531 (talk) 11:10, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Theairportman33531, I see his stats in the infobox. It says

    NPB statistics

Batting average .279

Home runs 145

Runs batted in 417

Maproom (talk) 11:50, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I want his Major League Baseball (MLB) statistics placed in the infobox. The are:

• Batting average .247
• Home runs 9
• Runs batted in 36

It should be in the edit source of the article. I dont know why it is not appearing in the infobox of the article. Thank you. Theairportman33531 (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

If you are facing problems related to the article, you will find help from interested editors on its talk page. Kpddg ^(talk) 14:08, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Sources

I'm having trouble with finding the right sources for wiki pages. Do you have any suggestions? GooseGeeseMooseMeeseShoopSheep (talk) 13:27, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Help:Find sources Castlepalace 13:46, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

For older stuff, archive.com can be worth a look. But often you have to conclude "No good sources for this, I'll go and edit something else." Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:35, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to Only Talk page showing up on Google search

Can someone please help me with this? It's been a few weeks and has yet to be resolved. When you Google the page, ONLY the Talk page shows up, not the article. Thank you! Llmeyers (talk) 20:12, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY: Carey R. Dunne. David notMD (talk) 20:16, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llmeyers That's interesting, I've never seen that before. My guess is that this is a problem at Google's end, and nothing WP can do anything about, but again, guess. Try asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), it can't hurt. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:36, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

I suspect that the article technically counts as a newer than 90-day unpatrolled article, since I can't find any other evidence and its marked as noindex in the HTML source. I am unaware uncertain how the talkpage got indexed, however, because its noindexed. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:50, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Victor, please see below... I'd like this article to be reviewed because it was recently proposed for deletion and I strongly believe it holds up to Wiki guidelines for biography of a living person. Can you take a look and signal it should be kept if you think so? Llmeyers (talk) 17:08, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt ignore the post above! I've been made aware of the canvassing rules since posting. Llmeyers (talk) 17:59, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Llmeyers The issue was raised with the developers and going forward it's up to them to fix. Even if a solution happens it won't reverse whatever Google is doing currently. Once the article page is reviewed it will become indexable and then this may resolved but we have no direct control over Google's display choices. It also used to be possible to add pages to a queue for Google to index but that's not a general option anymore. Zindor (talk) 21:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Got it. Thank you! In the meantime, the article was also proposed for deletion and I strongly believe it holds up to Wiki guidelines for biography of a living person. Can you take a look and signal it should be kept if you think so? Llmeyers (talk) 17:08, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Llmeyers. I think the concern is that the subject is known for one event, that is to say they may not be individually notable but were part of a notable event (Trump case). I'm not going to comment at the AfD however as i'm feeling slightly canvassed. Thanks, Zindor (talk) 17:32, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Ah, Zindor, thank you for clarifying!! I understand. Thanks for adding the link to the canvassing page, actually –– I didn't realize I shouldn't ask for support on the AfD and will just let people discuss on the page as it comes up. Llmeyers (talk) 17:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llmeyers, correct, you shouldn't ask for support. Per WP:APPNOTE however, it's fine to ask for more input. Atm, though, waiting and see what happens is probably the sensible thing to do. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:56, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Got it, got it! Thanks @Gråbergs Gråa Sång. Hopefully others will take a look soon. It's my first time working on an AfD so I got stressed! Llmeyers (talk) 17:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Llmeyers, so did I: [1]. It worked out fine though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Notifications for replies on other talk pages

How do I change my settings so that I get notifications for replies to my messages on other users' talk pages? I did not get a notification for a reply to my post on User talk:SunsetSon PacificDepths (talk) 22:04, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, PacificDepths, and welcome! You can watchlist the page temporarily or permanently. You can also "subscribe" to a specific conversation, which will give you a notice when there are new replies (the link to do so is in the upper right corner of the section heading; see also Help:Notifications). Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 22:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Perfect4th! I can't find the "subscribe to conversation" feature. It might be because I'm on the "new" wikipedia experience. The termporary watchlist was useful. PacificDepths (talk) 04:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

PacificDepths, after some digging, I found the explanation of the feature here (part of the Talk pages project). I typically use the temporary watchlist feature myself, though. Glad it was helpful! Perfect4th (talk) 19:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Trouble with IP address

I am having trouble by turning back and fourth to a IP address. 216.16.45.152 (talk) 20:02, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

I didn’t mean to reply on this sorry. 216.16.45.152 (talk) 20:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse! My best advice is to simply create an account, if you haven't already. Happy Editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 20:36, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

When you log into your account, check the box that says "Keep me logged in (for up to 365 days)" and you won't get automatically logged out. RudolfRed (talk) 20:39, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

How to put my brand name and publish it on wik

Hi tell me how correct to put my brand brand on wik and yo publish it couse I tried but u sand me email it’s not correct thank 85.73.116.249 (talk) 21:08, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. You seem to misunderstand what Wikipedia is for: it is not a place for you to advertise your brand, as that would contravene Wikipedia's policy of what Wikipedia is not. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:38, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_soapbox_or_means_of_promotion Tobias2934 (talk) 21:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome.. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not a place or website where one promotes their brand, name, business or any other commercial activity. Kindly look for a commercial website to conduct such. Regards Volten001 ^☎ 21:46, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Tropical Disturbance 91W (2022)

I was Wondering If Someone Can Check My Draft. I Can Not Find References Nor Reliable Sources i did Find This Info To Show This Storm Did Exist to See the Storm Click Here For the Article Click Here. Capricorned (talk) 11:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

If you can't find reliable sources for a set of assertions, Capricorned, then you may not make those assertions. Also, your bizarre use of capital letters makes for painful reading. -- Hoary (talk) 12:45, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Capricorned and welcome to the teahouse! storms have to meet the notability criteria for events to have an article. unfortunately (or should I say fortunately?) since the storm hasn't even done damage, it isn't really notable enough for a separate article as not every single disturbance formed warrants one. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 12:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Capricorned, and welcome to the Teahouse. Nobody denies that the storm existed, but existence is not enough for an encyclopadia article. I exist, my house exists (and is on the register of Listed buildings, the songs I have written exist, but none of them is likely ever to have a Wikipedia article written about them. A Wikipedia article must be based on reliable published information, and if there is not enough such information available on a subject, the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article on it is possible.

I remember when I was a new Wikipedia editor many years ago I was desperately looking for a subject that there wasn't an article about, so that I could write one and "make my mark". Now I know that creating a new article, as well as being very very difficult, is not the only, or usually even the best, way to contribute to Wikipedia. (I have not created more than a dozen articles in 17 years). ColinFine (talk) 13:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Is it known for being destructive? Is it record-breaking? Did it get some significant coverage? Is there something truly remarkable about it? I seriously doubt about its notability if it doesn't even have a name. In the link you shared I just can see a bunch of clouds in the middle of the Pacific with some kind of marked trajectory. Please check WP:NWX for more info on the notability of weather events. Tobias2934 (talk) 22:13, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Afraid of being banned because of my edits

HI I am worried that I will be banned. I am being threatened because I like to change as many articles as I can to what I think is the best format. By doing this I am accused of being disruptive. How can I know what is a good edit or not? please help me thanks

Warmest Regards,

FerretSlice FerretSlice (talk) 22:27, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello @FerretSlice, and welcome to the Teahouse! I see that an experienced user gave you some feedback on your contributions. Wikipedia operates on consensus; that is, some changes need to be discussed first. Please try to take it slow, read our policies and guidelines, and perhaps find a mentor or complete the Wikipedia Adventure. Thanks! 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 22:42, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

FerretSlice(ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You listen to the more experienced people who are trying to help you, such as the one who politely tried to help you on your user talk page. Wikipedia operates by consensus, not by fiat. There is a difference between a block and a ban. 331dot (talk) 22:44, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@FerretSlice I would say it does seem like you need to be more careful with your copyediting, e.g. here, waste is the correct English, and here you add unnecessary spaces, and I saw a couple other issues with your copyediting. I would avoid copyediting if you are not 100% sure about your the edit and your English. Also in one of your edits you added a reference to Wikipedia - I would take a look at WP:USERG and the rest of the reliable sources guideline before continuing to add references. To be clear, no one is going going to block/ban you, as long as you listen to the feedback you've been given, since you are clearly here to help and I hope you continue to do so. Galobtter (pingó mió) 23:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Translate page Anaplastic oligodendroglioma to Spanish

Why can't translate Anaplastic oligodendroglioma into Spanish through "Wikipedia Translate page"? The system doesn't work since Friday, when I do something, also for other articles. Good morning, Wname1 (talk) 05:27, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

@Wname1, I've never seen this "Wikipedia Translate page" you're asking about. What and where is it? Do you mean that list of languages down the left side of many pages? If that's what you mean, they're not translations (not usually, anyway). They're links to articles on the same subject in other language Wikipedias. Occasionally, someone might have translated a Wikipedia article in one language to include in another, but it's probably more usual that someone wrote the article independently.

And if you see an article in the English Wikipedia, and nobody has written an article on the same topic in the Spanish Wikipedia, you're not going to find a link to the Spanish Wikipedia.

Or am I answering the wrong question? Uporządnicki (talk) 23:31, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Uporządnicki Here you can see a tranlation page. https://de.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Spezial:Inhalts%C3%BCbersetzung&from=en&to=es&page=Anaplastic+oligodendroglioma&targettitle=Anaplastic+oligodendroglioma#suggestions. It doesn't work anymore since Friday. Here more informations about not working anymore https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:Content_translation. Good morning, Wname1 (talk) 04:28, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Bare references

If only someone is willing to help by formatting all the references at the article and includes |author= |work= |website= . Thank you. BloatedBun (talk) 05:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi BloatedBun. I don't mean to be sound rude, but it looks like many (if not all) of the WP:Bare URLs found in Ada Wong were added by you yourself as you were trying to improve the article. Perhaps the next time around, you should try and format the references yourself when you add them. If you're not sure how to do so, then there are some examples given in Help:Referencing for beginners. While it's great that you're trying to improve articles by adding citations, it's even better when you can format the citations yourself. Instead of adding a bunch of bare urls as citations and then adding a template like {{Link rot}} to the top of the article, try formating the citations yourself. If you know enough about citations and Wikipedia editing in general to understandinf something like WP:LINKROT, you should be more than capable for figuring out how to format citations. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I cleaned up some of them. Thanks for bringing this up. I.hate.spam.mail.here (talk | contributions) 05:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks both. Its because refill doesnt work right now and its hard to format everything at mobile, but next time I will def format it. BloatedBun (talk) 05:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

BloatedBun, I have created thousands of properly formatted references on mobile devices, specifically Android smartphones. I use the fully functional desktop site, which works just fine on modern smartphones. Please read my essay User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing for more information about productive editing on mobile devices. Cullen328 (talk) 06:15, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

That's fine BloatedBun. Just for reference, there's a bot the usually goes around cleaning up articles tagged with the template "Link rot"; sometimes the bot works quickly and sometimes it takes some time, but eventually it should cleanup the bare urls. If you add the template still notice there're still bare urls after a few days, you can always go back a "fix" the citations yourself. I sometimes edit using my phone, but I can pretty much do everything I can do on a laptop by setting the mobile version to desktop set up describe above by Cullen328 above. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:10, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks to all of you guys. I know it is painful to spend most of your time formatting references on mobile, but I have overcome my laziness right now. BloatedBun (talk) 10:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I just edited the article "List of most expensive cars sold at auction" but need help putting the finishing touches on it.

Hey guys, I just edited the "List of Most Expensive Cars Sold at Auction" article, but I need some help putting the finishing touches on it. While there is a hyperlink to the yahoo article I used as the source of the information, all we see in the references section is a hyperlink tab, but not the actual information. I need help editing the references section. Also, the graph displaying the number of vehicles each marque has on the list needs to be updated to add one for Mercedes-Benz to make their total 13. Additionally, the graph needs to be updated graphically as well to account for the new sale. Finally, the absolute record section needs to be updated showing the Uhlenhaut coupe on top of the list, highlighted in green. Any help on this would be greatly appreciated as this sale took place two days ago, and we need this article to stay up to date. Thanks. SuperHyper74 (talk) 22:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @SuperHyper74 and welcome to the teahouse! please read Referencing for beginners. in here, you'd place the link inside {{cite web}} and fill in the details the template asks for it to generate a full citation. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: List of most expensive cars sold at auction @SuperHyper74: - who is we? TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@SuperHyper74 "we need this article to stay up to date". That is why, in my opinion, articles/lists like this are poorly suited for an encyclopedia. A reader who sees an article like this can never be sure if it is up to date. A reader might be better off using a search engine to find the info in the first place. These articles create work for future editors to keep them up to date. Looking at an article like this and trying to determine if it is up to date us not easy. And there are lots of similar list articles... 73.127.147.187 (talk) 11:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I am Mad at Reliable Sources

Hello I Am Currently Angry At The Reliable Soures Because , It Wont Let MSN Be a Reliable Source Nor a Goverment Agencies Named The National Hurricane Center (N.H.C.) and Nasa! Capricorned (talk) 23:15, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Capricorned This is not the place to express your anger. MSN is an aggregator and not a source itself. Government agencies are primary sources. 331dot (talk) 23:30, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

@Capricorned If this is about Draft:Tropical_Disturbance_91W_(2022), the problem is that the tropical disturbance is not notable (click here) . Notability is not exactly the same as "importance", but in this case, this tropical depression is not important either. We believe that it existed, but it wasn't important or notable (not enough for an encyclopedia). If your question is about something else, then I apologize. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 11:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Still another friend i had in 2021 used MSN as a Reliable source. Capricorned (talk) 11:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Capricorned Did you understand what 331dot said? "MSN is an aggregator and not a source itself". If you didn't understand that, please ask. Thanks. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 11:38, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Submission Rejected Due to Lack of Notability

Hello, everyone. I submitted a Wikipedia entry which was subsequently rejected due to Wikipedia's notability criteria. Here is a link to the entry: Draft:Fengru_Lin Could I get some advice on what needs to be changed/tweaked for the submission to go through successfully? Thank you! 219.74.237.99 (talk) 05:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

It's not just tweaks that are needed. You would need to find and cite some reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of her. Articles based on press releases won't count; nor will articles based on interviews with her, or written by her company. Maproom (talk) 07:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

If you can't find such sources, it may be that she is not notable. That's not the article's fault... 73.127.147.187 (talk) 11:42, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

What also won't count are little texts written by or for companies that offer her services as an educator or whatever. -- Hoary (talk) 07:36, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Moving links and history after namespace has been appropriated

An article I created for the women’s ice hockey team Kiekko-Espoo was recently moved over an existing redirect at Kiekko-Espoo Naiset by another editor. The title change is not overly controversial to me but the original article namespace, Kiekko-Espoo, has been reappropriated for use with the men’s team of the same name and all of the page links created for the women’s team continue to link to that namespace. The page history has also been broken. I tried to undo the move but a message stated the move had already been undone, which does not appear to be accurate. I’ve begun trying to fix all of the broken links but would like to know if there is any way to correctly move the page history and links to the new namespace. Cheers, Spitzmauskc (talk) 04:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

You won't be able to make all the links redirect to the women's team without manually doing it yourself. Wikipedia does provide a list of all the pages that link to the Men's team and you can go through the effort of moving all of them yourself. Esolo5002 (talk) 12:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Can you cite a book from Google Books?

Recently i'm making an article, and i wanted to ask if i can cite a book from google books. For example, i'm gonna cite a random book here from google books, I don't wanna get banned, that's why i'm asking this question. Leahnn Rey (talk) 02:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Leahnn Rey Like otthers are saying, you are citing the book, which may be WP:RS or not. The link to gbooks can be nice to include in the citation, since it can give readers easy access to the source, and with tools like reftoolbar it helps filling in some cite-info automatically (and sometimes correctly). But the link if not mandatory to cite the book, see WP:OFFLINE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

References

@Leahnn Rey if you've read the page or pages you are citing, and the pages contain useful information about what you're writing about, then a section of a book found on Google Books is just the same as if you'd found the book at your public library, or on your own bookshelf. Cite the author's name, book title, page number, publisher, and year of publication. I have referenced numerous books that I found via Google Books. Karenthewriter (talk) 03:04, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Leahnn Rey Google books can be used in references, see WP:GBOOKS. Your random example is from 1886 and will contain some outdated information, so a more recent source may be better (see WP:AGE MATTERS). It is also about anatomy and there are guidelines for biomedical information at WP:MEDRS which are stricter than those for other topics. TSventon (talk) 03:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for this info. Leahnn Rey (talk) 12:55, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Sole source for article

I once saw a note that the information provided was entirely from a single source. Can someone please direct me to how to include such a note in an article?2603:6010:4E42:500:D8A2:2925:629C:C58B (talk) 13:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse! You can tag the article by typing {{One source|date=May 2022}} at the top of the article and publishing the changes. (The template itself and its instructions can be found here.) The various article tags are all listed at Wikipedia's list of article-related namespace tags. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 13:57, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Giant gap in The G Word

•  Courtesy link: The G Word

In the Episodes section, there is a gasping gap, at-least for what I can see.

Anyone want to fix it please? I can't, i'm unskilled. Smotoe (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Episode table template is too wide, so on some screens it goes wild. The best possible solution is just to write more content so the episode table gets pushed below the infobox, but that doesn't seem entirely reasonable. I think there's some way to reduce the width of the table? casualdejekyll 14:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Adding the "|total_width = 75" parameter to the {{Episode table}} sets it to 75%. :) That look better Smotoe? Alyo (chat·edits) 14:41, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Alyo, on my screen the table still is just a bit too long to fit beside the infobox. Is there a way to set it to take up the width of the article minus the width of the infobox? Perfect4th (talk) 14:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't think so, as that's essentially dictated by the resolution of your monitor/screen? Or if there is, it would be in your own browser/skin settings rather than something that can be set for everyone. I decreased the width of the table again to 60%, but if you're on a small enough monitor you'll eventually run into issues no matter how shortened the table is. Alyo (chat·edits) 14:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I suppose that makes sense. The article looks fine on my screen now, thanks! Perfect4th (talk) 14:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much, it looks much better! Thank you! Smotoe (talk) 15:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Google Books vs. Open Library

A specific page of a book is being cited in an article. This page can be either previewed on Google Books or checked out at the Open Library. Should I prefer Google, which does not require an account, or archive.org which does require a free account but is libre and nonprofit? --Maddy ♥︎(they/she)♥︎ :: talk 12:36, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Maddy from Celeste: and thanks for stopping by to ask this question. Strictly speaking, linking to print sources is not required, merely that one includes complete bibliographic information (such as title, author, and publication information). Supplemental linking for when such sources are available online is fine, WP:GBOOKS contains some information on how to use Google Books for such linking; however Google Books does generate its own problems, the essay Wikipedia:Google Books and Wikipedia explains why it isn't the best option (but it is the easiest). That essay offers Internet Archive as an alternative. Per other Wikipedia policies, we are agnostic regarding sources and logins/paywalls; which is to say we don't downgrade a source's reliability or usefulness merely because it is behind some kind of login or paywall. Those sources are fine. So, I guess what I am here to say is that either link is sufficient; they each present the problems you state, and you should feel okay about using either one (or neither) as needed. --Jayron32 15:25, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Best Wikiproject or Sister Wikiproject for contributing geographical information to Wikimedia Foundation site

I am wondering where is the best place to contribute to a Wikimedia Site geographical knowledge. The Wikiproject Geography is a good place to write geographical information. I have contributed information to OpenStreetMap and looked at Wikitravel. Is there a way to map on a Wikimedia Foundation website? ScientistBuilder (talk) 20:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I think the best idea is to edit WikiData and add my geographical information there. I want to add some mapping information about a road, sidewalk, shed, and basketball hoop to Wikipedia but I'm not sure where to edit this. My idea is to add a road to Wikidata as a new item.ScientistBuilder (talk) 21:23, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikitravel was WMF-ized into Wikivoyage, if that sort of thing's what you're after. casualdejekyll 21:24, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

I am proposing a Wikiproject for mapping named WIkiEarth. ScientistBuilder (talk) 15:05, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

...OpenStreetMap? @ScientistBuilder casualdejekyll 15:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

WikiData does not link to Open streetmap. I have contributed to openstreetmap but the links are not stable enough for Wikidata links. https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Wikidata:OpenStreetMap ScientistBuilder (talk) 16:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Interfere administrator needed

Radhika Pandit some extra space maybe creating problem have a look on it regards User:NP:83 using IP 2409:4060:295:A4CE:0:0:F37:8A1 (talk) 18:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

 Done - Arjayay (talk) 19:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Acceptance

My article has been rejected several times, what should I do? Ashimneupaney (talk) 18:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

My draft is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nepal_Live_Today Ashimneupaney (talk) 18:49, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ashimneupaney, and welcome to the Teahouse! First and foremost, the articles contained on Wikipedia belong to the WMF and to the encyclopedia community. Content creators do not own any article specifically, even those they create themselves. I see there is a question about a potential COI with regards to the subject organization and yourself. I'm not sure if anyone has pointed you to WP:COI and WP:UPE yet but I wanted to offer you the opportunity to read those policies and guidelines just incase you fit the criteria. I also see that someone pointed you to WP:NMEDIA so that you could review the notability requirements for media related subjects. I think you should review these links first and perhaps also WP:YFA prior to going back to the article and trying to get it through the AfC process. Good luck and please follow-up if you have any further questions are concerns. --ARoseWolf 19:02, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, this is getting really confusing. I even added the "COI" part, and it is rejected again. I think I should just delete the draft. It is really frustrating now. Ashimneupaney (talk) 19:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ashimneupaney. To get a minor point out of the way, the Draft has been Declined, not Rejected. The difference is important:

"Declined" means "not up to the required standard (for the reasons given) yet – keep working on it."

"Rejected" means "this subject is unlikely to qualify for an article in the foreseeable future – give up."

The primary reason for the declines seems to be a failure to demonstrate Notability (please go and read that guideline carefully: yes, I know it's long, but it's fundamental to creating articles). The first 4 (of 6) references are to items published by the subject itself – these can never be used to demonstrate Notability, though they may be OK to confirm minor facts. The BBC article cited makes no mention of the subject, so cannot possibly confirm its notability. The South Asia Times reference is a good one, but one reference is insufficient: at least two (preferably more) of this quality (and completely independent of each other) are needed to establish Notability.

Since the subject entity is only just one year old, this is probably a case of WP:Too soon. In due course other good press articles (etc.) about the subject will probably appear and can be used. In the meantime, the Draft can remain and be improved (make sure to edit it at intervals of less than 6 months, or it may be deleted for inactivity). Remember that Wikipedia has no deadlines and may not be used for promotion of a subject, regardless of what it (or those with a Conflict of Interest concerning it) may want. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.235.54 (talk) 20:00, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Can my account be globally blocked if I use a VPN for editing?

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

---

I am active here but I want to use a VPN since I'm banned permanently from editing any page of another language Wikipedia by an administrator who did that to win a dispute, which is illegal. I want to use a VPN only to request an unblock. Can that reflect in a bad way on my global account in MediaWiki? Thanks a lot! Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 16:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Super ninja2. Please read Wikipedia:Open proxies for information on using VPNs. The Wikipedia:Unblock Ticket Request System may also be of interest to you. Cullen328 (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Super ninja2 Your question is a difficult one for us to advise on here. Whilst I don't speak Russian, or know anything about Russian Wikipedia, it's clear that your rather stupid - and offensive to many - edit on ru.wiki back in March (see here) caused an administrator to immediately block you for trolling. Judging by the history of your talk page, you appealed an indefinite block, which the blocking administrator (User:Q-bit array reverted. You then appealed from an IP address which the same admin blocked for 5 years. That would be unusual and extreme for an IP address here on en.wiki, but each Wikipedia has its own rules and policies, as I suspect you know. Had I seen your edit here on English Wikipedia, I might have felt the same way as Q-bit array, though might have warned you first and only blocked you again if you tried to repeat that edit. On en-wiki we don't revert block appeals; instead we leave a clear trace of why such an appeal is rejected. Again, the rules and protocols are different on each site.

I can also see that you've made over 1,300 edits across 6 years on en.wiki, and your last block here was 3 years ago for edit warring. So you don't look like a troll to me.

Now, to attempt to address your question: I know en.wiki doesn't permit users to edit from a VPN - but that may be different on ru-wiki. I am also aware we do not globally block registered users, though we do ban them (see here). Those bans are put in to stop cross-wiki disruption, and I don't feel your edits on ru-wiki and those here and elsewhere would make a steward think your IP address should be globally blocked, or you banned.

Whilst drafting this reply, I see Cullen has given a much more succinct and probably more helpful reply, but I'll post this anyway, as it will ping the blocking administrator and possibly invite them to reconsider or reaffirm your block there. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:59, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

User:Nick Moyes, first and foremost, you either use a good language when speaking to your peers, or I will have to report a WP:Personal attack. This harrasment is unacceptable and can lead you to be banned so stick to your limits. If you're here to help, then try to make your actions a constructive ones. Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 18:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Super ninja2 I gave you an honest assessment of how I saw the situation, and was genuinely trying to help and guide you. I'm sorry you chose to interpret my investment of time and effort as harassment. That's your business. My view of your two edits on ru.wikipedia which got you blocked for trolling still stands however (at least based on how an online tool translated it for me), but I did not think you were a troll, as I state above. But if you feel you have a case against me for the way I replied to you, the venue here to complain about my conduct here is WP:ANI. I have struck the word 'stupid' from my reply in respect of your expressed sensitivities. Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes, be civilized, Avoid personal remarks, Argue facts, not personalities.. These are the rules that you must comply with in order to maintain a constructive and fruitful discussion and to gain your peers' respect. Good luck. Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 21:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Sound advice. I wish I'd had the benefit of your mature wisdom before I did my RfA a couple of years ago. It might have gone so much better. Oh, and good luck to you, too. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

You won't be able to edit on a VPN unless you have IPBE locally on the Wiki where it's blocked or globally if it's blocked globally, neither of which you'll qualify for while blocked. PRAXIDICAE💕 17:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Just some clarification. The user was blocked by me because of trolling and provocations. The IP range was blocked for 5 years because it belongs to a hosting provider. Such ranges of hosting providers are usually blocked for that long time and not only on RuWiki, but also here (see for example [2]) and on Meta. P.S.: And I really liked her talks about the free speech and the "right to express one's opinion" during the block appeal. But just to make it clear - supporting the Russian aggression against the Ukraine will get one blocked. And not only on the Russian Wikipedia. We have had more than enough pro-Putin proxy-using-trolls so far. -- Q-bit array (talk) 19:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Q-bit array, What ever issues they may have had on ru.wiki belong there, not here. As pointed out by Nick, they do not appear to be a troll as they have been on en.wiki since 2016 and their last block was three years ago for edit warring, nothing trollish at first glance. Being as this is an editor currently in good standing on en.wiki, I don't think it proper to call them a troll here. Regardless of where I stand on their comments made on ru.wiki they didn't make them here and have violated no rule in regards to disruptive editing or trolling on en.wiki. I ask you, as a fellow editor to strike your comment about them being a troll. I believe Cullen adequately answered their question.--ARoseWolf 20:08, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Let me clarify. I see nothing wrong with your statement up to But just to make it clear - supporting the Russian aggression against the Ukraine will get one blocked. because you were explaining their actions and your response on another wiki. It's the insinuation that followed that this editor has been a troll on places other than ru.wiki, And not only on the Russian Wikipedia. We have had more than enough pro-Putin proxy-using-trolls so far., that I take issue with as they have not been proven to be such on en.wiki. IMO, it has no place here on the Teahouse where we try to answer editors questions in a civil and educational manner. --ARoseWolf 20:19, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Q-bit array, that dispute belongs to the Russian Wikipedia, not here. Therefore, you don't need to clarify anything here. Save it for the ruwiki. Regards. Shorouq★The★Super★ninja2 (talk) 21:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

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

Link to Wikipedia entry needs to be fixed

Under "Sources" in Thomas Henry Huxley, the second item by Charles Darwin appears in red because "(page does not exist)." But the page does exist. Can someone fix it? Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Maurice Magnus. I've updated the link, the article title had changed almost imperceptibly the change in capitalization was causing the error. In future just be bold and have a go at fixing it. All the best, Zindor (talk) 01:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

My article keeps getting declined.

Hey guys, I have recently submitted an article Draft:Renderforest

Could you please help me understand what's wrong with the content? I have followed all the guidelines, inlcuding the fact that I am an employee. I have also inlcuded some famous press coverages.

I would really appreciate your help <3

RosiGhalach (talk) 12:36, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@RosiGhalach: The problem is your draft looks like an advertisement. You will need to cut unnecessary detail from it and only summarize what reliable sources say. Please see WP:COI, WP:NPOV, and WP:ADMASQ. The Tips of Apmh 12:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks : ) RosiGhalach (talk) 07:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

We read: The company launched a new feature: an AI and Machine Learning-based tool, which automatically creates videos based on the script provided by the user. / In 2019, Renderforest expanded its library of products by launching its Website Builder, Logo Maker, and Mockup Maker. / in 2019, Renderforest became one of the first official partners with Amazon and Joomla among other Armenian startups. Would anything be lost if this were instead the following? The company launched an AI and machine learning-based tool that creates videos based on the user's script. / In 2019, it launched its Website Builder, Logo Maker, and Mockup Maker. / in 2019, it became one of the first partners with Amazon and Joomla among other Armenian startups -- Hoary (talk) 13:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much RosiGhalach (talk) 07:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Publishing Draft:OBA_Market

•  Courtesy link: Draft:OBA_Market

Hi dears. My article almost 1 year is waiting for publish. Please someone help to publish it. 94.20.42.13 (talk) 00:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Are you User: Vusal Davinci? If so, please log in before editing further. One practical problem about your draft is that the sources are in the Azerbaijani language and the Turkish language. References to non-English sources are certainly permitted on English Wikipedia but only a very small percentage of English Wikipedia editors are able to read these languages, and those editors are probably not reviewing Articles for Creation submissions. Editors who do not speak those languages can use machine translation tools, but there are concerns about the accuracy of machine translations in general and these specific languages in particular. A given reviewer may be more inclined to accept a machine translation from languages like Spanish, French, German and Italian because many reviewers may have some familiarity and competence with those languages. A more challenging issue is the ability of a reviewer to evaluate the reliability of a specific source. They will probably have no experience working with most of these sources, which may lead to reluctance to make a decision. Even an editor (like myself) who considers English my only fluent language, have studied other major European languages at least a little bit, and I am familiar with the most famous newspapers and magazines published in Western Europe. I noticed that one of your references is to Hürriyet, which I am familiar with as Turkey's largest newspaper with a long history, and considered mainstream in the Turkish context. I read a few of your references using Google Translate, and my preliminary opinion is that they were borderline between significant coverage and "less significant coverage", if you will. Perhaps the articles were generated by press releases issued by the company on the occasion of opening their 900th store, and accordingly are not fully independent. But my inclination is to assume that a six year old business that has grown from one outlet to 1000 stores in a country of ten million people is quite likely notable. I hope that some of the other editors active here at the Teahouse will take a serious look at your draft, and make some informed comments. This may be an example of Wikipedia:Systemic bias. Cullen328 (talk) 01:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Its quite possible its notable, however every single source except one appears to be a press release and the one is the company's own site, so doesn't help establish notability. Two of them are the same article/press release published on different web sites. If you are affiliated with the subject, please read WP:COI and then forget everything you know and every press release written and find independent sources that talk about the company. With a thousand stores, presumably some organic press coverage has occured.Slywriter (talk) 03:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Also note that the article contains some words that are not appropriate for a Wikipedia article. These are "our" (see WP:OWN) and "currently" (see WP:CURRENTLY). Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Attempting to insert an aerial view photograph

The Settlers High School commissioned a drone photograph offering a panoramic view of the buildings and fields. This is an authentic and up to date view of the school which we would like to adorn our Wikipedia Page. The text edits I was asked to place to make the site more up to date and relevant to changes that have taken place at the school in recent years have been posted and accepted, but the photograph gives me a message that this doesn't seem constructive. There is nothing offensive about the photograph at all and it is simply a view of the school taken from a drone.

Please advise TSHSCommunications (talk) 08:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

It would help if you gave a link to the article - The Settlers High School. It would also be a good idea to see whether the photograph is free enough for Wikipedia. --Bduke (talk) 08:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Note: User has been blocked due to advertising. Kpddg ^(talk) 08:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

First important thing to point out. It is not your page. It is Wikipedia's article about the school. The school does not own the article or have any editorial control over it, bar asking for errors to be fixed. It is not there to act as a promotional puff piece for the school. Also, you appear to have a conflict of interest. Before you do anything else, please read WP:COI, the disclosure instructions on there are mandatory. The image will almost certainly be either the copyright of the drone company or the school. In general, Wikipedia tries to avoid copyrighted photos wherever possible. - X201 (talk) 08:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy ping for @Theroadislong: - X201 (talk) 08:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Got a draft declined to post about a Law Firm? What can I do to publish it?

Got a draft declined to post about a Law Firm? Please guide me what can be done to Publish it? Please also tell how can I give references in the article, if they don't seem to be put here correctly.

Draft Link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ali_%26_Associates

Tony Kallis (talk) 09:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Tony Kallis, assuming this is about Draft:Ali & Associates. Your first hurdle is WP:NORG. You need a few sources that are at the same time reliably published, independent of the topic (and it's people) and about the topic in some detail. Afaict, none of the links you listed are independent, the last 2 seems to be press releases. If you can find the sources demanded at WP:NORG, then you can look into adding citations correctly, see WP:TUTORIAL. Also, if WP:COI applies to you, please follow the guidance there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

James Jranklin

The birth and death information for James Franklin, brother of Benjamin Franklin, is incorrect in the beginning of the article and in the templated, boxed area in the top right. As a newbie, I was unsure how best to fix it all. James was born in Boston on February 4, 1697, and died in Newport, Rhode Island, on February 4, 1735, on his 38th birthday. His death is entered correctly in the last paragraph of his information. ~ Mark A Tirrell Editor06181967 (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

The birth and death date of a person is a big aspect of their article. I would suggest going to the article's talk page and creating a new section there regarding what you mentioned. If possible, also provide a reliable source supporting your claim. Urban Versis 32 (talk) 22:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

The dates and places associated with James Franklin (printer) were only changed this April by an IP editor. They are clearly incorrect per multiple sources in the article and I have reverted them. Thanks, Editor06181967 for pointing this out. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:23, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Image on article

Hello Wikipedians! I've got a question. I uploaded a file on Commons but it's not sure if it's going to be deleted or not. I've used on one of my drafts. If, eventually, the image gets deleted, do I continue to use it there or not? And, is there a way to upload a file via Wikipedia? If so, how? Thanks - Fisforfenia (talk) 14:48, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@Fisforfenia Welcome to the Teahouse! Which file are you referring to, and which draft are you referring to? There's also Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard, which states "Please ensure you understand copyright and the image use policy before proceeding." Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:16, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Fisforfenia. I see that you uploaded a file called "LØREN at YSL Show 2022.webp" to Commons but it has been deleted as a copyright violation. Did you take the photo yourself? If not, where did you find it? Can you explain how you are the copyright holder for this image? Only the copyright holder can freely license an image for uploading to Commons. Cullen328 (talk) 16:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Cullen328. I'm not the copyright holder, unfortunately. I found it on several sites and apps e.g. Vogue, Pinterest, Twitter, Instagram etc. No one checks on social media whether the image has any copyrights so I thought there are free licensed. I could ask the person who posted it on Pinterest to give me the copyrights in a mail but I do not think it will work either because it wasn't given by the photographer, I believe you understand what I mean. However, in second thoughts, I should check all the policies again next time. I was just asking so I could provid some images to my draft. Thank you to both you and @GoingBatty for spending your time to answer my questions. - Fisforfenia (talk) 18:55, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty You are right, users on social media generally do not check (or give any thought to) copyright concerns. That gives others the unfortunate impression that either everything is public domain, or else that copyright doesn't matter, so I can see how you got that impression. WP does care about copyrights though... 73.127.147.187 (talk) 16:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

73.127.147.187 - I think your reply was intended for Fisforfenia, not me. GoingBatty (talk) 14:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, sorry. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 13:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Fisforfenia, the bottom line is that you cannot upload an image to Commons unless you are the copyright holder (which usually means that you are the photographer), or you have solid evidence that the image is copyright free or already freely licensed. Cullen328 (talk) 19:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

About acceptance

Hi there, the article I edited, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Nepal_Live_Today , copied here has been rejected several times. What do I need to do? I have already added a few independent sources for the same. Thank you Rameshyp (talk) 11:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm afraid you have reached the end of the line. Rejection is more severe than your previous "declines" (which imply that the draft is lacking something but could potentially be improved). Rejection means that the last of four experienced reviewers who have looked at the draft have now concluded that there is no hope it will ever be acceptable. Please don't waste everyone's time by continuing with this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Very similar and relevant advice was given to a now blocked editor at WP:Teahouse#Acceptance. I hope you are not another sockpuppet. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

And, indeed, they were (now blocked). Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Rejection of article

Hi. I have made a article of an awareness day but it keeps being rejected and I'm not sure how to improve and have i approved. Would you be able to help out? It's this article: Draft:Hae day :-)

Thanks so much.

Best,

Rikke :-) FRH9900 (talk) 12:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

FRH9900 Your draft has not (yet) been rejected, only "declined", which means it can potentially be improved. However, you have a long way to go. We are looking for WP:INDEPENDENT sources (so not the organisation's website) which show it is notable in a Wikipedia sense. I wanted to verify the very first source, which did seem to be independent. However, the web link provided in the citation was just to www.congress.gov, with no indication of how I might reach the actual source page. Such sloppiness in sourcing is one of the justifications for the declines. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mike. Thanks so much for your reply. And strange about the citation to congress.gov – this is the link (and I'll update accordingly): https://www.congress.gov/bill/112th-congress/senate-resolution/286 Do you think I need other improvements before asking for approval again? Thanks. Smiles, Rikke :-) FRH9900 (talk) 14:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

FRH9900 I doubt that you'll get very far with developing the draft to meet Wikipedia's standards for notability without finding and including some decent independent sources. The first conference was, I understand, in 2021. Did this trigger any newspaper articles in India or internationally and has this year's event (if there was one) done so? If not, there is not much you can do to make the draft acceptable: I note that much of the material in the draft is already mentioned at Hereditary angioedema#Society and culture, which may be a better place for it since that's where people interested in the topic would be likely to look. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Can someone to help review changes I am making to an article of mine that was rejected?

Not long ago, I decided to write an article/page for International Professional Security Association (IPSA). It is a huge membership organisation in the UK working towards the wellbeing of frontline workers.

Following the rejection and the suggested changes/ recommendations, I have reworked it and was hoping for some experienced editor to review and share their thoughts before I could submit the changes.

Please advice if this is possible and how I could go about it.

Thanks :) Ihsnavihs (talk) 13:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Agreed still rife with promotional wording. Fix before submitting for review. David notMD (talk) 14:28, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Fixing it to a state where it will be acceptable as an article will be difficult or impossible. It will be easier to start again from the beginning. Discard all that poorly referenced promotional bullshit, find some reliable independent published sources that discuss the subject, and write a draft based entirely on what they say, citing them as you go. Maproom (talk) 15:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

How to delete

How do I delete a short paragraph that is no longer relevant? 76.91.14.102 (talk) 16:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Just because something isn't currently relevant doesn't mean it isn't encyclopedically relevant, so you'll have to be more specific. You can start by indicating which article you're referring to. PRAXIDICAE💕 16:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

How do you change a heading?

The entry for R A Streatfeild omits the periods after his initials. I can find no reason for this. Everywhere that I have seen his name -- in several books by Samuel Butler (novelist) and in other places -- his initials have periods after them. But when I click on "Edit source" at the top of his entry, I do not see the heading with his name. Maurice Magnus (talk) 16:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello Maurice Magnus! What you're seeing as the "heading" on that page is actually the article title. The MediaWiki software stores the title separately from the article's source code, so changing it requires moving a page, not just editing. See Help:How to move a page for more information.
You're correct that this article should be called R. A. Streatfeild, to comply with the punctuation rules given at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography § Initials. I've gone ahead and made that change for you. Let us know if you have any further questions. Thanks! RoxySaunders (talk · contribs) 16:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Make Bhil people's page with the name Bhil.

Make Bhil people's page with the name Bhil. Karsan Chanda (talk) 15:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Karsan Chanda: If you want to move Bhil people to "Bhil", you can request to move the page at Wikipedia:Requested moves. The Tips of Apmh 17:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Archiving a talk page

Hey. How do I archive a talk page? I think the Monster High talk page should be archived because all of its content is absolutely obsolete. Either tell me how to do it or do it for me. Thanks! Castlepalace 14:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace: See Help:Archiving a talk page. In short, simply place {{subst:Setup cluebot archiving|archives=yes}} on the talk page. The Tips of Apmh 14:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I did. Now what? Will it just archive automatically (if so, when?) and do I need to do anything else? Castlepalace 14:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace: In Help:Archiving (plain and simple), it says "a bot will be along in a couple days to start archiving", so just be patient. The Tips of Apmh 15:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! Castlepalace 17:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Why Are Only Some of My Scholarly Edits Undone?

I have recently been reading a number of books by biblical historians on the history of the ancient kingdoms of Israel and Judea. I have discovered that beginning in the 1980s a number of dramatic changes have taken place in the way biblical historians write about these ancient kingdoms and their history. Modern biblical historians no longer assume uncritically that the Deuteronomistic "histories" included in the Hebrew Bible/Old Testament (HB/OT) are historically accurate. They see much of the so-called "history" writing in HB/OT as being motivated by the Judean writers' biases and their ideological and theological objectives in writing them. As a result, modern biblical historians look to extrabiblical texts, archaeological studies, and demographic studies to reach tentative conclusions about actions and events which took place in ancient Israel and Judea during biblical times. I have attempted to update a Wikipedia article titled "Assyrian Siege of Jerusalem" with modern historical accounts of this event, but someone is undoing/removing my additions to the traditional account provided in the Wikipedia article, an article which relies heavily on older scholarship and conservative evangelical accounts which assume the HB/OT account is historically accurate. Why are my brief additions to this article, additions which are taken from more recent scholarly accounts of the siege, being undone/removed? Rodger Kroell (talk) 20:19, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rodger, and welcome to the Teahouse. Differing views on what is appropriate in an article are absolutely normal in editing Wikipedia. We work by consensus: if you think something in an article should be changed, and somebody else disagrees, it is up to you to discuss the matter with the other editor (and any other editors who may be interested) and attempt to reach consensus. There is no "authority" to appeal to within Wikipedia, and not necessarily anybody who can explain why the other editor reverted you, apart from that editor themselves. If you are unable to reach consensus, then dispute resolution explains the possible ways to take the issue forward. The whole process is summed up in WP:BRD. ColinFine (talk) 21:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Here is the first reversion, [[User:Rodger Kroell. The editor viewed what you added as commentary or editorializing. While it didn't bother me, and similar low-key commentary exists in many articles, it may, technically, be disallowed in Wikipedia articles. If there is a clever way you can add the material, perhaps as a "Modern-day critique" section following the account, it likely wouldn't be seen as breaking the rules. Another option is to post your above inquiry at Talk:Assyrian siege of Jerusalem, where other editors interested in the topic may weigh in. You can also discuss the matter on the Talk page of the user User talk:Persimmonel.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:13, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Rodger Kroell (talk) 18:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Rodger Kroell (talk) 18:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up to Publishing my new article

Hello, I saw that the photo I inserted in the Michael Mosoeu Moerane article was not approved, although it is on at least two websites already. I cannot get hold of the person who wrote the objection at present - although I did try - and so what I thought I would do is find another photo, which I did, on another website, and I uploaded it but this has not been added. I am a bit confused now. Is it waiting for approval? Could you help? Thanks so much.---- Cape doctor (talk) 10:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Cape doctor, and welcome to the Teahouse! Please see the image use policy, and bear in mind that all images (with some exceptions) must be released under a free license or in the public domain. Images from a website are unlikely to be either if these things, and the image in question is copyrighted, and thus not suitable for use on Wikipedia. Happy editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 12:47, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

----Thank you!---- Cape doctor (talk) 20:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Cape doctor. Wikipedia is more careful about copyright than many sites - partly because an aim of Wikipedia is to make all of its content freely reusable. (It doesn't achieve this 100%, but that's the aim). This means that it doesn't accept any images unless either they can be freely reused, or their use complies with the (strict) set of non-free content criteria. Most images you find on the web do not meet either of these conditions, and so may not be used at all in Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 14:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

----Gotit!---- Cape doctor (talk) 20:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Cape doctor. To put the above in a slightly different way:

Never assume that if you can't see copyright claimed on an internet image it must be free to use.

Instead:

Always assume that an image is not free from copyright restriction unless you can see an explicit declaration of Public domain or of release under a licence compatible with Wikipedia's usage.

International copyright laws are horrendously complicated (which is why there are lawyers who specialise in it), but Wikipedia has to comply with all of them, so following this rule won't get us (and you) into trouble. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.235.54 (talk) 20:24, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

---- I deeply appreciate these detailed responses, thanks a mill. I will try and get a photo that meets all the requirements, eventually. Ta! ---- Cape doctor (talk) 19:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, my article got declined.

The submission of my article got declined. Draft:Renderforest. Can someone help me undertsand what the problem is? It says the content feels like an advertisement. However I have tried to keep things purely informational. On top of that, I have added some authority press coverages about Renderforest.

1. https://www.makeuseof.com/tag/create-videos-animations-online-using-renderforest/
2. https://timebusinessnews.com/5-amazing-presentation-apps-for-a-conference-or-trade-show/
3. https://www.lifewire.com/best-free-powerpoint-alternatives-4843042

I would appreciate your help a great deal! RosiGhalach (talk) 08:56, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, I followed all your advice. Got rid of promotional words. Added the fact that I am an employee, but still, the reviewer seems like they do not want to approve the draft. Any ideas why this can happen? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RosiGhalach (talk • contribs) 09:14, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @RosiGhalach, and welcome to the Teahouse! I would recommend checking out the policy on Neutral Point of View, as I feel that would be more useful for you. Then, if you have anymore questions, feel free to post them here. Have a great day! HenryTemplo (talk) 10:16, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the article. I will read it before resubmitting. RosiGhalach (talk) 07:35, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@RosiGhalach: Welcome to the Teahouse. I am not a reviewer, but the tone is inappropriate, and I see why reviewers would consider it to be an advertisement: some of the language is something I would expect to see in ad copy. For one, the second-person pronoun is rarely (if ever) used in articles, and highlighting the prices sounds like "wow, look how cheap it is! You should buy it."

I personally don't like seeing and more, because it's a cheap way of trying to entice the reader into investigating further. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:09, 20 May 2022 (UTC)

@RosiGhalach Prices in an article can become out of date; Isu ggest that you remove them. I would also remove "in minutes" from "helps create logos and brand guidelines in minutes". 73.127.147.187 (talk) 08:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Omg, I did not even notice how biased that sounds. Thank you much for your help. RosiGhalach (talk) 07:34, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

It might not be a bad idea to compare and contrast your draft to an established software company/service article, such as Microsoft or Youtube, which read more like narratives, versus this article which unvaryingly just lists off the company's products and services (which does makes it seem more like an advertisement). Deedman22 (talk) 20:54, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

question re having a tea

Where is a good place here [meaning at Wikipedia itself], to sit, have a cup of tea, and maybe have a nice chat with other editors, if you are not an inexperienced editor? can we think about that, maybe? truly open to ideas, suggestions, etc. thanks. --Sm8900 (talk) 20:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Sm8900. I suppose it depends on what you're looking to chat about. Have you checked out the WP:IRC side of things at all? I believe there are also Discord servers, if you're into that sort of thing (Wikipedia:Discord). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

that's a good idea. maybe I will check that out. I guess I should also check out the Discord chat for my local chapter here in nyc. hmmm. on the other hand, since those resources do have some validitty and usefulness here, should we set up some equivalent, i.e. simply as a regular interactive page here? on the other hand, I am on the Telegram chat threads, but sometimes, those can seem too active, actually. so i guess it is a knotty question of sorts. --Sm8900 (talk) 20:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Telegram (software)? I'd actually never heard of that before today - boy am I out of the loop. I'm not sure how active the IRC/Discord channels are, I've never visited either (though I do have a Discord account; maybe I should check out the en-WP channel tonight), but I do read a fair number of posts on Wikipedia that refer to stuff which happened in IRC, so it's at least semi-active. I imagine there are multiple channels in each format, with varying levels of activity. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

How to remove an unintended and wrong "Languages" link from the menu on the left?

Finishing an additional entry within Net neutrality by country, I recognized a link within the "Languages" Section of the left side menu, reading "Deutsch" and pointing to https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motion_(Schweiz). As there is no German equivalent page of "net neutrality by country", and the link target has nothing to do with the matter, the link is simply wrong. I tried to remove it by editing the Languages Section, but alas, there seems to be no "de" (German) entry at all. Now i'm a bit helpless: What is the source for and the magic behind that link? Nisse4712 (talk) 20:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Nisse4712. Thanks for noticing this very strange thing. I fixed it by adding a colon to the link to that German article, Draft, which wasn't showing up in the text without that initial colon. Instead it seems to have made a link to the article in the sidebar. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

That is normal behaviour: see WP:ILL#Local links. Before Wikidata, this was the normal way of linking articles in different language Wikipedias together, and it still works, though it is not normally the preferred way to do it. ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

My sincere thanks to you, too, for your comments!

As far as I now understand, my issue goes back to a combination of discontinued but still effective capabilities of the Wikipedia platform, which I as a "user" am hardly able to grasp.

A number of review facilities exist for citations. It would be very helpful if I as a user could also get a hint a) that and b) where confusion with "language links" might have arisen.

Where should I really place this requirement? Nisse4712 (talk) 22:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Great! Many, many thanks! Nisse4712 (talk) 22:43, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

restore File:UZ Postal Sercive logo.jpg

File File:UZ Postal Sercive logo.jpg has been deleted by the Bot, as the article was removed with no real reason multiple times. Only through talking on the Teahouse, someone was able to make the article pass. O′zbekiston Pochtasi. The logo was present here. Saippuakauppias ⇄ 00:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Saippuakauppias and welcome to the teahouse! now that the draft is an article, you can probably reupload the image as long as it follows all the other rules of non-free images. those images are not permitted anywhere but in articles, which is why it has been removed initially and then deleted after a while (which is normal process for non-free files not used in an article). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, but that doesn't solve the problem. Please restore the image. It was hard labor to get the image. -> admin should please restore the image. Thanks. --Saippuakauppias ⇄ 00:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Soap seller. Please ask at WP:Requests for undeletion. ColinFine (talk) 09:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Saippuakauppias "Sercive"? Should that be "service"? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 00:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Need help with error

Can someone please take a look a page Rajaram I and help with fixing the break space error? If fixed, can you please also explain the issue as I tried but to no resolution.

 {{cite book}}: Empty citation (help): no-break space character in |quote= at position 46 (help) MehmoodS (talk) 13:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@MehmoodS To explain a bit, there was a character called a "non-breaking space", which is a special kind of blank or space character, in the citation. Sometimes copying and pasting can bring over a non-breaking space. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 00:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

An editor fixed it. David notMD (talk) 14:08, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Improvement article.

Hi everyone, anyone please tell me how to improve Draft:Lubna Marium this article. so that goes to the main page of Wikipedia. Ayatul nish (talk) 13:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Ayatul nish As the reviewing editors have pointed out, much of the draft sounds very promotional in tone. Read these two linked pages and you should see the problem, for example in the section on her training in dance. That whole paragraph has as its citation just one brief press release. So who said all that stuff about her being "a dancer of much repute" ... "seeking the right artistic style" etc.? Cut out anything you can't source specifically (see WP:BLP) and stick to the facts you can support with reliable sources that are WP:INDEPENDENT of her. I think that an article can eventually be accepted but there is some way to go. As to getting it onto the Main page, your best bet (after acceptance) is to use the WP:DYK process. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ayatul nish Also, the article has curly quotes. I think that many of those should be straight double quotes, but some of the named things should maybe be italicized... I'm not sure about that, but the curly quotes are not right. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 00:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Live updates to a Wikipedia mirror

There are lots of information on how to set up a Wikipedia mirror, e.g. starting from a full database dump (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Database_download). The question is whether it's possible to keep the mirror updated in realtime, e.g. by subscribing to a live update stream? Information on this subject seems to be hard to find... Hippo62 (talk) 02:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Hippo62, welcome. It's recommended that such active mirroring not happen because it puts a strain on Wikimedia's servers. If you must mirror it's best to do it over long intervals. How long i don't know but at a guess no less than a month, that's a real guess though someone will have a better figure. Regards, Zindor (talk) 02:50, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Hippo62. The focus of the Teahouse is answering questions about how to edit Wikipedia articles. In my opinion, you are more likely to run across editors with this level of technical expertise at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Cullen328 (talk) 02:55, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Zindor and Cullen328, these are all really helpful, thanks! Hippo62 (talk) 01:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

A-BOMB SIMULATOR

I WORKED 17 YEARS FOR EG@G AND DREW UP THE MECHANICAL DETAIKS FOR EMP-2. I HAVE A ARTIST DRAWING OF THE SIMULTOR. 174.28.85.243 (talk) 20:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Does it have a big red stop button? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 20:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Okay, we would be glad to have that data, here at Wikipedia. to start with, can you please sign up for an account? that would be very helpful. you can reply here, for assistance. --Sm8900 (talk) 20:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@Sm8900 I wonder if the artist's drawing is copyrighted by EG&G, even if the OP drew up the details and has the drawing. Also, would something like that be classified (or marked "secret")? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello fellow IP, welcome to the Teahouse. Did you mean EG&G? Can you be more specific about what you have an artist's drawing of? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:29, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

P.S. NOT all caps, as that is considered shouting (= rude). David notMD (talk) 02:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Reference citations

Hello fellow Wikipedians! I want to know if a section of a Wiki article is divided into 3 paragraphs and the sources for whole of the section are cited only at the end of the last paragraph, will it be clear that they cover all the above paragraphs? or do we need to cite them at the end of each paragraph? Insight 3 (talk) 04:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes you can do that but that particular reference must cover the information which you added on that particular section but usually references are added at the end of sentences. You can see WP:REFBEGIN for more information. Fade258 (talk) 04:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Insight 3. There is no single answer to your question, because it depends on how the article is structured and what the sources say about the topic. The lead paragraph usually does not need references since its purpose is to summarize the well referenced content in the body of the article. Direct quotations require a reference, though, as do contentious assertions. As a general rule (again with exceptions), each paragraph in the body of the article should have at least one reference (maybe more). On rare occasions, an early version of an article may have three references to high quality sources that each independently devote significant detailed coverage of the topic, and each reference verifies every substantive assertion in the article. An article like that is probably a candidate for a major expansion because there is probably more limited and focused coverage of the topic in other reliable sources that can be used to develop a more well rounded overview of the topic. For using a reference more than once in an article without repeating it, please see WP:REFNAME. Cullen328 (talk) 04:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi

Hi Organic Increse45( ͡ಠ ͜ʖ ͡ಠ) (talk) 04:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Organic Increse45 and welcome to the teahouse! do you have a question regarding wikipedia? 💜  melecie  talk - 04:53, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

No, I was just wondering what this was> ~~~ Organic Increse45( ͡ಠ ͜ʖ ͡ಠ) (talk) 21:32, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Could you help me to improve my first article about our EU project

I'm a member of a large community of underground heritage researchers and we would like to make our activities more visible. So we want to create a simple wikipedia page about the project. Could you help to review and improve the article draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Underground4Value. Thank you! Fruct chair (talk) 21:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Fruct chair, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately it sounds as if, like many peoplem, you have misunderstood the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not for you to tell the world about your community, however wonderful or virtuous it may be. If your community has been written about in independent reliable sources (for example, in major newspapers or books from reputable publishers) then it is possible that there could be an article in Wikipedia about it. The article will not belong to your community, will not be controlled by your community, would ideally not be written by your community, and should be based on what people with no connection with the community have published about it, not on what you and your colleages say or want to say. Please see WP:NORG and Your first article. ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

You're a large community of underground heritage researchers writing about yourself. That smells like conflict of interest to me. Again, it is ideal that strangers who don't care about your community and who have not been in close ties with your community are the ones writing the article about your community. A diehard editor Editing Wikipedia too much rn, talk to me here, bruh. 06:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Food Crisis

what is descritpion about food in the coming times 39.52.76.172 (talk) 07:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! there is an article regarding this over at 2022 food crises. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 07:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Easily move talk page sections around

Hi everyone. Today, I am here to know, how or if at all, I can move talk page sections around easily. This might seem unclear, so I am trying to be specific. This is my talk page archive. Due to certain problems, the archiving was messed up and the messages on the archive aren't in order, that is the messages aren't date wise, that is not in the order in which they arrived. I know that I can use the cut and paste function to arrange the sections, but that is really a tough job. My archive is also really big. And the whole archive can also get messed up. What I want to know is, is there any script of tool (or anything near to it), that will help me arrange the archive by letting me easily move the talk page section? Like for example, there can be a hand sort of thing with which I can drag the talk page sections and place it at the desired place I want it to be. Is such a thing possible? If not, then how do I assemble my talk page archive properly in the way, they were before archival. Will be happy if someone helps me in this. Best, Itcouldbepossible^Talk 08:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, can't you simply copy the old revision and paste it into your archive? Do it in two copies if that's easier for your computer to process. What Cluebot is up to is another question Zindor (talk) 10:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@ZindorWell, the bot did not archive the messages from the top, but messages from the bottom. So that also won't work. Is there any other way to solve this? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 08:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Article Resubmission

I need an advice what needs to be changed in order to resubmit the article

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

Thank you in advance Leroks (talk) 11:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Leroks, and welcome to the Teahouse! The draft, as it stands now, needs to be written in a less promotional tone, and only summarise what independent, secondary reliable sources have said about the subject. Long lists of features are also not appropriate for a Wikipedia article. Please also see the policy on What Wikipedia is not. Happy editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 11:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Azov Battalion

Azov Battalion

Good afternoon. I am a citizen of Ukraine and I want to make adjustments to the definition of the Ukrainian Azov Battalion. Sorry, I can't edit this article, but please consider my corrections. First, the name is not correct, ie not the Azov Battalion, but the Azov Regiment. Secondly, the very definition of the Ozone Battalion is incorrect. Now it is said that The Special Operations Detachment "Azov" (Ukrainian: Окремий загін спеціального призначення «Азов», romanized: Okremyi zahin spetsialnoho pryznachennia "Azov"), also known as the Azov Regiment (Ukrainian: Полк «Азов», romanized: Polk "Azov") and the Azov Battalion (Ukrainian: батальйон «Азов», romanized: Bataliyon "Azov"), is a neo-Nazi[disputed – discuss] unit of the National Guard of Ukraine based in Mariupol in the coastal region of the Sea of Azov, from which it derives its name.

This is a wrong definition. I would like to change the definition to: A separate detachment of special purpose "Azov", also known as the regiment "Azov" (OZSP "Azov", unit 3057) - the formation of the National Guard of Ukraine (NMU), which is part of the 12th brigade of operational purpose of the Eastern Operational Territorial NMU. The formation was established in 2014 as the Azov Volunteer Battalion and until November 11, 2014 was a unit of the special police patrol service of the Ministry of Internal Affairs of Ukraine. The detachment is based in Mariupol, Donetsk region (temporarily based in Berdyansk, Zaporizhia region).

Thank you, best regards, Wikipedia Ukrainian user Zhanna Popovych (talk) 11:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Zhanna Popovych Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please direct your comments to the article talk page, Talk:Azov Battalion, where the editors that follow that article will more likely see them. Please note that Wikipedia uses names that are commonly used by English-language reliable sources, and not necessarily official or legal names, please see this policy regarding names. 331dot (talk) 11:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Zhanna Popovych In addition to the above regarding the name/title, make sure to read the header of Talk:Azov Battalion, which includes in particular the warning that Discussions on this page often lead to previous arguments being restated, especially about the use of neo-Nazi descriptor in the lede. (emphasis mine). The probability that you manage to change consensus on that point is pretty low even if you have a complete mastery of Wikipedia sourcing guidelines and access to a comprehensive database of newspapers; it is virtually zero without those. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Legal basis for copyright

WP:F7 B says the following: "Non-free images or media from a commercial source (e.g. Associated Press, Getty Images), where the file itself is not the subject of sourced commentary, are considered an invalid claim of fair use and fail the strict requirements of Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria; and may be deleted immediately.".

Where does this rule come from? Is this based on US law? PhotographyEdits (talk) 11:01, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes. Please see fair use. Shantavira|^{feed me} 11:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, PhotographyEdits. Wikipedia's policies and guidelines about use of non free content are actually stricter than US law regarding fair use. Our goal is that, to the greatest extent possible, Wikipedia's content is freely licensed or copyright free. The exceptions are quite narrow and are described at Wikipedia:Non-free content. Cullen328 (talk) 16:11, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

I read "Note that if the image is from a press or photo agency (e.g., AP or Getty Images) and is not itself the subject of critical commentary, it is assumed automatically to fail the "respect for commercial opportunity" test.". Why was this decided? I cannot find that in particular. To me, it seems that decreasing the image resolution to the bare minimum fixes this. PhotographyEdits (talk) 16:27, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

That quote applies to Pictures of deceased persons, in articles about that person, provided that ever obtaining a free close substitute is not reasonably likely., not every image from AP / Getty in general. To me, it seems that WP:ITN obituaries with photographs are already serious competitors to obituary headlines from online newspapers; using an AP / Getty image in that reeeally stretches the bounds of fair use. Furthermore, a "bare minimum" low-resolution on desktop can still appear flawless on mobile. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

List of all people with a Wikipedia page

Hi everyone,

for a research project I'm trying to compile a list of all the people (dead or alive) who have a page on Wikipedia. Is there a way to easily get such a list?

Many thanks!!

-Matan 144.82.255.94 (talk) 14:01, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. That would probably be a great many people. A list of articles about living people would be at Category:Living people. For the deceased you can start at Category:Dead people. 331dot (talk) 14:05, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata would be a better way. You realize there are about 1.5 million biographies on Wikipedia? Johnbod (talk) 14:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

political tendencies on a page

Hi, following is a page of a right-wing politician in Israel, https://he.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D7%90%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%99%D7%AA_%D7%A1%D7%98%D7%A8%D7%95%D7%A7 The page editors have decided to write her (in the Hebrew page alone) as a Human-rights activist. If you follow Israeli politics you know that the dear MP Orit Strok is in favor of some radical right-wings ideas and her main concern is to care for the Israeli settlers in the (occupied) west-bank. Please help. 192.118.64.29 (talk) 08:37, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is the English language Wikipedia. All Wikipedias are separate and have their own policies so we cannot help you here. You will need to take your concern to the Talk page of that article at the Hebrew Wikipedia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:12, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You have now written on en-WP, and the editors here have no authority over he-WP. You have to discuss your issue there, according to their policies and guidelines. [3] may be the place to start. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link to the EN-Wiki article: Orit Strook.

As the other editors have mentioned, we don't have any sway on the Hebrew Wikipedia. The English article mentions that she is the founder of an organization called the Human Rights Organization of Judea and Samaria, which advocates for the rights of the Israeli settler movement. To describe her as a human rights activist based on this would be a misnomer, but the English article doesn't do so. Bkissin (talk) 16:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

We've got notability... but no Wiki Page. How long does a request take to action?

Hoping someone can help or point me in the right direction.

Some months back I placed an entry here for TaxiPoint. Nothing seems to have happened and was wondering whether I've actually included enough information or done it correctly.

Wikipedia:Requested articles/Arts and entertainment#Media networks and organizations

We've been quoted in several mainstream publications, we are the industry's most read news source in the world (over 1 million different annual users) and appear on all mainstream news aggregators. We've also got several references linking back to our news articles that already appear on Wikipedia.

Is there anything else I should be doing or can be doing?

Many thanks for your time!

Perry Richardson TaxiPoint Founder 2A02:C7F:315D:7A00:D955:EFF5:4C9A:4A76 (talk) 14:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

• Hello Perry. First of all, please take a look at WP:PAID, which requires you to make a formal disclosure of your affiliation with TaxiPoint.

Listing something at Wikipedia:Requested articles is easy; actually turning a request into an acceptable article is hard; therefore, most requests stay dead for a long time. The way to improve your odds is to show convincingly that your request satisfies Wikipedia’s criteria for inclusion; 99% of the time, the hurdle is having enough sources to show the subject is "notable" (here, "notable" is Wikipedia-specific jargon). Such sources must be all of the following simultaneously: (1) written independently of the subject (so, not an interview of the founder), (2) published in an outlet with a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy (so, not a random blog post), (3) and that deal with the subject at length (so, not a hyperlink from a news aggregator). Notice that this criterion does not care the least about the facts that

1. We've been quoted in several mainstream publications → notability is not inherited; a quote is always a passing mention, failing (3)
2. we are the industry's most read news source in the world (over 1 million different annual users) → while it makes it more likely that someone else will have written about you, we need the actual source; a mere listing of news sources by readership would fail (3)
3. we [are cited in Wikipedia articles] → it only means Wikipedia editors consider your articles to be reliable sources (at least some of them for some claims), but that is not correlated with notability - many local newspapers with low circulation are as reliable as journalism can be but not notable; on the other end of the scale, the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a very notable historical document but absolutely unreliable

Your best chance is to find three sources that meet all of the above criteria, and list them along your request, all the other stuff (like the facebook page which fails (2)). "Three sources" is a high enough number that it passes the notability test (if the sources qualify), yet low enough that it is not too hard to check them all. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 15:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Tigraan. That gives me much more insight into what is required. Three high quality sources it is! 2A02:C7F:315D:7A00:2CF3:551D:3E9:1CAC (talk) 17:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Perry. Thank you for requesting an article rather than jumping in and trying to write it yourself. Unfortunately, to quote WP:Requested articles, You may request an article below, but please keep in mind that Requested Articles is more like a list of ideas for interested editors to peruse, rather than an article writing service where we methodically try to write every article. Most requested articles will not be written.

Wikipedia is entirely edited by volunteers, who work on what they choose to work on. Most requests at WP:RA will never be acted on: those that are are most likely to be are requests that grab a volunteer editor's attention and suggest to them that this will be an interesting and rewarding article to work on. A list of a dozen anonymous citations doesn't really do that, as they need to go and look at each one to see if it is worthwhile.

Because of your question, I have started to do just that. I looked at the first five or six citations before I got boardbored. Of those, two are to Wikipedia and Facebook, which are fan-contributed sources and therefore unreliable; one is a passing mention, and the other two are quoting you.

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. To meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, you need several sources, each of which is all three of reliable|, independent of you and contining WP:significant coverage of your company. Perhaps your list of anyonymous citations contains such sources, but given that I, even prompted by your question, gave up before finding one, it is unlikely anybody will action your request.

What I suggest you do is look for at least three sources that meet all three of those criteria. If you can find some, then add thenm - not anonymous references, but a proper citation with title, author if appropriate, journal, and date: that will make your request a little bit more likely to be picked up (though there are no guaranteed). If you can't find them, then you will know to give up and stop wasting any more of your time.

If this sounds negative, then I'm afraid it is. Most companies are not notable, and will not have Wikipedia articles written about them. If this is the case, then there is nothing whatever you can do to get an article. It depends on whether your company gets noticed and written about, independently of you.

Bear in mind also, that if there is an article about your company, the article will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, and may contain material you don't want to be there. See WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I can't see any useful sources in the list here [4] Facebook, Wikipedia and The Daily Mail are not reliable and the rest seem to just contain quotes from the founder. Theroadislong (talk) 15:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Appreciate your feedback. Back to the drawing board! 2A02:C7F:315D:7A00:2CF3:551D:3E9:1CAC (talk) 17:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello! Like it says at Wikipedia:Requested articles, You may request an article below, but please keep in mind that Requested Articles is more like a list of ideas for interested editors to peruse, rather than an article writing service where we methodically try to write every article. Most requested articles will not be written. So, "Nothing seems to have happened" is par for the course.

Your first (not only) hurdle is WP:NORG. So, what are the 3-5 best sources you can think of, that are at the same time reliably published, independent of your company and about your company in some detail? I checked the links you put at the other page, and [5] (i (newspaper)) hits 2/3, but the only thing it says is "The reasons for the shortages vary across the UK. Perry Richardson, licensed London Taxi driver and founder of industry news source TaxiPoint,", and that's not something we can base an article about TaxiPoint on. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:23, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Appeichiate the comments and thank you for the pointers. I'll present it again with a few more links and go from there. thank you! 2A02:C7F:315D:7A00:2CF3:551D:3E9:1CAC (talk) 17:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Good luck! And if you decide to register a WP-account, you can't name it "TaxiPoint", but something like "Perry at TaxiPoint" or "Best driver in London" is fine. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Help wanted with my draft article

I would like to bring my draft on Dominic Keegan in line with DYK standards. Am I on the right track? This is my first article from scratch; thanks for your help in advance. NotReallySoroka (talk) 17:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @NotReallySoroka, and welcome to the Teahouse! In order to be eligible for DYK, an article needs to be more than 1500 characters in length (excluding anything that isn't prose like quotes and infobox content), and be either recently (7 days) created, moved into the mainspace, expanded x5 or promoted to good article status. Other than that, apart from the usual standards for articles, there are no other real eligibility criteria for DYK. Happy editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 19:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

According to my rough character count, the draft stands at ~1200 characters, so you only need to add a few more sentences about him to go above the required length. The draft hasn't yet been accepted but if/when it is you will have 7 days to submit is as a DYK, so the only other thing to do currently is to think of an interesting "hook". What is the most interesting aspect of his career to date? Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

How do i add pictures?

I would like to put a new picture on Ford Power Stroke engine, because there is currently just a lable of the engine, not the actual picture of the engine. Seaparrot876 (talk) 17:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seaparrot876: To upload an image, follow the steps at Commons:Special:UploadWizard. To add an already existing image to the article, see Help:Files#Using files. The Tips of Apmh 17:17, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't have a original picture of it, so i cannot do it. Seaparrot876 (talk) 17:19, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seaparrot876, you have a couple of options:

1 - you could go over to Wikimedia Commons and look for photos of the engine. Someone else might have posted one, you never know.

2 - you could ask someone you know who owns a truck with such an engine if you could take a photo of it, then upload the photo.

3 - this would be tricky, but you could try to find an appropriately licensed photo on the internet. It seems you're already aware that most photos on the 'net are not compatibly licensed, but if you're really interested, maybe you could spend some time investigating. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:51, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

(EC) Images are very difficult to source. Wikipedia can only use (display) and host (as a repository) images that are declared to be compatible under a definite (free use) licence. You could try looking at places like Flickr, choosing the Commercial use & mods allowed, top left corner in the search results field.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 17:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Nothing there except full trucks.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 17:56, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seaparrot876 - I added WikiProjects to Talk:Ford Power Stroke engine, and noted that a picture is needed. GoingBatty (talk) 20:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

How to structure film awards won by a director?

For the notability of a draft about a film director that I am working on, it was suggested that I add the notability of the films directed. One of the films premiered at the most prestigious film awards in Russia and won multiple awards, however not all of the awards went to the director specifically (for example best cinematography would go to the cinematographer of the film, not the director). My question is how would I properly structure the "awards" section for the film director? many thanks. Jaguarnik (talk) 20:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC) Link is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Michael_Lockshin_(film_director)

@Jaguarnik Welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst I don't work in film or TV areas, my view would be that, for an Awards section of an article about a film director, you should really only list the awards that he actually won. You can place each on a separate line by using a bullet point and name the award and then the film that he won it for (with a citation of course).

After that, you could add a sentence mentioning other notable films that he directed, but which won awards in other categories. You probably don't need to name those award categories, as they would be in the target article, and aren't really that relevant to the director's achievement. It's often a good idea to look at existing articles to see how they have been done. If they've only won a couple of awards, using a simple sentence rather than bullet points might make more sense. Does that help at all? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:49, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Some citations I can't add automatically, why?

There are some sources that I use that I can't add automatically. Why is that so and what do we or they have to adapt so it works? Main issue would be any article by Bianet but others, too. Reuters, AP or books I can just add automatically. With Bianet it was possible some times in the past, but for most of the time and also presentntly not. With Ahval it was long possible to add them automatically, but now they at times also have difficulties, like with this linked article. Why? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 09:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Are you asking about the use of the "autofill" feature (magnifying glass icon) in the citation template drop-down menu? If not, please be more precise about what actions you take and what fails.

Assuming it is, I could not find any documentation, but I would speculate that it depends on the data source from which it fetches the info. For books, that is almost certainly the DOI database (the data model contains metadata). For newspaper articles, I double-speculate that it searches through the HTML tags of the page, trying to find things that look like an author, date etc. field; the presence of those would most likely depend on the website you query. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I edit in the visual editor, where it gives three options: Automatically, Manual or Re-use. In the manual mode one needs to fill in source date, first name, last name, website, etc. manually, while in the Automatically one a lot of this fields are filled automatically. JSTOR is a good example. At JSTOR I usually add the page number and a wikilink for JSTOR and that's it. At Bianet, a source which I often use I need to fill in all manually:author, source date, URL access date, article title, URL, website...Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

The fill references tool uses citoid to generate its citation data, which in turn uses a piece of software called Zotero. Zotero basically relies on volunteers submitting "translation guides" which tells the software how to turn a website's HTML into a citation. Zotero only works on websites where users have taken the time to write the guides, and the guides may end up breaking if the website ever changes its structure. If you want the tool to support a website you can pitch in and write a translator to add support for it, see the instructions at mw:Citoid/Creating Zotero translators 192.76.8.78 (talk) 21:12, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Uhh, well this explains it. Are there wikipedians specialized in this kind of translations who I could suggest this task to? This kind of translation is not in my activity area. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 21:22, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm not aware of anything related to Zotero on wikipedia, sorry. It might be a good candidate for a new wikiproject or something? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 21:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much. A really helpful and inspiring answer you gave me. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 22:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Offer to Translate to Afrikaans

I have never contributed to Wikipedia in any way for many reasons, one being time constraints. I will, though, have some more time available in the near future. I would like to translate many of Wikipedia's excellent pages (especially science related) from English to Afrikaans, where the Afrikaans page is non-existent or only a seed page. Two questions (1) Is this normally done, i.e. just translating from one language to another (because I notice that French and English Wiki pages often differ much in content). (2) If simple translation is allowed/encouraged, where do I start? 105.225.129.69 (talk) 18:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

(1) Yes, (2) Read WP:Translate us for details. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 18:51, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. To add to @Jéské Couriano's brief answer, I'd suggest that you register for a free account before you start. Maybe then read Help:Introduction to get an idea of how articles are edited. For example, we have two different styles of editing tool you can use on any language Wikipedia, and you might find you have a preference for one over the other.

I realise you want to translate into Afrikaans from English, so you might want to spend some time there making small edits or improvements just to get a feel of how things work over there. Once you're settled in, you could perhaps start by finding those articles that here on English Wikipedia we regard as the most important in their subject area, and see how you could imporve them over on Afrikaans Wikipedia.

Did you know that we have many 'WikiProjects' here which group topic-related articles together and classify them both by their importance and their current quality? So, at WP:WikiProject Science there is this weird-looking table. It's actually really helpful, as the left column contains all the Top priority articles, by quality. Just click any number in a cell to see a list of the actual articles. Thus, clicking '42' of the top priority articles in that table gives this list. You could compare these to those in Afrikaans, and see which ones you could improve for maximum benefit and minimal work. Or you could take the same approach by visiting Wikipedia:WikiProject South Africa and looking at their assessment table of related articles here, which gives these 132 top priority articles.

We always point out that each language Wikipedia has its own rules and policies. However, English Wikipedia is likely to have the most stringent ones when it comes to [[WP:V|Verifiability], so you should probably be OK there. But don't, whatever you do, attempt to add a reference without actually reading that source and checking what it says actually supports a stated fact. And don't simply translate word-for-word, but ensure you understand what is being said. Ideally write in your own words, too. If you don't do that, it's appropriate to leave an edit summary that says you have added a translation, and to link to that article by way of a credit to the authors there. There's plenty more I could say, but I hope this is a good start for you. Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Reviewing Virus Article

If you can please Check and See if this article I created is Suitable for the Wikipedia. Vaxinia Capricorned (talk) 18:47, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

No it isn't, I have moved it to draft here Draft:Vaxinia it was very poorly written and what's with the excessive capital letters? Theroadislong (talk) 19:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Capricorned, welcome back to the Teahouse. Writing an article is very difficult, and writing an article on medical topics is especially difficult; Wikipedia has a whole specialized set of guidelines about the sources which can be used in such articles, located here: WP:MEDRS. You can see some frequently asked questions about the guidelines, with answers, here.

Rather than jumping into writing articles, you could spend some time working on already existing articles in areas that interest you, though you'll need to be a little more careful about capitalization, punctuation and grammar. If you're more comfortable writing in a language other than English, you could try looking for a version of Wikipedia in that language. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Rather than "a little more careful", I'd say "hugely more careful". (And the matter of capitalization was pointed out days ago, to no effect.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:02, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary User has now been advised on their own userpage to take more care and to drop their over-use of caps. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Revision for AQUIRIS article

Hi team,

I am new to Wikipedia, only created one article and did changes to a few others. I am having a hard time trying to understand what is wrong with this proposal for AQUIRIS game studio page draft:

Draft:Aquiris

I got the following observation by a mod: The draft is put together from passing mentions of the company. Many sources do not mention the company at all and the sources often do not fit the written text.

All the sources mention AQUIRIS, also I don't know what "the sources often do not fit the written text" means.

Could you assist /orient me on this please?

Best,

Jesús JesusFabreC (talk) 10:54, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @JesusFabreC, and welcome to the Teahouse! In order to establish notability, the subject of an article needs to be covered in multiple, reliable, secondary sources which cover the subject in non-trivial detail, so this discounts passing mentions unfortunately. Try to find reliable sources that cover the subject in depth. Happy editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 12:56, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, JesusFabreC, and welcome to the Teahouse. Every single statement in an article, without exception, must be traceable to a reliable published source; and most of them must be backed up by a source wholly unconnected with the subject of the article (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.) It follows that unless you can find several sources, each of which is all three of reliable, independent of the subject, and containing significant coverage of the subject, there is literally nothing that you can put in an article, so no article on the subject will be accepted, however it is written. (See also WP:AMOUNT). ColinFine (talk) 14:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Every single statement in an article, without exception is too restrictive. Ledes generally reiterate information in the article, so as long as the information provided isn't controversial (which is determined by editor consensus), it doesn't need to be cited. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:32, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the detailed answers I have reviewed the links provided in the references section and all of them are press articles from independent outlets who are reliable, were not paid or sponsored in any way to talk about the studio and the contents linked talk directly about the company as the main subject, if not as a subject in second place but not in an accessory way, since without the mention to the company the article wouldn't make sense. I have added a couple of links directly to official websites of the company or to one of their products. Could you let me know if this is conflicting in any way with the Wikipedia rules?

The references used:

- Games Industry is one of the Top 3 sites that informs and generates opinion about the video game industry. They receive 5.5 Million unique visitors per month.

- IGN is the Top 1 news site that informs consumers about video game and other pop culture related news. They receive 142 Million unique visitors per month.

- "América Latina Juega" is a book independently edited and published by the renowned researcher and game developer Luis Wong, who previously wrote about the video game industry in Latin America in top publications as Polygon.

- I also made references to previous works of the studio, as some of their advergames, and linked to websites, some of them official, some of them are forums under the official domain of the company, where these works and be visualized or there are more details about them, I can remove them if there is a problem with those.

- MCV UK is one of the Top 10 news sites that informs and generates opinion about the video game industry. They receive 300 thousand unique visitors per month.

- Venture Beat is one of the Top 5 news sites that informs and generates opinion about the video game industry and innovation. They receive 14.9 Million unique visitors per month.

- TouchArcade is one of the Top 5 news sites that informs and generates opinion about the mobile video game industry. They receive 1.8 Million unique visitors per month.

- Pocket Gamer is one of the Top 5 news sites that informs and generates opinion about the mobile video game industry. They receive 6.8 Million unique visitors per month.

- The Apple official site is referenced to check the nominations that AQUIRIS' game Wonderbox received at Apple Design Awards in 2021.

After the feedback from @Tenryuu I have removed citations to official site products and the company site itself, leaving only third party independent sites that talked about the company with enough importance/coverage in their articles.

I really appreciate any indications you could give me, as I am very lost in this matter.

Looking forward to your feedback.

Thanks again.

Best,

Jesús JesusFabreC (talk) 17:45, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@JesusFabreC: I think you meant to ping ColinFine and not me. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

When I read Every single statement in an article, without exception is too restrictive. Ledes generally reiterate information in the article, so as long as the information provided isn't controversial (which is determined by editor consensus), it doesn't need to be cited." I thought it was you Tenryuu the one who said it, sorry if it was ColinFine JesusFabreC (talk) 20:09, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

The green text in Georgia font is quoted text. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

To take just the first citation, JesusFabreC, Games Industry may well be a reliable source, but the article you cite is mostly an interview with Manfredini. It is therefore not independent. Please reread the sentences in parenthesis in my comment above.

To reply about "every single statement": I stand by that, except that I accept that the phrase "traceable to" might be read as saying that it must be cited. That was not my intent: I accept that Wikipedia does not insist that every statement be cited to a source. But I maintain that for every statement - including those in the lede - there must be a reliable source which backs it up, even if no source is actually cited. ColinFine (talk) 21:30, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Colin, I re-read your first reply and I understand what you meant.

I have been checking other game studio Wikipedia pages, such as Simogo's and found numerous citations to interview articles that include affirmations from studio members/creators of their products, here are a couple:

https://www.eurogamer.net/ilomilo-and-year-walk-devs-reveal-canned-game-prototype-brisby-and-donnovan

https://www.eurogamer.net/device-6-adventure-texts

You said that Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. Just the same way as it happens in the Simogo entry.

Also in the same Simogo entry, there are references that point to the own Simogo blog, not to third party sites who are independent of the source, as this link for example:

https://simogo.com/2010/12/03/kosmo-spin-featured-by-apple-in-appstore/

Could you explain me why they are valid for those articles and not for ours? the articles I am citing are not written because their authors have been paid nor prompted to do so, they have been written because the authors think that is relevant information JesusFabreC (talk) 16:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@JesusFabreC, you may want to read the paragraph here on making comparisons to other articles. There are a lot of bad articles on Wikipedia (not that I'm saying Simogo is one) and a lot of unsourced or poorly sourced parts of otherwise decent articles. We try to avoid adding to the problem. Also, primary sources (such as interviews or company websites) are allowed to be used sparingly in limited circumstances - see WP:PRIMARY and WP:SELFPUB - but not for establishing the notability of an article topic. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Colin, I understood and totally agree on not adding to the problem. I have deleted all the references to articles including quotes from company members or their partners, there are now 6 references left which I believe show the company is one of the most relevant game studios in the country. Looking forward to your feedback. JesusFabreC (talk) 23:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll ping @ColinFine for you in case they do want to offer more feedback. They didn't make the above post, I did (in my secret identity as a different IP - or is this my secret identity? They're so hard to keep straight...) 97.113.167.129 (talk) 23:45, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Question regarding draft

Hey there fellow Wikipedians! I'm brand new to Wikipedia and have just - kinda - finished up completely redoing a draft another few users made a while back. The article is Draft:Blooket and I was wondering if the article is good enough to be submitted for articlehood :). Or if it still needs some works.

Thank you all so much! AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 23:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

AdmiralAckbar1977, it has a "Controversy" section that's completely unreferenced. This alone would be enough for me to decline it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Alright! Thanks so much! AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 23:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@AdmiralAckbar1977: The entire list of sources contains only one good one [[6]]. All the other sources look like crowdsourced info, primary sources or blogs. Please read WP:YFA and for further detail WP:GNG. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:04, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll get right to it. AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 00:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Why was my update on the wikipage removed ?

External Link

• Martin Lynch at Find a Grave <--------------------------- my update

I see this same external link used successfully on other wikipedia pages ???

Why was mine removed with the reason --> (Reverted good faith edits by [Royalal](talk): See WP:ELPEREN) Royalal (talk) 00:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Royalal Please read WP:FINDAGRAVE-EL which says that external links to that website should rarely be added. It is user-generated content and therefore unreliable. The only potentially valuable thing are the photos of the gravestones, which are terrible in this case. They are out of focus and illegible, and two different gravestones are shown. Plus, there are already too many external links in that article. Cullen328 (talk) 01:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Banning vandals

The recent history of edits to Oliver Wendell Holmes Jr. shows that someone changed his age at retirement to 455 and added something about his being a "bitch." An editor quickly reverted it. I'm curious whether there is a procedure for permanently banning such vandals from editing Wikipedia and for preventing them from signing up under new pseudonyms.Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Maurice Magnus, WP:ANI if there is debate over whether they are a vandal. WP:AIV if there is no debate.Slywriter (talk) 00:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

usually, editors will be given up to four warnings to stop before they can be blocked, depending on the severity of the edits and how likely they are to know the policies. this gives them a chance to reform, and/or informs them of these rules if they haven't yet (wikipedia has pages upon pages of policies, it won't be expected for someone to know them all upon first joining). one will only be blocked and can be sent to Administrator intervention against vandalism (AIV) if they're clearly persistent (has accumulated up to four warnings or is otherwise clear they won't stop vandalism or disruptive contributions).

additionally, if it's clear an editor is a blocked editor under a new account, that would count as sockpuppetry and can be blocked by going to Sockpuppet investigations (SPI) where checkusers can see if they're clearly the same user, or just sending them back to AIV if the vandalism is still clear.

for less obvious cases of persistent vandalism there's Administrator's noticeboard for incidents (ANI), but again, that's only if everything else has been exhausted, including opening up a conversation with them, and I'd personally recommend you to avoid going to ANI unless absolutely necessary. 💜  melecie  talk - 01:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Maurice Magnus, an IP editor made three bad edits to that article a week ago and then disappeared. Administrators almost never block IP addresses indefinitely because they frequently change and long blocks are usually ineffective. Plus, the editor has not been warned. Blocks are intended to stop immediate, ongoing disruption not to deal with a brief outburst a week ago. In most cases, indefinite blocks are reserved for severe, ongoing disruption that continues after warnings, lengthy discussion and escalating short blocks. Cullen328 (talk) 01:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Where did the page go?

I recently edited a page named "Christian Barozzi", but when I returned a few days later, it was gone. Do any of you know where it went? Or if it was deleted or not?

Thanks, AmerikanKoloniser

. AmerikanKoloniser (talk) 01:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@AmerikanKoloniser: Yes Christian Barozzi was deleted, under speedy criteria WP:CSD#A7. See WP:CCS for some more information on that. RudolfRed (talk) 01:52, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! AmerikanKoloniser (talk) 01:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @AmerikanKoloniser and welcome to the teahouse! Christian Barozzi was deleted two days ago for the criteria for speedy deletion A7 by Bbb23, with the deletion reason being Article about a real person, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! AmerikanKoloniser (talk) 01:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Fix chart

Please help me fix Team titles chart under NCAA Women's Division III Tennis Championship. Thank you. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 02:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pennsylvania2 Sometimes the best thing to do in a case like this is to work backwards to try and find the last properly formatted version of the table. Most often it's do to some syntax being unnecessarily added or removed. You made a series of edits to the article and perhaps one of them accidentally damaged the table's syntax. Once you find the last clean version of the table, move forward edit by edit and you should find the one which introduced the error. Once you find the error, it should be relavtively simple fix. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

That worked thanks. Pennsylvania2 (talk) 02:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Help creating an article

Hello,

I am a new comer to creating and editing Wikipedia pages. however i have spent maybe hours combing through the site for interesting information. In 2021 a family member of mine died. And he had a huge effect on Alaska, however he lacks a Wikipedia page to him. And i promised myself at his funeral that i would not let such an injustice stand. And so i stand here today asking with much respect that anyone who is interested help me make a Wikipedia page to the late Chief of Ruby. AlaskanBorn (talk) 06:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @AlaskanBorn and welcome to wikipedia! I'm sorry about your family member, but unfortunately people have to meet certain criteria to have an article, which does include (as the basic criteria) them being mentioned in multiple reliable sources independent from them or you. if you do have sources or news articles focusing on them that establish their notability, then you may write an article, click there to figure out how, but you'd also have to note that writing an article is very hard and even harder for people who are related to the subject (you'd need to disclose your conflict of interest while writing, and this is non-negotiable, and be careful to write neutrally about them). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 06:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

For the convenience of people reading this, here is AlaskanBorn's contributions, so we can check if they decide to start writing about their family member. A diehard editor Editing Wikipedia too much rn, talk to me here, bruh. 07:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict, split off to separate comment) oh, and another tip for someone with a conflict of interest would be to basically forget everything you know about them personally and write as if you know nothing about them and only go off and summarize what these sources have stated, nothing more. since most bits of information have to be verifiable and have reference attached to them, you cannot add anything that your sources don't cover, even if they are true. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 07:12, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Melecie "cannot add anything that your sources cover" ... I think you mean "that your sources do not cover, right? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

fixed. can i please stop making typos aaaaaaaaaa 💜  melecie  talk - 06:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, AlaskanBorn, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that "X deserves a Wikipedia page and it's an injustice that they don't have one" is, usually, a very very bad reason for creating an article. An article about your family memeber would not be his page, it would not be for the benefit of him or your family (except incidentally), and it would not necessarily say what you wanted it to say. It cannot be "an injustice", because an article is in no way for the benefit of the subject: we have many articles on thoroughly unpleasant and objectionable people if they have been written about enough elsewhere, and we do not have (and will not have) articles on millions of wonderful people if it happens that they have not been written about. Please also see WP:NOTMEMORIAL. ColinFine (talk) 08:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

AlaskaBorn I am guessing that your intention is to create an article about First Traditional Chief Donald Honea, Sr. of Ruby, Alaska. As pointed out above, this would only be plausible if people have published articles in newspapers or on websites about Honea. Only if you are sure you have those items to use as references should you attempt this task. A Google search on "Donald Honea, Sr" did yield several obituaries, but this may not be enough to justify an article. As an alternative, consider adding content about the Native American presence to the History section of Ruby, Alaska. David notMD (talk) 10:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

• AlaskaBorn I'm a bit surprised that you would bring up the lack of a Wikipedia article (not a mere "page") at your family member's funeral. As others have noted, Wikipedia is not a place to memorialize our loved ones. There are websites where that is done. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Xtools

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

---

Has the gadget Xtools stopped working? It is continuously saying "cannot fetch revision data". What is the problem with the tool? I cannot see any info regarding a page. Is the problem same for everyone? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 03:21, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Itcouldbepossible: It is working for me. At least enough to see this page: [7] RudolfRed (talk) 03:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@RudolfRed No, actually I am not talking about the Xtools website. I am talking about the Wikipedia gadget that one can enable from the preferences sections, if he or she likes to. I am talking about that gadget. Why is it not working for me? Itcouldbepossible^Talk 03:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

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

Editing a Family Friends Wikipedia Article

Hi. I'm a Highschool senior. As a senior we were tasked with doing a extensive project that required a thirty minuet presentation. I decided to do my project on a family friend, who has gotten very famous, and has even got himself a exhibit in the Smithsonian Museum. The project went very well. I ended up interviewing him for a hour. Here's the question. I wanted to pay him back for all of the help he has given me. so when I looked at his article on Wikipedia I noticed that it was severely out of date. I would love to update his article to include his most recent achievements with his help, but I don't know if I'm qualified to do so. I would love to give him a legacy that will stand as long as the internet is around. Am I qualified? (His Name is Gary Strobel) Speartopia (talk) 05:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Speartopia: Well, you have a conflict of interest, so you might want to read the WP:COI guideline. Basically, you can make corrections to the article (spelling, grammar, dates, names, adding sources, reverting obvious vandalism) but any substantive changes to the prose are best proposed on the article talk page. You can use the template {{request edit}} to preface your proposal, which causes your proposal to be listed on a category page that is monitored by some editors. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:24, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Speartopia Could I add that updating recent achievements must be based, not on interviews with the subject, but on available independent sources. Once you’ve declared your WP:COI, you could add a ‘Selected publication’ list yourself, which might do the trick. Nick Moyes (talk) 08:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you are qualified. Per COI, you need to state on your User page that Strobel is a family friend. People with a COI are asked to not edit the article directly, but instead to post requested changes on the Talk page of the article, using that request edit notification so that someone will see it, and then either implement or reject your requested changes. A suggestion: existing content and new content will need references. Use your Sandbox to practice formatting references. Your intent is admirable, and I hope your persist. P.S. You could take a photo of Strobel, add that to Commons, and then put the photo in the article. David notMD (talk) 10:13, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

how to change main page title

new to creating Wiki page... only in sandbox at this time....I wanted to name the page Earl Carter, American Photojournalist Tne name that appears is Earlc11946 and I am unable to change it...that is my account name and I get messages that a user page has not been created yet....I am working in sandbox at this time....I have view many you tube videos hoping to finds an answer and looked at many wiki support pages.... Earlc11946 (talk) 09:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Currently at User:Earlc11946/sandbox. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Earlc11946 If this is an attempt at autobiography, see WP:AUTO. If this is ever submitted as a draft and accepted, the accepting reviewer will properly name the article. As there are no existing articles about other Earl Carters, "Earl Carter" will suffice. David notMD (talk) 10:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Earlc11946, here's one section, in its entirety: Chief Photographer, Kingsport TN Times-News, Staff Photographer, Miami FL Herald, Photo Editor, The Huntsville AL Times. Problems: No reliable source is provided for any of these claims; it's not the state but the newspaper title that needs italics; your positions are of less interest than is what (according to reliable, independent sources) you achieved in each of those positions; article text should consist of sentences, each one having a subject (e.g. "he") and a predicate (e.g. "was a staff photographer for the Miami Herald, where he [whatever]"). -- Hoary (talk) 12:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Bridlington website removed

Hi, I am trying to include the bridlington.net website as a link in the Bridlington page but it keeps being removed. The website is the towns primary website and has been in existence since 1989 providing local tourism and business information, history, local news, what's on guide etc. Could someone advise the likely reason as to why the site is being removed as I see no difference between bridlington.net and other sites performing the same functionality listed within wikpedia for example wikipedia pages for Morecambe, Scarborough, Norfolk, Wales and I am sure many more.

Any help to understand why the editor for the Bridlington page is choosing to remove links to sites with content which seems acceptable on other pages would be most appreciated.

Thanks in advance for any help or advice as i am starting to feel paranoid. 80.234.238.224 (talk) 12:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

There's no need to guess why the link has been removed: you can instead ask those who removed it to explain. The place to ask is Talk:Bridlington. -- Hoary (talk) 13:10, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

additionally, there is a guideline for external links, which you may want to check. the revert summaries stated that it was removed for being promotion, and given that the page seems to be primarily for promoting bridlington tourism (not an official government site which will definitely be allowed, for example), I'd understand this conclusion, however I'm not the best person to determine whether this is an appropriate link. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Thanks for that, I understand what you are saying, just annoying that there is no government site for the area, presumably because the job is already being done by ourselves :-( 80.234.238.224 (talk) 13:48, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, fellow IP - since you say "ourselves", I assume you have some connection to the website. In that case, you have a conflict of interest (WP:COI), which you should disclose per the policy, and - friendly warning - should expect to be challenged if you start adding links to the site in an apparently promotional manner. Thanks for checking with us instead of continuing an edit war, though! 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello! need some advice about an article I put together.

Hello everyone.

I am a very sparingly contributor to wikipedia and recently put together an article, which was rejected on the grounds that it felt like an ad. I tried to be neutral but the subject has lived a truly inspiring life, to me at least. So I feel like a second set of eyes would be helpful in polishing the tone and make it better appropriate for wikis standards. Do you mind giving it a look over and giving me some comments? Here is a link to the draft article.

Thank you

Senet Senetsudaien (talk) 23:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Senetsudaien Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid I must point out that you have breached our first rule of Wikipedia by copy/pasting, or at least closely paraphrasing, a lot of content from other quite promotional sources. See this copyright violation report. Those sentences should be removed and rewritten in your own words. You have not written in a dispassionate, encyclopaedic voice, but have used promotional wording throughout. You have also repeated and cited what they have said about themselves as if it were true. It may well be, but we only accept what others have written about that subject, not what they say about themselves in interviews. He may well meet our notability criteria, but the content at the moment is not acceptable for Wikipedia as it stands. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Additionally, Senetsudaien, the draft says for example In the 1970's, he worked for Andy Warhol in the early days of Interview Magazine as a part of the launching team.^{[7][6][8][5][9][10]} I'd simply say that he worked for Andy Warhol during the launch of Interview. You might have more than one reference if one only says that he worked for Warhol but doesn't mention Interview, another that he worked for Interview but doesn't mention Warhol, etc -- but why as many as six? -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Senetsudaien, an unreferenced sentence like His natural talent for drawing and his desire of becoming a fashion designer led him to the acclaimed Fashion Institute of Technology (FIT) in New York does not belong in a neutrally written encyclopedia. Remove all unreferenced and unattributed evaluative language. Also, we use first names like "Freddie" only once, in the first sentence, according to the Manual of Style. The exception is when distinguishing between family members who share a surname. Remove those excess "Freddies". Cullen328 (talk) 04:01, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

great thanks Senetsudaien (talk) 19:08, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

thank you. Senetsudaien (talk) 19:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

How can I get enough sources to create a good/decent article?

How can I get sources in villages in Ukraine. Many people said that I cant give enough sources but, every time I googled it, most of it are just forecasts. Xicilisms (talk) 20:43, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Xicilisms, welcome. I'm not sure which sources you are after but i've written a method down about census records at this page, i think it may be useful to you. Kind regards, Zindor (talk) 20:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Actually i forgot i found an English version the other day. A citation to the census is enough to prove the village is a populated legally recognised place per the inclusion criteria, but if you can expand the articles a bit further using significant coverage in reliable news sources etc that's even better. Zindor (talk) 20:55, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Does English Wikipedia have a "Reference Space" akin to French Wikipedia?

I noticed that on French Wikipedia common books have their own space with editions listed. For example: https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/R%C3%A9f%C3%A9rence:M%C3%A9tamorphoses_(Ovide)

That allows for easy inclusion of that reference in various articles.

Does English Wikipedia have this too? And if not, were there ever attempts to do something like this and archived discussions somewhere? 'wɪnd (talk) 14:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@'wɪnd: I'm not aware of anything similar. You could ask at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

We once had some kind of reusable references from templates, but they were deprecated again. {{Cite doi/10.1126.2Fscience.1084370}} was one of these if you have admin access. You can see some of the discussion at Template talk:Cite doi. —Kusma (talk) 20:28, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@'wɪnd We used to have some templates that operated in this manner, but they were all deleted following this discussion. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton @Kusma @IP: I very much appreciate your responses. Super helpful. No, I'm not an admin yet, still very much a beginner. 'wɪnd (talk) 21:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Copy Pasting Between Articles

I'm editing articles on abortion in different states. Each article has a "terminology" section that is, for the most part, identical. Terminology doesn't vary between the states, but the wording of each section is slightly different. Can I "standardize" across all the state abortion articles by copy and pasting the same text into each? Cioriolio (talk) 17:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I see from your edits that Abortion in Alabama, Abortion in Iowa and Abortion in Florida are existing articles. I am stunned by the idea that there may be 47 more such articles! "As to whether text in a "terminology" section can be the same across states, I suppose that depends on the law in that state. As for copy/pasting from one Wikipedia article to another, that is allowed as long as the Edit summary states where from. David notMD (talk) 17:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Cioriolio You can copypaste text between WP-articles, but the rule is that your WP:ES must include a wikilink, like "Adding text copied from Abortion in Iowa." More at WP:COPYWITHIN. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD @Gråbergs Gråa Sång

Thanks for your help Cioriolio (talk) 21:41, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

How can I improve my article Draft:Sciex?

My article has been rejected for being too commercial, and for not using independent sources. I did review several other Wikipedia articles on companies in the field of chemical instrumentation before I wrote this. I tried to use a neutral tone, introducing facts about the history of the company that might be of interest for notability, not for promotional purposes. I almost exclusively used used references from the scientific literature or from media outlets not associated with the company (mostly to support facts about business issues), with only one reference from a company annual report. Perhaps an experienced editor can suggest what aspects I should eliminate or improve. Brucet8585 (talk) 22:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Brucet8585. You've done a good job using neutral tone, i think what's needed is for the prose to be brought together and some explanation to the reader why these aspects of the company are significant. Have a look at prose like 'Over 300 instruments were sold during the next several years ' and ask yourself is it encyclopedic or does it simply serve to make the company look good? "SCIEX is one of the major suppliers in the overall mass spectrometry business estimated (in 2019) at $3.68 billion world wide" is good but what is SCIEX's market share? If you can establish the importance of the company and make these kinds of tweaks then that will go a long way; often promotional articles are just lists of selected facts and big unrelated numbers, so this is what we're trying to avoid. Hope that helps, Zindor (talk) 02:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Brucet8585, can I just add that having read your draft, I consider it to be well-written and well-supported by references. I would urge DGG to reconsider their assessment. I am utterly certain that were your draft to land up at AfD, it would survive (which is the ultimate test). Sciex is one of the big mass spec companies, and while we are not here to advertise, we are failing in our job if we don't say what a notable company or notable person has achieved; I don't see any obvious way in which you could express things more neutrally. (For the record, I have no connection with Sciex, nor do I have the foggiest idea who Brucet8585 is outside Wikipedia). Elemimele (talk) 08:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Incidentally, some tidying is going to be necessary outside the Sciex draft. At the moment Sciex already exists as a redirect to Danaher Corporation. Rather annoyingly, the article on Danaher has a list of divisions, which includes a blue-linked Sciex, which of course is the redirect that takes the reader back to where they already are. I'm quite certain that (almost) no one in the mass spec world will have the foggiest idea of the existence of Danaher. Elemimele (talk) 08:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I think DGG made the right call at the time because the promo indicators were evident and there is a lack of SIGCOV. I agree though if it's a large company in a multi-billion industry then it probably would be kept. Regards, Zindor (talk) 11:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I have removed reference to 300 instrument sales, and changed the reference about market size to one that has a quotation saying SCIEX is a major player. The previous market size number that I had cited (3.68 billion $) was actually for the LC/MS market. This new citation is for the entire MS market at 5.5 billion (in 2018). I added the quotation about being a major player to the reference. This is from an industry market study. Actual market share information is difficult to find without paying for one of these expensive market reports. Brucet8585 (talk) 16:07, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments Elemimele . I will try to work with Zindor and DGG to find a way to appear less promotional and remove any contentious references and statements. Brucet8585 (talk) 15:16, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

I'll also have a grub around if I get a moment, and see if I can find some stuff relating to Sciex in particular. I have a feeling they are quite important amongst the metabolomics people in Germany. There are two sorts of coverage for a company like this: business coverage and scientific-impact coverage. They can be notable based on their contribution to the science/technology just as much as their market share in the business of selling instruments. I would argue, for example, that Thermo's development of the orbitrap is far more significant than their actual existence as a business making mass spectrometers. Elemimele (talk) 16:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Brucet8585:, @DGG:, @Zindor: Having grubbed around, I still think it might be possible to make it less promotional by emphasising Sciex's claims to technical novelty and their role in the development and commercialisation of mass spec technology; I've found two refs this morning: second commercial tandem mass spec; first commercial ICP-MS; first commercial Electrospray ionization (ESI) source; 2nd commercial LC-MS. Elemimele (talk) 06:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele You have been busy! Thank you for these references, which I have not seen. I will try to strike to right tone of notability not promotion and see how it flies. Brucet8585 (talk) 21:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

You clearly know something about this field. Hard to compare the importance ("notability") of science vs business, but I think it is true in this industry that developments in the science drive business success (eg Thermo). Every company has made key developments that contribute to its success - the Orbitrap for Thermo, oTOF for Waters, FTMS for Bruker, triple quadrupoles for SCIEX. Hard to find independent references that document the breadth of the impact that developments in mass spectrometry have made on the various fields of bioanalysis - from drug development to drug discovery to metabalomics to proteomics. Your second reference is a good example of one aspect though. Brucet8585 (talk) 23:10, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

References

Waitlist

I am wondering how likely SpringerNature's waitlist for Wikipedia library access is to open up.

I think Springer Nature does not have that many spots because I have been waitlisted several times because there are not enough spots.

I am wondering if this is the reason why the waitlist is long.

ScientistBuilder (talk) 19:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@ScientistBuilder, welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to ask about this is the Wikipedia Library itself. Try contacting them via any of the listed methods here. Regards. Lightbluerain (Talk💬 Contribs✏️) 02:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Question Regarding Citations in an Article Draft

Hey there, I was wondering if anyone could go over the sources in Draft:Blooket to see if they are in line with the quality expected for a wikipedia article.

Thank you all so much! This is the first article I've really worked on, and this means a lot to me. AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 23:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

AdmiralAckbar1977, probably not what you want to read but there are still significant issues. Reddit and Youtube are not reliable sources. ICANN doesn't do anything for notability, Tapinto is a passing mention, K-12 is a press release, LeeDaily gives no indication that its anything more than a blog, publicistpaper uses exact same software as LeeDaily and its 'about us' is even less reassuring as it actively solicits press releases, TealMango is similar to both of those and also looks to be recycling press releases as news articles. BizJournals, I also have doubts about as Inno seems to be brand-new focused on emerging products with no editorial policies and the one scholarly paper cited I can not access. Wikipedia needs some in-depth coverage of the subject that wasn't supplied by the subject and currently thats lacking.Slywriter (talk) 23:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks you so much for responding. Looking back on the citations, I agree with everything you state - and probably should have worked harder to find actual refutable sources. I do have one additional questions. Would it be possible to cite the actual website as a way to identify features of the website. Or is that also not allowed. Thanks! AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 00:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

• thank AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 00:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

  Meant to signify spelling correction. Gosh, this isn't looking too great :) AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 00:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

First hurdle is notability, which requires independent, reliable secondary sources. Once notability is established, using primary sources for limited non-controversial information is usually acceptable, though the article can not turn into a product catalogue or be overly self serving.Slywriter (talk) 00:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@AdmiralAckbar1977 I tried to help you out by finding some good references, but was only able to find a few newspaper articles and books that mention Blooket as one of many good resources. These would be helpful if you had a couple of articles that gave in-depth coverage to use as your main references. If you happen to have a subscription to www.newspapers.com, and use 2021 - 2022 as the time frame to search in, there 3 articles about school resources that mention Blooket as being useful. If you don't subscribe to newspapers.com it may be possible for you to get a one week free trial subscription that will allow you to find and save those articles.

I also searched on books.google.com and found a couple of non-fiction books that recommend Blooket. It may be that Blooket is too soon, in which case you may be able to find good references in a year or too. If you go back and work on your draft article at least every six months it won't be deleted, and will be there if better references come along at a later date. Best wishes on project. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I'll take you and @Hoary's advice and kinda wait it out until Blooket becomes significantly more mainstream, and if it never achieves Wikipedia level notability, then no problem! In the meantime I'll just add a little from time to time, probably follow your idea about newspapers.com and the like.

Thank you so, so much - AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 03:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

AdmiralAckbar1977, there's no need for "actual refutable sources": that would be taking the principle of falsifiability too far. Reliable sources, yes. My guess is that these simply don't exist. Maybe wait a couple of years for [Wikipedia-defined] notability to emerge? -- Hoary (talk) 01:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm guessing AdmiralAckbar1977 meant "reputable" rather than "refutable". CodeTalker (talk) 03:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Editing a foreign-language wiki

I found an egregious error in a French-language Wikipedia article, so I left a message on the talk page. It was made clear to me that I needed to communicate in French, so I translated the message and reposted it. It's been two weeks and I haven't heard anything back. The question is: is it kosher to edit a foreign-language wiki? Note this doesn't regard the language or a translation, it's a matter of fact. The info box for the article about a novel incorrectly lists the name the author used as a working title, not the title it was actually published under.

There's also an error in the body of the article. They use the French phrase "pepites d'dor" (gold nuggets) which definitely should be "mineral d'or" (gold ore). The novel was originally published in English, so the editor was basing their plot summary off a translated edition, so I figured that might be a problem, so I included that information in my original message, but intend to let it go at that. Is that correct behavior, or should I edit that too (if editing is appropriate at all)? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 19:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

Different-language Wikipedias are also different editions of Wikipedia, with their own communities, standards, and practices. We can't really give you an answer to this question because fr.wp is a completely different beast from en.wp. I also do not recommend using automated translation; it tends to fall apart if used for discussion. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: Just going to add that when you try and edit a non-English Wikipedia, you're most likely going to be expected to be able to communicate (at least to some degree) in the relevant language. I'm pretty sure all non-English Wikipedias have help desks or noticeboards in which questions can be asked, and some of them may even have specific pages set up for asking questions in English. So, you might have better luck get a response at a general help desk than perhaps an article talk page. French Wikipedia has a page called fr:Wikipédia:Bistro des non-francophones/en which seems to be geared to helping non-French speakers with issues on Wikipedia; so, perhaps try there. As for editing non-English Wikipedia articles, there should be no reason why you can't. However, once again, you shouldn't assume that all policies and guidelines are the same across all the different Wikipedias (some are quite different), and you shouldn't assume that others who disagree with you are going to go easy on you just because you may have difficulties communicating in their language. I've seen a number of discussions on English Wikipedia talk pages breakdown simply because one of those involved is not really competent enough in English to participate. You don't need to be fluent as long as you're understandable (at least in my opinion), but you also should understand that the individual bias of the others involved in the discussion may start creeping in if they find your language ability to be lacking. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)

It is not really reasonable to edit a wikipedia in a language you do not speak, automated translators are not yet good enough for you to fully understand the text or contribute at a sufficient level. If it is a language you speak, but not perfectly, you may find it difficult to defend your edits on the talkpage, even if you are in the right. Boynamedsue (talk) 22:42, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for responding, everybody. I went ahead and made the edit, documented it in the edit summary and on the talk page (in French) and related the whole story (in English) on the Fr:Wikipedia:Bistro page mentioned above. @Boynamedsue: You didn't read what I said: the edit involved only the title of a book, a matter of fact. It had nothing to do with a text, the language, or a translation. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 02:48, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Pete Best Beatles Another contributor has since clarified the text in the lead, to make it clear that "for the love of Imabelle" is the title the book was published under, while "The Five Cornered Square" was the working title of the manuscript. Regarding minerai/ore vs. pépites/nuggets, I searched a bit on the internet without being able to find confirmation either way, so I will not edit that.

I think editing a foreign-language Wikipedia without perfect mastery of the language is acceptable if you are reasonably sure of what you are doing. That can be achieved by a combination of machine translation tools, making very careful edits, and only on fairly standard parts of the article (e.g. an infobox). I have done so on the German and Italian Wikipedias (I can read and listen German fairly well, but I speak and write with many errors; I can barely understand written Italian, or slowly-spoken Italian about simple topics).

I would even think that using talk pages in English might be acceptable for a small subset of articles that are likely to attract editors fluent in that language, for instance, fr:Anglais américain (American English); but not the page about a book that has been translated.

However, telling others from that Wikipedia that they could just use a translating tool because "you’re in the US and speak only English" is absolutely not acceptable. No fr-wp editor has replied to you, so I will do the biting for them: it is plainly a you problem that you cannot communicate in French on the French Wikipedia, and if measures entirely on your side cannot fully fix that, you should at the very least recognize that the problem is on your side and humbly ask for accomodation, rather than demand that others adapt to a problem that you created. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

@Tigraan: Regarding your statement "Another contributor has since clarified the text in the lead, to make it clear that "for the love of Imabelle" is the title the book was published under, while "The Five Cornered Square" was the working title of the manuscript", I see that on the history page, comparing versions. But for some reason that's not the way it reads in the article itself, I don't see that anyone changed it back. The change I made to the info box has stuck, though. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 02:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Tigraan:Well, the article has gone back and forth, but it's where it needs to be as of right now. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 06:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

What is the consensus around "A is (one of the) greatest works of X"?

I'm new to Wikipedia, and am trying to understand the consensus on ranking people and works.

Every now and then I stumble across Wikipedia articles involving science and mathematics where it is said: "The work A is the greatest work of X" or "The work A is one of the top 3 greatest works of X". Here X can be a person (e.g. "John Doe") or X can be a domain (e.g. "biology").

I personally find rankings of "greatness" unhelpful as it is conveys no useful information to me. Great in what sense and to whom? It is subjective and vague to me.

If I change perspectives, and ask myself, why do people write such statements? Maybe what they mean is:

• "Sources I read mention this more than other things."
• "If I compare this content to other content of the time, I find it more interesting, surprising, or resonating."
• "I want to spread its beauty (as I see it) to others by citing somebody who thinks the same."
• "It's the earliest work I know of where ideas of this kind were stated."

I'm aware of WP:NPOV and WP:WEASEL. However, it is not clear to me what the consensus on rankings are, when it is sourced. Can anybody be an authority on "greatness"? I have a very strong opinion on the unhelpfulness of "greatest" type of statements, but it unclear to me what the consensus is.

Has this been written and talked about? Thank you. :) 'wɪnd (talk) 10:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@'wɪnd Such a statement can only be in an article if an authoritative source (preferably multiple sources) actually makes that claim. No WP editor can make such a claim. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 10:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely. I see this too often in articles which have nothing to do with science or math. Doug Weller talk 11:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

To clarify, Wikipedia's consensus is that statements as I outlined in the question are encouraged if there's an "authoritative" source? Who is to tell who an authority on judging "greatness" is? To me, this does not seem objective. Any ranking words such as "greatest", "major", "leading", "top" seems to hold little informational value to me, and masks a more precise statement. 'wɪnd (talk) 13:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@'wɪnd, we rely on the opinion of experts in a particular field to judge the best of that field. Of course, experts often disagree, so Wikipedia usually holds off on making any such pronouncements until a majority of experts have agreed on which is the best. Each field has its own criteria for greatness, and ideally, somewhere in the article should be an explanation of what the subject's greatness consists of, specifically. Our article says that Fred Astaire "is widely considered the greatest dancer in film history", and follows that up with a long section on "Working methods and influence on filmed dance", plus explanations of his particular skills at other points in the article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm glad you showed a specific example. That makes it easier for me to understand what the consensus is. :)

In the Fred Astaire article there's the statement "is widely considered the greatest dancer in film history" [2]. Following the [2] reference I get to an Encyclopedia Britannica article which says: "He is regarded by many as the greatest popular-music dancer of all time.".

Now, it seems to me, the Britannica article has neither author nor any reference to this claim. According to the revision history, it seems to stem from before 2000.

So Wikipedia consensus says: if an unknown author at Encyclopedia Britannica before 2000 makes a "greatest in X" statement about Fred Astaire, then this opinion is encouraged to be included in Wikipedia? What does many mean here? And great in what sense? 'wɪnd (talk) 13:59, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@'wɪnd, since the Encyclopedia Britannica is considered to be a reliable source, then yes, we can include statements it makes. If someone wanted to question its reliability, there are avenues to do so, but that's a separate point - once a source is deemed reliable, all of its statements are also (usually) deemed reliable. If other reliable sources make conflicting statements, those should also be included (taking into account our policies on neutral POV, due weight, etc.). And as I said before, any statement in our articles - and IMHO in any decent reference publication - that something is "great" should be followed by an explanation of why it is great. I assume the EB article did so, as ours does. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:27, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

A couple of problems. One is that a publisher or a newspaper, for instance, being a reliable source does not make all their books or articles reliable. I've seen reputable publishers publish dreadful fringe junk. This goes for the Britannica, and a number of editors don't think highly of it.[8][9]. Among other things its articles give no sources and there isn't always an author. I've even see a sockpuppet convince the Britannica to include their fringe claim. It's a tertiary source and we should try to use specialist sources. So I would never consider the Britannica to be a good source for this sort of "greatest' statement. Doug Weller talk 14:38, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, there you go - looks like the EB has been challenged. Sources do get challenged and re-evaluated all the time. If consensus says it's actually not a good source for that claim in Astaire's article, then the claim should be removed. It all comes down to consensus in the end. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:43, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Incidentally, this seems to be related to the conversation here, with Boynamedsue, about some reverted "According to whom" tags and the specifics of WP:WEASEL words. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads up there. I think when we consider "greatness", you really need a good source to state it in wikivoice. The logical thing to do if you are unsure is to simply attribute the statement to the person or organisation which makes the statement. That is certainly more positive than tagging it. Boynamedsue (talk) 18:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

• I would definitely avoid using "the greatest A" even for clear-cut cases. Note the Bob Dylan example at WP:PEACOCK; we can definitely find authoritative sources that call Bob Dylan "the defining figure of the 1960s counterculture" or "a brilliant songwriter", but we should still refrain from calling him so in wikivoice. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

  It seems to be a subject under some debate. Albert Einstein is "widely acknowledged to be one of the greatest and most influential physicists of all time", Muhammad Ali is "frequently ranked as the greatest heavyweight boxer of all time", The Notorious B.I.G. "is widely considered one of the greatest rappers of all time", etc. There's even a kerfuffle going on at Yuzuru Hanyu, which I stumbled across recently. I suppose it's all part of an ongoing three-way tug-o-war between fans, critics, and informative neutrality. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:27, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

  @Tigraan: thank you! WP:PEACOCK is exactly the kind of thing I was looking for. This hits the nail on the head. Thank you. :) Now I know what template to include: {{Peacock term}}, or better yet to rewrite the sentence with attribution if it is clear to me how to do so (as @Boynamedsue seems to prefer). 'wɪnd (talk) 12:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Examples of particularly clear / well organized articles re: plants (as a guide to editing a plant article?)

Hi - I saw the following topic included in a list of articles that could use copyediting: Diplazium australe

I did an off-the-cuff search for some plant articles that might serve as templates: (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azalea, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fern, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequoia_(genus)).

Of these the Sequoia article seems maybe the most clear and well organized. But would welcome pointers to any additional examples.

And, more generally, does Wikipedia provide category-specific listings of articles that are regarded as particularly well written?

Thanks. Margarita-Dz (talk) 11:29, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Margarita-Dz - under Wikipedia:Featured articles#biology and Wikipedia:Good articles/Natural sciences you will find sections on Wikipedia articles about plants that have been rated as either Featured articles or Good articles - have a look at some of those - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 11:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I suggest you also take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Plants. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Margarita-Dz (talk) 12:23, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Adding former cantons in Template:Cantons of [department]

Can I add the list of former cantons in the templates of cantons of French departments (like in Template:Cantons of Nord)? See :fr:Modèle:Palette Cantons du Nord for example. (I know that most of those articles will be red links, but over the course of time, interested people can make such articles). Excellenc1 (talk) 05:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 My gut reaction is that it would be unwise to do that. It would cause confusion if mixed with others current cantons. Lots of red links would be pointless, even if they were placed into a separate part of a template. Why not create one simple list article of former cantons (in a defined date range, I’d assume?) and add that to a ‘See also’ section for relevant articles? Nick Moyes (talk) 08:25, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes So can I add a list of former cantons in the pre-existing list of cantons (instead of a separate article)? Like I did in cantons of Eure. Excellenc1 (talk) 09:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Excellenc1 I don't think that would a problem. But at Cantons of the Eure department, I don't see any source that would allow me to Verify your list of former cantons. As many are redlinks, I think some link to show which they were would be valuable. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Revisions for VERYWELL article

Hello,

I tried to correct the the infobox link on the Verywell article and was blocked. I checked the history of the spam issue and I see it is four years old and no longer relevant. The spamming user accounts were all disabled. The URL on the infobox forwards to a different domain and I wanted to update it to reflect the correct one. Any advice? Emarket 12:20, 27 May 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emercado2020 (talk • contribs)

hi Emercado2020 and welcome to the teahouse! Verywell links are currently blacklisted for use in Wikipedia due to persistent abuse in I'd assume elsewhere in the wiki (plus besides, since you're not seeing those links, it could be that the blacklist is doing a good job of keeping those links out when it's used as spam). I'd advise you to take it over to the whitelist noticeboard so it can be whitelisted for use in that article. happy editing! 💜 (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.)  melecie  talk - 12:29, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Emercado2020. I'm a bit concerned because I notice that all your contributions to date have focused around Dotdash Meredith and its brands, and your username may indicate a marketing connection. You should be aware that editing with a conflict of interest is subject to certain restrictions and requirements - see WP:COI. 97.113.167.129 (talk) 12:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Apologies for missing the disclosure. I've updated my profile to be transparent. I believe talking here about the edit complies with COI requirements. Is there any reason why the edit I proposed should not be made? Emercado2020 (talk) 12:56, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Emercado2020 - I have transferred the second version from your Talkpage to Talk:Verywell - the first version was correct, the second was correct for the article.--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 13:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Emercado2020, asking for help here is perfectly fine, but if there are edits to specific articles you want to make, you should make edit requests on the talk pages (see WP:EDITREQUEST). You should not generally be editing them yourself if a COI applies. See melecie's answer above for instructions on having the link whitelisted for use. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Question about the "Draft"

Good evening,

I have just created an article on the french economist Gaël Giraud but there is the draft, and I don't understand what I did wrong.

Somebody helps to find the issues ?

Draft:Gaël Giraud here the article.

More over, i can't anymore edit the code.

Ty for the answer.

PS : Sorry for my english, i'm french. Mathieu Royans (talk) 22:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

The Draft has not yet been submitted for review. When you are ready please press the blue Submit the Draft for review! button. However, it is unlikely to be accepted at present as it is unclear what the subject is notable for. He is a civil servant, a priest and a mathematician. None of these alone makes him notable so we need to know what it is about him that makes him notable and desereving of a Wikipedia article. I hope that that helps.  Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   23:08, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Mathieu Royans, and welcome to the Teahouse! I'm not certain what issues you're talking about – the draft is there and you should be able to edit it. Velella gave you good advice; you should make sure the draft explains why he is notable by Wikipedia's standards before you turn it in. This guideline explains it more specifically. Happy editing! Perfect4th (talk) 23:32, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mathieu Royans. Is the draft you're working on a translation of the French Wikipedia article about fr:Gaël Giraud? If it is, then you probably should take a close look at WP:TRANSLATE since the information it contains applies to your draft. It's OK to translate articles found on other language Wikipedias into English, but you need to make sure that the original article is properly being attributed for Wikipedia's licensing purposes. The next thing you probably should look at are WP:OTHERLANGS and WP:BIO. Each language Wikipedia is part of the same family so to speak, but they also are separate projects with their own policies and guidelines. In many cases, these policies guidelines are the same or quite similar, but it many cases they're quite different. Since English Wikipedia is the largest of the various Wikipedias, it's policies and guidelines tend to be more rigorously enforced that perhaps is done of some other Wikipedias (e.g. French Wikipedia). So, in order for a draft about Giraud to be accepted on English Wikipedia, you will need to establish that he meets English Wikipedia's notability guidelines. You might be able to use the sources cited in the French Wikipedia article (even if they're written in French) to help establish his Wikipedia notability as long as they are considered to be WP:RELIABLESOURCES for English Wikipedia purposes, but any reliable sources giving Giraud WP:SIGCOV in English would also be helpful. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE : Thank you for your answers ! @Velella-@Perfect4th-@Marchjuly — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mathieu Royans (talk • contribs) 14:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Any way to remove slurs from edit summaries?

Hello everyone,

I spotted that there's been a recent vandalism problem at Goodfellas (presumably triggered by the news of Ray Liotta's death) that led to the page being semi-protected - while looking through the article's history, I noticed that some of the edits reverting the vandalism were from an IP user who included racial slurs in their edit summaries aimed at the vandals (e.g. this diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Goodfellas&oldid=1090062105). This is clearly unacceptable and in violation of Wikipedia's policies, but I'm not a regular editor and don't really know what, if anything, can be done about it. Is this something that can be removed? Is this something that community consensus says should be removed, even if doing so is technically possible, or should it be left up? (The IP in question seems to have already been banned for their racism, so hopefully the problem won't recur, at least). Any advice would be greatly appreciated - thanks in advance!

TrueAnonyman (talk) 14:09, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out @TrueAnonyman - only administrators can redact edit summaries, and I've now done just that. Sam Walton (talk) 14:13, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! TrueAnonyman (talk) 14:45, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict)The edit summaries in question have been revision deleted by Samwalton9. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 14:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

what the freak?

I joined Wikipedia to work on making a page for a studio I work for, I put hours of work into it, and I come back to find out its been entirely deleted and my profile is full of some 'admins' leaving denial messages which all have bios like 'yeah i stream on twitch in my free time'. who on earth is deciding what is worthy of being on wikipedia???? are you kidding me???? ItsAmmon (talk) 04:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@ItsAmmon: The draft in question was deleted as blatant promotion. Creating a new article is one of the hardest things one can do on Wikipedia even without the complicating factor of a conflict of interest. Attacking the deleting administrators for notifying you on your talk page - not "profile" - about the deletion isn't a good idea. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

'attacking' LMAO - and it wasn't blatant promotion. I quite literally based my article off one that is up as we speak and its exactly the same. We are just bigger. This is bullcrap. ItsAmmon (talk) 05:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@ItsAmmon: Wikipedia is never to be used for publicity purposes, and that's the reason behind both of your drafts, the one about yourself and about your employer. Someone realized that, proposed it for deletion, and an administrator agreed with the assessment and deleted it. You say you put "hours of work" into the studio draft, and yet it was just two sentences. Who's shoveling the bullcrap here?

That said, in my opinion the deletion was premature and you should have been given a chance to flesh it out more. @Athaenara: you deleted it; would you reconsider? Draft space, after all, is the only venue we offer for editors with a conflict of interest to write an article. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:34, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Anachronist: I'll do nothing to help anybody promote their employer. The new user may not know about Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion, s/he/it's free to try that. – Athaenara ✉ 05:57, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Athaenara: As you well know, WP:REFUND is not applicable to G11 deletions. That is why I pinged you in the first place, because the undeletion decision would be yours. As the article in question was only 2 sentences, however, ItsAmmon is free to try again. Many company articles get started by a COI editor. If the company is notable, the draft will eventually improve to the point where it's acceptable. This particular 2 sentence draft didn't get that chance, and the author's conflict of interest wasn't evident from the content. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:19, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

ItsAmmon, you tried to write an autobiography twice, and those drafts were deleted twice. I have been a Wikipedia editor since 2009, and I estimate that 99.9% of efforts to write an autobiography fail. Maybe more. You tried to write an article about the company you work for, and your draft was utterly mediocre, and completely failed to make the case that the company meets the Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) guideline. I agree with Anachronist that the deletion of the draft was premature. Perhaps it was a work in progress and you were right on the brink of demonstrating that the company is notable. But you ought to start from strength and the backbone of a good draft is references to reliable independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic of the proposed article. Your draft had none of that, so you were starting out from a position of weakness rather than strength. I understand that you are a game developer. You ought to be familiar with game theory. Wikipedia is not a game in the sense of video games or board games or gambling or athletic games. However, it is a game in the broadest sense of the term and it has a complex rule set and a variety of social norms that we call Policies and guidelines. The goal of the Wikipedia "game" is to build a free, well referenced, neutrally written encyclopedia in every significant language. If you charge into a game like a bull in a china shop, ignorant of most of the rules and insulting people who might otherwise be willing to help you, how successful do you think that you will be? Cullen328 (talk) 06:14, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

what the freak? No need to bowdlerize, ItsAmmon: if you want to ask "What the fuck?", go ahead and ask it. Just don't expect to get the hospitable responses for which the "teahouse" is justly famous. In contrast, politeness and specificity are appreciated; perhaps "How was my draft 'unambiguous advertising or promotion'?" ¶ who on earth is deciding what is worthy of being on wikipedia???? Large numbers of editors (among whom adults, males, the middle class, US residents and whites are somewhat overrepresented) have laboriously reached a set of criteria. ¶ are you kidding me???? No we are not. -- Hoary (talk) 09:12, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

An Admin (not the Admin who Speedy deleted your attempts at autobio and the company your work for) did you the courtesy of informing you what happened to your articles, and why. Insulting the messenger is never good strategy. David notMD (talk) 09:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

User:JalenFolf, who placed the notice, and who I assume ItsAmmon is referring to, is not an admin. casualdejekyll 12:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

However, they have been around for 15 years. Their judgment is likely quite sound. casualdejekyll 12:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the latest draft was a very clear autobiographical self promotion of a subject that under Wikipedia's standards is not notable. Jalen Folf (talk) 21:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

• I quite literally based my article off one that is up as we speak and its exactly the same. - ItsAmmon, care to tell us which article? We might want to delete it. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Creating new page- WeatherSTEM- Need help editing to get approval

I submitted an article for WeatherSTEM, it keeps getting rejected. I edited it to add resources, and changed the wording, I even used other similar pages on Wiki as a guide for how to word the article. How to I make the correct edits needed to get this approved? Is there someone I can hire to publish this for me if I send them the info? Weathergeekman (talk) 14:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, Weathergeekman Writing acceptable articles is a tough challenge and the usual problem for new editors are, first, to show that the topic is notable according to English Wikipedia's strict standards. This is done by citing sources that are reliable and WP:INDEPENDENT of the subject. You only properly cited three sources, of which two are weatherstem's own website, which doesn't demonstrate independence, and the third is to the top level of IBM's website, which doesn't allow readers to verify the stated fact and won't be useful for notability unless IBM has discussed their partner in some detail. You have a slew of other "sources" as bare URL, which are not linked to any of the text, so no-one can tell which source backs up which statement and judge whether any adds to the notability. At minimum, you need to convert the best ones using {{cite web}} and ditch the rest. In drafts, the accepting editors will be looking for quality, not quantity. I don't know why you would want to pay anyone to create this article unless you are part of the WeatherSTEm organisation's PR department and if so you need to carefully read WP:COI and WP:PAID for some mandatory things you need to do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:WeatherSTEM

(edit conflict) Hello, Weathergeekman, and welcome to the Teahouse! Mike Turnbull gave you good advice about your draft. I noticed you said on your talk page I am trying to find our article so that I can edit and review it and I am trying to get WeatherSTEM Wiki verified. How do I go about this?. Are you employed by WeatherSTEM? If you are associated with the company in any way, then you need to disclose that before you continue editing the page. You can follow the practices detailed at Wikipedia's conflict of interest guideline; the section about paid editing can be found here. Perfect4th (talk) 15:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

• Weathergeekman Hello and welcome. Be wary in using other articles as a guide, unless they are classified as good articles. If the articles you are using as a guide are problematic, anything you write will have the same problems. 331dot (talk) 15:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Maintenance Tag Issues: How to remove when issues dealt with

Grass Valley (company)

I'm working on cleaning up this page (my user page has a paid disclosure statement).

There are three maintenance items:

• This article needs additional citations for verification. (May 2020)

I'm working on all of these to update all at the same time where "citation needed" appears.

• This article's tone or style may not reflect the encyclopedic tone used on Wikipedia. (May 2020)

I have removed a section that looked to be "marketing speak" just leaving chronological facts. However, the maintenance item still is listed and I can't figure out (also see below, same issue I believe) where these are flagged in the edit page. Have I missed something? I know it's not automatically removed from reading the instructions, but can't find anything in the edit page that relates to this and the following item.

• This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. (May 2020)

I believe this is the same section as flagged above, so same issue. Reply in visual editor please. Silbergleid (talk) 21:11, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Silbergleid - Thank you for adding a paid disclosure statement on your user page. I added one for you on Talk:Grass Valley (company). Since you have a conflict of interest, you should not be editing the article directly. Instead, you may post questions and suggestions on the article's talk page with the {{request edit}} template, or use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:38, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Silbergleid - Also, I'm not sure why you requested a reply with the VisualEditor. What difference does it make whether I use the VisualEditor or the source editor or the new reply tool? GoingBatty (talk) 02:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

The instructions said to request mobile or visual editor, I had to pick one (or thought I did). With regards to the edits of the Grass Valley page, all of the missing citations relate to very old historical events. While I have a conflict, I also have access to analog (paper, film) archives that can help point me to third-party citations such as books that have never been digitized or magazines that are not available online either. My feeling is that I would rather clean those up since I can do the research needed. No one outside the company has access.

Thanks for adding the disclosure. The "paid" instructions said to place it in one of three areas, so I did just that. Silbergleid (talk) 13:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh, can you actually answer my original question? Silbergleid (talk) 13:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Silbergleid You are asked to pick an editor to use; the editor others use does not matter in that regard. You received an answer to your question- you should avoid editing the article directly. Independent editors that monitor the use of those tags will eventually evaluate the article to see if the issues raised have been addressed. 331dot (talk) 13:29, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks for your help. Silbergleid (talk) 13:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Silbergleid, the "very old historical events" are actually quite important, since they seem to be what the notability of this company is primarily based on - see the discussion at the bottom of the talk page. Most of what the history section talks about right now is, from Wikipedia's viewpoint, not very important at all. Apparently the company has an "illustrious history", according to an editor from long ago; if you have access to sources which could inform us of that history, they would be very useful! 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Silbergleid, I see you've continued editing the article. I think I should remind you of what GoingBatty said above - Since you have a conflict of interest, you should not be editing the article directly. Instead, you may post questions and suggestions on the article's talk page with the {{request edit}} template, or use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:29, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Confused about AFD

Hello, I’m a COI editor for Fitness Blender, which was recently reviewed and accepted and moved into article space. Then nominated at AFD shortly after. I’ve read the WP:GNG guidelines thoroughly and I’m a bit perplexed that this article was nominated for deletion. Here’s WP:SIGCOV by independent reporters in this Wall Street Journal article about the company, this Seattle Times article about the company, a more than passing mention in the New York Times, this Insider article about the company, this KING5 article about the company, this Seattle Met article about the company, this Paste Magazine article about the company, among others. These are not press releases. I understand that people don’t like companies using Wikipedia for promotion, but I feel like these sources are being overlooked in this discussion. The nominator thinks because some of these have quotes from the founders, that they are interviews, and thus should not count. But these are not Q&As and nothing I can see in WP:INTERVIEW states that an article with quotes from the subject throughout cannot be used for WP:GNG. The article was kept thin to avoid being promotional, but I do think the company is notable given the sources linked above. Am I missing something about notability guidelines? Just looking for some help or guidance. Thanks. ButtercupBaleen (talk) 16:31, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

ButtercupBaleen, we need independent sources to establish that the subject is notable. A journalist reporting what a founder of the business has said about it does not qualify as an independent source. WP:INTERVIEW states "the mere fact that a person has been interviewed does not automatically mean that interviewee qualifies for a separate, stand-alone article". That also goes for the interviewee's business. Maproom (talk) 18:17, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Prohibition on using citation templates in existing article

I have been advised, when editing an existing article which consistently avoids the use of citation templates, that I should not change a citation I'm modifying to use a citation template without first oobtaining consensus. Is that really the case?

To be clear, I'm not offering to go through the article and change all the citations to templates, but it seems to me that using a template offers important advantages. I would likely avoid fixing citations if I couldn't use a template. FWIW, I do all my Wiki edits with the "traditional" editor rather than the visual editor. Fabrickator (talk) 17:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Fabrickator, welcome to the Teahouse. This page should contain the answer for you Zindor (talk) 17:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

See WP:CITEVAR. The style should be kept consistent within an article. However, if the existing citations are incomplete, they do not "count" as establishing a referencing style for the article. MB 17:41, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

And let's not overlook note 3. Then again, citing rules can be characterized as a form of intellectual lazines, but please don't be offended. Fabrickator (talk) 18:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

date in signature

Can someone please explain why my signature is showing 25 May 2022? 73.167.238.120 (talk) 02:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Because the dates/times in all signatures are displayed in UTC, regardless of the time zone where you actually are. GoingBatty (talk) 02:36, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Oh, that is very confusing. What if I was in another country besides the USA? What would the date be then? 73.167.238.120 (talk) 02:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

The same, because UTC does not change based on what country you are in. RudolfRed (talk) 02:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. No, it is not confusing at all when you understand the concept of time zones. Planet Earth has 24 of them, and Wikipedia, as a worldwide project, needed to pick one time zone to coordinate its record keeping around the planet. UTC is the time in London, which is, going back centuries, the most important city of the English speaking world. As a Californian, I accept that and am well aware that the new day starts in London late afternoon or early evening from my Pacific Standard timezone. Greenwich Mean Time is the historical concept. UTC is widely used by projects that operate in many countries, even if English is not the main language. Cullen328 (talk) 05:20, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Just to point out that London is currently on British Summer Time (UTC +1 hour), so it is currently 09:25 here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:25, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, I am understanding now, but it took me awhile and there is no harm being confused. Thank you, though, for the explanation! 73.167.238.120 (talk) 14:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

to put it very concisely: UTC is "co-ordinated universal time". It does not belong to any country nor to any poles. Also, UTC does not have daylight saving mode, so it never changes and remains the same throughout the year. So, it can act neutrally (not belonging to any country) — nobody gets disappointed, and it is a good "fixed" point of reference for other countries/time zones (as UTC is same all the year). —usernamekiran (talk) 19:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

NFTi Emporium - page deletion message removal

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

Hello, our company name is NFTi Emporium and we recently put our page in wikipedia.

However after a short period of time it was found out that is was proposed for a deletion,

we were very confused why it was, later we found out if was by the person @Zippybonzo

We contacted with this user what the issues were, then the user stated that the issues were

the following

- There was a source that does not count as a source, which is a twitter link.

- There was no user declaration made that who wrote this wikipedia page is getting

  paid by the company NFTi Emporium. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Paid-contribution_disclosure

In response the twitter source has been deleted.

And the user who wrote that is Ekcs27 the disclosure has been made.

So everything has been sorted out accordingly.

We now ask can the deletion message on the page now been removed after appropriate actions have

been taken and things have been amended.

Thank you Ekcs27 (talk) 17:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Ekcs27, and welcome to the Teahouse! I took a quick look at the article, and I'm afraid that I must agree with what the editor has said when proposing the article for deletion. As the article stands now, it is written too much like an advert for the company, which is not in keeping with the policy WP:What Wikipedia is Not. The article would probably need a complete rewrite to correct this, and even then it might not be notable, hence why it was proposed for deletion. I would advise you to familiarise yourself with the deletion policy as well, in order to understand the proper procedures which will be taken. If you have any more questions or queries, please do feel free to post them here. Have a good day! HenryTemplo (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

What do you mean by "notable", we recently just put the wikipedia page. It may take some time for any page to be notable.

Additionally the only things what the issues were by the user stated were the following

- There was a source that does not count as a source, which is a twitter link.

- There was no user declaration made that who wrote this wikipedia page is getting

  paid by the company NFTi Emporium.

And these have been amended.

And the user after that does not seem to have any problems after that. Ekcs27 (talk) 18:31, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

If you haven't read the rules about notability, do so now, as it is crucial to understand them. Notability is defined slightly differently on Wikipedia, and any article's subject must be notable as defined by those rules, otherwise it is not suited to Wikipedia. Thanks! HenryTemplo (talk) 18:35, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Regarding "It may take some time for any page to be notable", please read WP:TOSOON, thanks. HenryTemplo (talk) 18:37, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ekcs27, you have removed the PROD - that's allowed, though the article may still be proposed for deletion. However, you also removed all the maintenance templates, which is not allowed. You have a declared COI, you should stop editing the article. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

What is the exact reason why the article shall get deleted ? which sentences and paragraphs are something that seems incorrect ? Ekcs27 (talk) 18:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Ekcs27, the article is largely unsourced and its notability is in doubt. You need to read WP:NORG. To be frank, you should never have attempted to bypass WP:AFC in the first place, since you are a paid editor. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:00, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Now at AfD: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/NFTi Emporium. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:19, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Ekcs27, it's unclear whether the article is meant to be about NFTi Emporium, or Kareem, or Kareem's artworks. If you want to create an article, decide what its subject is to be, find some independent sources on that subject, and then write a draft basing it on those sources. Maproom (talk) 18:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

It is meant to be regarding the company itself. But has a small part talking about its CEO. Ekcs27 (talk) 19:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Maproom It is meant to be regarding the company itself. But has a small part talking about its CEO. Ekcs27 (talk) 19:23, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Question about a regionally notable criminal case

Hello! I have a friend who was involved in criminal case back in 2016 that was regionally notable (covered by about 20 media outlets).

To make more of a long story short, the State's version of events was inaccurate and there was significant police misconduct that directly influenced the conviction. This didn't come out until after (the DA withheld evidence), and he tried to appeal, and though he was told he had grounds to appeal, it would only have set him back to square one, not thrown the case out, as it should have. His family, at that point, had endured quite a bit already, so another two years of it seemed cruel and he elected not to. Sadly, our system is a business that's predicated on the irrational pursuit of convictions rather than the objective pursuit of the truth. This has harmed countless people and their families over the years.

Without getting into a ton of detail in this question, he has extensive evidence that the State's version was inaccurate, even a recent report from a private investigator. He also approached the news outlets who covered the case, and, to date, 15 have removed their content after seeing the evidence of what actually did and didn't occur, including a few larger ones. In fact, in response partly due to his case, a larger one recently debuted an initiative where they allow people the opportunity to have outdated articles removed to help them in moving on with their lives—so, some good is coming from his situation.

Why I'm reaching out on his behalf is there are a handful of news outlets remaining that are being stubborn and mean. He’s only ever reached out politely and respectfully, but they refuse to look at the evidence he has, which is an extreme breach of the journalistic code of ethics. And that's why it got me thinking about Wikipedia. His case was an historical event, and Wikipedia would be a great way to get the truth out there, especially since Wikipedia ranks high in search engines. It would be a way for him to counteract the fake news, and it would be a massive blessing and help to his family as the fake news has been highly damaging socially, economically, and personally.

The purpose of the Wikipedia page would simply be to display the truth and that the State's version is false and has always been false. So, if a potential employer, or, say, his child's parents were to stumble upon his name online, they would at least have some correct information to counteract the false stuff. Please let me know how to get started on this if It’s even possible. Thanks so much!

-Seizetheday44 Seizetheday44 (talk) 17:32, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

• child's friend's parents Seizetheday44 (talk) 17:36, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

You have a very compelling story to tell... but until it gets significant media coverage, Wikipedia is not the place to tell it.Fabrickator (talk) 17:44, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I see. Thanks for responding! It was significant in the midwestern region, but you're saying it would had to have gotten national coverage? Seizetheday44 (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seizetheday44: Welcome to the Teahouse. It would need to be reported by reliable sources with significant coverage to demonstrate that it meets Wikipedia's definition of notability for it to be included. The encyclopedia is not a place to right great wrongs; if it is accepted by Wikipedia, it would have to be reported in a neutral manner. Primary sources have very limited uses on here, and secondary ones are vastly preferred over them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:53, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! That's a very informative response and super helpful. Maybe it would be best to post the relevant information on a personal website instead.  Seizetheday44 (talk) 17:57, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello Seizetheday44. So glad you brought your question to the Teahouse. In addition to the great information @Tenryuu provided above you may want to read this. It will give you some pointers on how you may proceed with writing an article should you decide there is enough coverage in reliable sources to continue. Good luck! --ARoseWolf 18:02, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf @Fabrickator@TenryuuThank you, everyone!!! Seizetheday44 (talk) 18:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for responding! It was significant in the midwestern region, but you're saying it would had to have gotten national coverage? Seizetheday44 (talk) 18:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Seizetheday44, That I am aware of, there is no threshold regarding local, regional, national or international media attention. There is only the requirement of it receiving significant coverage in reliable independent sources, secondary preferred. One can make the deduction that the more local the media coverage is the more involved and less independent it will be, either positive or negative. SO that is why you will see the national and international media sources used more but there is no written rule specifying this and local/regional media can be independent and reliable. --ARoseWolf 18:11, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolfOhhh, I see. That makes sense. Very interesting. That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for clarifying that! But the proof involved would have to be confirmed by a secondary source and published somewhere online first, correct? Seizetheday44 (talk) 18:20, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seizetheday44: Sources don't need to be online; it's fine if they're not. What matters is that they're independent of the parties involved and reliable. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:46, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@TenryuuGot it. So, a private investigator would constitute an independent source, if I'm understanding that correctly. I was thinking relevant screenshots could be included of her report (and she's a female private investigator, which is awesome and fits in with the push for more female Wikipedia contributors). Seizetheday44 (talk) 18:59, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seizetheday44: They wouldn't, unless the findings were published to meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy; even then, that would be a primary source at best. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:01, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Gotcha. I just thought she would constitute a secondary source because the primary source would be the news articles, and her investigation and subsequent correct information that she uncovered from her investigation would be secondary to the primary source. Seizetheday44 (talk) 19:10, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Seizetheday44, Don't equate primary and secondary with independent and non-independent or with reliability. They may or may not be connected in each case but that is dependent upon the source. A primary source simply means it's written by someone close to or directly involved with an event. --ARoseWolf 19:15, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf Got it, thank you. Thanks for explaining that. Seizetheday44 (talk) 19:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

What I am saying is that I think the investigator could reasonably be considered secondary but not independent as one would hope they didn't only interview their paying client. Then again, Tenryuu may be correct that the investigator would be considered Primary because of their proximity to the event or those involved in the event. --ARoseWolf 19:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf I see what you're saying, and it is a bit confusing, in all honesty, haha. In this instance, she interviewed everyone involved and combed through all the available documents and evidence, and then referenced what she discovered against the prevailing State/Media narratives and found those to be inaccurate. So, her proximity to those involved in the event was necessary for her to do her job, so I don't think creates a conflict of interest in that regard, but I could be wrong. I do think that the righting of the wrongs that someone mentioned might be pertinent, though, because ultimately, that would kind of be what it is. Seizetheday44 (talk) 19:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf Which, by the way, her report contains actual statements from those involved that contradict what was published originally, and screenshots of those would be included in the entry. So, I guess, there wouldn't need to be cited sources, because the sources would be right there to read directly. Seizetheday44 (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seizetheday44, no, those would be primary sources, and not something we could use. A Wikipedia article doesn't present evidence and build a case - it summarizes the reports of reliable sources on cases others have built. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:16, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf I see what you're saying, but I guess I was thinking that the initial media coverage would be considered the "primary source." Seizetheday44 (talk) 20:21, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

(I'm not ARoseWolf - at least I don't think so - just a random IP.) You might want to read WP:PRIMARY to get a better idea of what we mean by primary, secondary, and tertiary sources. The initial media coverage was earlier in time, perhaps, but still secondary. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:24, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 I definitely understand that--it just seems kind of silly that the people with first-hand knowledge would be given less precedence as a primary source, than a news outlet would as a secondary source. I would think that, if the truth is proven and corroborated, which it is, then that should take precedence over something the media published, who did not do their due diligence in thoroughly investigating. Do you see what I'm saying? I'm not sure if I'm articulating what I'm trying to say correctly, haha, I apologize if I didn't. Seizetheday44 (talk) 20:31, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I understand, and it's an objection many people raise. But in the end, Wikipedia's purpose - as it stands now, who knows where it will stand next year, or a decade from now - is "to be verifiably wrong rather than unverifiably right." 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:36, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Seizetheday44, the fact that she's a paid (I assume) investigator for one of the parties involved would create a bit of a conflict of interest. If an unpaid and unconnected news organization picks up the story and prints it, then maybe the whole thing - criminal case, investigation, retractions, etc. - could wind up as Wiki-notable event. I assume you don't want to have an article that only covers the initial conviction, that wouldn't help your friend at all. Good luck carpe dieming! 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 @ARoseWolf Haha, thanks! And she was, yes, but part of what she uncovered was old evidence that had been withheld by prosecutors that also contradicted the prevailing narrative, which she included. So, I was just thinking that the fact that she was paid might be immaterial because the proof/evidence speaks for itself regarding showing the truth against what the State and media initially presented. So, the authoritative source in in this instance isn't necessarily the PI, but the truth itself. She was just the means by which that was excavated, if you will. Seizetheday44 (talk) 20:20, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately: WP:TRUTH. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:22, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 Gotcha. Well, the irony in it all is the reason the issue began in the first place is because the media (and State officials) were not reliable sources, haha, although the public would consider them to be. So, essentially, another news outlet would have to publish a new story in order for that to be considered a reliable source? I think I understood that correctly--it's all somewhat confusing for a newbie, haha. Seizetheday44 (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Part of the essay I linked above reads as follows:

"Sometimes we know for sure that the reliable sources are in error, but we cannot find replacement sources that are correct. As Douglas Adams wrote of The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, 'Where it is inaccurate it is at least definitively inaccurate. In cases of major discrepancy it's always reality that's got it wrong.'"

So... yeah. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 Wow, that's very interesting. This is a super clear explanation--I appreciate it. I guess, yeah, that's a tough thing to address because there does feel like a moral component should be evident, but it does make sense. You're right, the procedures could change, but if the objective is currently to be verifiably wrong as opposed to unverifiably right, then yeah, there's nothing that can be done. I would probably contend as to the validity of the evidence presented in juxtaposition to the "reliable" sources, but again, as you pointed out, the way the rubric for reliable sources is structured currently on Wikipedia, those that are, in fact unreliable in this instance, would be considered reliable (ultimately, any "source" is just a person sitting at a computer who has their own bias whether they admit it or not, haha). And I get that 100%. I know that none of this sort of thing is easy to navigate, so I appreciate you (and everyone who replied) doing your best to try and help me understand! Thank you! Seizetheday44 (talk) 20:45, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Editing the article name or changing the article name

Hi, i've been trying to find out how to edit the article name Kamina Johnson-Smith but I can't seem to locate that option. I would like to remove the hyphen from the individual's name. Krystal Mac (talk) 20:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Done - you have to "move" the article - it's on the3 top tab. but see WP:MOVE. Johnbod (talk) 20:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Krystal Mac: If it's a controversial move, you might want to discuss this on the talkpage (for example with the creator of the article), but that doesn't seem to be the case here. YonasJH (talk) 21:19, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Local notes with nested references

I somewhat frequently have a bit of an issue where I would like to have a wikitable with some notes in it. I can use Template:efn and Template:notelist, but notelist collects all notes that occur before it in the page, which is sometimes undesirable. It even seems to ignore reference groups. As an example

Lorem ipsum{{efn|dolor sit amit{{refn|{{harvcoltxt|Syed|1998|pages=19-20}}}}}}

== Table ==
{| class = "wikitable"
! consectetur adipiscing elit{{efn|group="table"|sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Syed|1998|pages=48-49}}</ref>}}
|}
{{notelist|group="table"}}

== Notes ==
{{notelist}}

== References ==
{{reflist}}

This above puts both notes in the first notelist, but I want only notes in the table group to be put in that notelist. The other thing I've tried is to use the references html.

Lorem ipsum{{efn|dolor sit amit}}

== Table ==
{| class = "wikitable"
! consectetur adipiscing elit<ref name="note2" group="table"/>
|}
<references group="table">
<ref name="note2" group="table">sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua{{refn|{{harvcoltxt|Syed|1998|pages=48-49}}}}</ref>
|}
</references>

== Notes ==
{{notelist}}

== References ==
{{reflist}}

This fixes the above problem, but introduces some new ones. The citation disappears and the group forces the note to be called "table 1", which I'd like for it to not be. I've tried a few more minor variations on the above two, but I've not been able to get the desired outcome.

What way is there to do this? AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 17:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@AquitaneHungerForce I'm just going to focus on the efn mark-up example here, the issues are similar in the second one.

The "Group" parameter has to be one of the following predefined groups, lower-alpha upper-alpha lower-roman upper-roman lower-greek or note, which have various forms of styling. Any other value is treated as part of the default group (lower-alpha).

As stated in the template documentation, you must not use quote marks around parameters when using {{notelist}} and {{efn}}, the templates add them automatically when needed.

Hope this helps, 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

This doesn't really help. It just means I can't use groups to solve the issue, which already seemed evident. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 18:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

AquitaneHungerForce Doesn't this do what you want, or have I misunderstood the question? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Lorem ipsum{{efn|dolor sit amit{{refn|{{harvcoltxt|Syed|1998|pages=19-20}}}}}}

== Table ==
{| class = "wikitable"
! consectetur adipiscing elit{{efn|group=upper-alpha|sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Syed|1998|pages=48-49}}</ref>}}
|}
{{notelist|group=upper-alpha}}

== Notes ==
{{notelist}}

== References ==
{{reflist}}

It messes with the formatting of the notes, which is something I'd like to avoid. I guess it's works as a stop gap. But I'm really looking for a principled solution that doesn't cause weirdness in the final result. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 19:19, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@AquitaneHungerForce What do you mean by "messes with the formatting"? It seems to display OK for me. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Well it changes the references to render with latin caps. So when you have a couple of ref groups you end up having to label them based on technical concerns rather than in a way that's natural for the reader. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 19:45, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@AquitaneHungerForce The different styles of numbering are an intentional feature of the notes templates, so that they are visually distinct and easy to seperate from references which are denoted by numbers. If you want to have the notes use numbers like the references then you can use {{Refn}} instead, which does accept arbitrary group names. Try the following:

Lorem ipsum{{refn|group=notes|dolor sit amit{{refn|{{harvcoltxt|Syed|1998|pages=19-20}}}}}}

== Table ==
{| class = "wikitable"
! consectetur adipiscing elit{{refn|group=table|sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua<ref>{{harvcoltxt|Syed|1998|pages=48-49}}</ref>}}
|}
{{reflist|group=table}}

== Notes ==
{{reflist|group=notes}}

== References ==
{{reflist}}

192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:52, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Yeah exactly. I'd like to use the styles with intention. e.g. I'd like to use lowercase leters for the notes. But since that formatting is tied to ref groups I'm forced to use random formatting to avoid collisions between the groups. AquitaneHungerForce (talk) 20:03, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@AquitaneHungerForce You are supposed to be able to set the numbering scheme in a {{reflist}} template using the |liststyle parameter, but it seems to have gotten broken in a template update a few months back. I've just left the admin who did the template edits a message. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 21:33, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

trying to get photo file to fit in side of userbox

I'm trying to get a photo to fit inside

R MThis user has had the best two years

I like

This user is interested in political science.

So I tried editing the the source like this to make my own.

{{userbox|border-c=black|border-s={{{border-s|1}}} |id=[[File:LDS name tags.jpg|LDS_name_tags size 8]] |id-c=black|id-fc={{{id-fc|white}}} |id-s={{{5|{{{id-s|14}}}}}}|info=This user has had the best '''[[Missionary_%28LDS_Church%29|two years]]''' |info-c=white|info-fc={{{info-fc|black}}} |info-s={{{info-s|8}}}}}<noinclude></noinclude>

And it's not working the way I'd hoped. What am I missing here?

Thanks! Jmjosh90 (talk) 23:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

hi Jmjosh90 and welcome to the teahouse! try this:

{{userbox|border-c=black|border-s={{{border-s|1}}} |id=[[File:LDS name tags.jpg|LDS_name_tags size 8|x48px]] |id-c=black|id-fc={{{id-fc|white}}} |id-s={{{5|{{{id-s|14}}}}}}|info=This user has had the best '''[[Missionary_%28LDS_Church%29|two years]]''' |info-c=white|info-fc={{{info-fc|black}}} |info-s={{{info-s|8}}}}}

This user has had the best two years

you were just missing a cap in the image to prevent it from expanding into full size. I've added x48px to prevent it from expanding too much, instead having a height of 48px. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much!

Jmjosh90 (talk) 00:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Copyright stuff

Hello! I upload images, but I’m not sure how to not list them as my own/I can’t find a button that says I can list the owner of the image. Can someone help me? Thanks! NonPopularPerson (talk) 21:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

NonPopularPerson, you can't donate the copyright of an image to Wikipedia unless it's yours to donate. The owner of the copyright can, either by creating an account at Wikimedia Commons and uploading it there, or (more difficult) by doing some tedious form-filling. Maproom (talk) 22:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, NonPopularPerson, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that copyright is quite complicated. In most cases, you may upload images only if you own the copyright (and can license it on the fly) or if they are already free for use - either they are in the public domain (usually because they are very old), or because the copyright owner has explicitly licensed them in a suitable way. It's not enough to list the owner of the image, or for the owner to give permission to use them on Wikipedia: the owner must explicitly release the image under a licence such as CC-BY-SA, which will allow anybody to alter or reuse the image for any purpose as long as they attribute.

Most images you find on the internet have not been licensed in that way, and so you cannot use them unless you contact the owner and they agree to license them (which they would do either by uploading them themselves, or by mailing according to donating copyright materials). ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@NonPopularPerson - The Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard allows you to upload a non-free file (such as a book cover or CD cover), and states "Please ensure you understand copyright and the image use policy before proceeding." If you let us know what image you want to upload, we can provide additional suggestions. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

@NonPopularPerson Some info about copyright was given to you in late 2020 on your talk page. There is more on this Teahouse page, above, from a couple of days ago (it might get moved to archive). Those notes were maybe not completely explicit, so maybe that info wasn't clear to you... I hope the blue links on copyright and image use policy that GoingBatty left you (click on those, please, and study them) will make this area clearer. Copyright is complex, but, to restate: in general, you cannot upload and use images that you find on other web pages, in Wikipedia. Hope this helps. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 02:26, 25 May 2022 (UTC)

Me again, I tried to submit a photo of the same image, this time understanding copyright and filling out the form. Is there a way that I can publish the image on Draft:CodeSpark without having to make the system make it a draft? NonPopularPerson (talk) 20:02, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@NonPopularPerson Did you understand that you cannot submit images that you do not own the copyright to? Or are you trying to follow the fair use guidelines? It's not clear to me that you have understood all of this ... although others are more knowledgeable about copyright than I am. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:30, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Will my article be meaningful

I recently purchased Woven Jacquard Silk Portrait panel of George Washington at a charity auction. The panel has documented estate provenance. The panel was made in Lyon, France in 1856. From what I've learned on line, there is one in the Smithsonian and one at the MET. There are no articles in Wikipedia on this panel. I don't know how many were produced in France, or how it got to America (or when). It would be really cool to create a wikipedia arctic on this. What do you think? DanJill (talk) 00:47, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @DanJill and welcome to wikipedia! first of all, you would need to check over the notability guidelines to see if the article would be meaningful. if it does, if it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, then you're likely good to go (although if there are any existing articles where this info can be added instead, add it there instead, since making an article is hard). check out Your first article to write an article. if it doesn't, then stop: the article won't be accepted. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, DanJill. Your first task is to determine whether or not the weaving is notable. The short definition in that General Notability Guideline is 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. So, assemble a list of reliable sources that devote significant coverage to the weaving. If you can find three to five of those sources, then you can start writing an article draft. Without such coverage, it is not possible to write an acceptable article. In addition, there is the issue of your Conflict of interest as an owner of one of these weavings. If you manage to produce a compehensive article about this weaving, it could plausibly increase the value of your weaving. You need to openly disclose your conflict of interest (as you have commendably done here), and defer to experienced editors who do not have a COI. Cullen328 (talk) 01:14, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, DanJill, if you come to the conclusion that a whole article on your portrait isn't possible, you are still in the fortunate position of being able to photograph it, and offer the photo for use in other articles as appropriate. It might be that a good photo of this portrait would be interesting at Jacquard machine, which currently has the famous portrait of Jacquard himself, and a bit of abstract William Morris, but otherwise no example of the product. Getting good images is a real problem for Wikipedia because the copyright arrangements here are so generous to the reader, meaning that the vast majority of images on internet are not appropriately covered and can't be used. You own the rights to your own photos! Elemimele (talk) 05:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@DanJill, I've never heard of Jaquard silk, but assume it's related to Jacquard machine. Perhaps you should consider an article about "Jacquard loom art" or something like that, it may be easier than showing WP:GNG for a specific piece. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 06:55, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@DanJill Personally, I would have it appraised to see if it's worth millions of dollars (or hundreds of thousands). Then I would decide whether to insure it, perhaps sell it, lend it to a museum, etc. Then, maybe, draft an article about it... (You might already be doing all of this...) 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:45, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Ox, Oxen and disambiguation page

The article entitled "Ox" does not list a species. This is a significant oversight.

Also, the "Ox" disambiguation page does not refer to the animal.

I am not an expert in bovines. While I do have skill in editing, I have no knowledge of the Wikipedia system. Thus, I am reporting this here with the hope that someone who has both skills can make the necessary updates to these articles. 173.243.189.124 (talk) 09:21, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

The article Ox conspicuously points to the article Cattle, which explains. The "Ox" disambiguation page has a conspicuous link to Ox. So your opinion and mine differ: in mine, no such change is needed. You're free to ask on Talk:Ox for this or that alteration; perhaps somebody there will agree with you that it's needed. -- Hoary (talk) 09:50, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

If Ox is a male bovine, it can't list a species, can it? An ox can be a Bos grunniens or a Bison bison, etc. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Sandbox

Excuse my not-perfect language. I'm a foreigner. How to make a sandbox under my user name when I don't want to have a discriminating "own" user page? Jari Rauma (talk) 08:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Just click on "Sandbox" at the top of any Wikipedia page and then edit it and publish it to create it. Whether you have a user page is irrelevant. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Just checked: There is no word for "Sandbox" (Hiekkalaatikko in Finnish) in Finnish Wikipedia at the top of article page or at the top of the article's history page or at the top user's start page or at the top of the user's talk page. Jari Rauma (talk) 08:53, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Simply click on fi:Käyttäjä:Jari Rauma/hiekkalaatikko, edit it, and save it, Jari Rauma. Though I've no idea why you're asking about the matter here rather than in fi:WP. -- Hoary (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello Jan. On English Wikipedia, you can have as many user sandboxes as you like, having any names you like, such as User:Jan Rauma/My first sandbox or User:Jan Rauma/some topic I want to write an article on. Also for convenience there is an automatic link to the one called User:Jan Rauma/sandbox (if it exists) at the top of every screen. I would guess it would be similar on su-wiki, but I don't know. ColinFine (talk) 10:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

It worked! Thank you very much. Why am I asking here? Because I have asked 2 times in the Finnish Wikipedia without getting an answer yet. Jari Rauma (talk) 10:09, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hmmm

how do you replace the images in a table? Edward Zeke Rivera (talk) 10:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Edward, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you'll need to be more explicit if you want a useful answer, because with what you have said so far, my answer is "the same way as you replace images anywhere else" - see Help:Pictures. Note that unless the images you want to use are already in Wikimedia Commons, you'll need to upload them, and that gets you into the thorny area of copyright. ColinFine (talk) 10:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine WE ARE BORG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:16, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Edward Zeke Rivera, Welcome! Can you give us an example? And do you want to replace the images with images correctly uploaded on Wikimedia Commons, or random pics you found online, which is probably a no-no? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Is this website reliable?

Hamariweb.com. I found many Wikipedia articles cited this site and the site is very much popular and minimum 10 years old. Actually, I want to use this site for refference that's why I am asking that is this site reliable or not? Thanks Grabup (talk) 09:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't know, Grabup. My guess is that most people here won't know either. The place to ask is Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. -- Hoary (talk) 10:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree with what Hoary says. Searching the archives of that noticeboard, nobody seems to have asked about it before. The question is, is it a site with an editorial policy of checking facts, or does it just reproduce anything that comes its way? ColinFine (talk) 10:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary,@ColinFine. Thanks for the answers. I asked this question there in Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard. Grabup (talk) 10:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Linked data project

Hi I am in my first MSc year in GIS. I am in a project linking data from OSM and Wikipedia. I have to link osm residential construction sites to their Wikipedia page. To do so I have used a tool to transform OSM data into RDF so that I can link to wikidata and eventually wikipedia. I uploaded a very simple and basic article about Kruisvaartkade Draft:Kruisvaartkade. Is it possible to generate a wikidata page from this when it is still draft? LefterisKaltsas (talk) 10:40, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I can't see why you'd need a novel wikidata page when many already exist, also there's little chance of that draft ever becoming an article. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Zindor (talk) 10:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Citations

I'm a new editor (Just started May 27th), and I don't understand how to do the citation links at the end. Please help. Macegav4774 (talk) 01:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Correction: May 26th Macegav4774 (talk) 01:12, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Macegav4774 and welcome to the Teahouse! please see Referencing for beginners. you can use various templates such as {{cite web}} and {{cite news}} for this situation, and have them inside the <ref> </ref> tags. additionally, I'd advise you to read Reliable sources to see which can count as a reliable source for your citations. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

After using a template inside the <ref> </ref> tags, you only need to put "{{reflist}}" in the References section at the end and the references autopopulate. RandomBlobby (talk) 02:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Macegav4774 (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

"Self-advertising" in user page

Hey, I recently created my own user page User:Rhinocesus - Wikipedia in which I briefly mention my twitter page (because contacting me via twitter will probably give a faster response then my talk page). Is this allowed? Rhinocesus (talk) 12:45, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Rhinocesus and welcome to the Teahouse. First of all, I will remind you that Wikipedia is not a place for self-advertising. I think you are new in Wikipedia where you are not aware of such Wikipedia policies. If your eidts were promotional then you will be blocked from editing Wikipedia. Please be patient or don't get panic, I will send some useful links in your talk pages. That guides you on how Wikipedia works. Thank you! Fade258 (talk) 13:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome, Rhinocesus. The guidance regarding what may be placed on userpages is at WP:UPYES. This specifically says that links to a personal website are OK provided they are not used in a promotional way. However, the guidance also cautions that such personal information, once published, is very difficult to remove, so you should be cautious about your privacy. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Reference problem

I do not know how to repair this. No link at all? This is via the WP Library deisenbe (talk) 17:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: There is a link next to the message that says "how to repair". Click "show" for help on this issue. RudolfRed (talk) 18:00, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

I have tried to follow those instructions. Either I'm not following them right, or they didn't solve the problem. They led me to cfeate this:

|url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?AN=41341328

but it doesn't link to anything. This is the second reference as I had an AN number at hand for it, but not for the first. deisenbe (talk) 19:34, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Deisenbe: Here's the correct URLs to use for those two refs:

• https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12188/
• https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12227/

You should also consider adding and populating the doi parameter as well.

Here's ready-to-use examples for both refs:

• |url=https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12188/|doi=10.17077/0003-4827.11512|doi-access=free
• |url=https://pubs.lib.uiowa.edu/annals-of-iowa/article/id/12227/|doi=10.17077/0003-4827.11521|doi-access=free

Hope this helps! Garzfoth (talk) 23:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, but I have no idea how to create a doi parameter, nor where to find instructions. deisenbe (talk) 13:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi Deisenbe. Citing (scholarly) journals is vital for many articles. The Digital object identifier is an international standard which we use normally within a {{cite journal}} template. If you look at the website pubs.lib.uiowa.edu, you'll see that each article's webpage has a "how to cite" part that gives its doi. The good news is that Wikipedia has lots of tools to help editors create citations. See WP:CITEGENERATORS. The one I use can take a simple doi within the cite journal template:

{{cite journal |doi=10.17077/0003-4827.11512 }}

and turn it into a full citation ready to be placed inline as a reference.

References

Hence for most citations I never fill out the parameters in the template myself but rely on the tool to do this for me after I supply the doi (or the ISBN, as the tool also works with books). However I do check that the tool has got everything correct and I add |doi-access=free if appropriate. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:36, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Question regarding information boxes

Hey there, I was wondering if anybody could help me learn how to insert the boxes one traditionally sees at the very top right of an article, the one with all the info and whatnot on the article in question. I'm writing up Draft:Star Wars: Young Jedi Adventures, and think it requires one of those.

Thank you all so very much, AdmiralAckbar1977 (talk) 14:29, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@AdmiralAckbar1977: Welcome to the Teahouse. You are thinking about infoboxes, and they are not required for articles. They help consolidate information about the subject, but by no means are they required. I would focus on making sure the draft is good enough to be accepted before even thinking about that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:43, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello AdmiralAckbar1977 and welcome to Wikipedia. Help pages about many of the items you'll need as an editor can be found by typing "WP:" followed by the name of what you are looking for into the "Search Wikipedia" box. So WP:INFOBOX will get you to the right place. That said, I think it is a bit WP:TOOSOON for your draft to be accepted as it refers to something only supposed to happen in 2023 and not yet widely discussed in reliable independent sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:49, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Indice

Buongiorno, sono nuovo a Wikipedia e sto scrivendo un articolo. Vorrei inserire l'indice ma non so come fare.

Mi potreste aiutare? Grazie ancora.

Cinescienza (talk) 09:07, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

This was the first non-English post on this page and apparently the answer to my question about the sandbox. Thanks, good joke though, if you can’t come up with a better answer. Jari Rauma (talk) 09:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

It's not about you, Jari Rauma. -- Hoary (talk) 10:01, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Cinescienza, if you're asking about the table of contents that normally appears near the top of a complex article, don't worry. It will be generated automatically. -- Hoary (talk) 10:01, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

grazie Cinescienza (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Forum for community review of draftifications

Hi everyone. If a page mover moves an article to draftspace, what is the forum to challenge the page move? Would WP:DRV be an appropriate forum? I would of course first try to persuade the page mover to move it back to article space. Cheers, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 02:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Clayoquot: to challenge the draftification all you need to do is move it back into the main space. At that point anyone who feels it meets one of the criteria for deletion may nominate it as such. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 02:59, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

OK thanks :) Do you know the name of the policy that says it's OK to do this? Do I need to discuss it with the page mover first? Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 03:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Clayoquot: See WP:DRAFTOBJECT. You do not need to discuss it first. RudolfRed (talk) 03:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks! Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 03:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Clayoquot: @RudolfRed: That is not a Wikipedia policy, that is an essay, basically one editor's point of view. A better practice would be to initiate a discussion on the talk page of the user who draftified it. Usually when I draftify something, it is for a good reason (usually the author had no clue about what makes a Wikipedia article acceptable) and I move it to draft space as a courtesy rather than delete it. Because I have seen newbies start move-warring, I also often leave a create-protection behind so that only a reviewer with the extended-confirmed right can move it back to article space. This is a way to encourage more eyes on the article, rather than rely solely on the judgment of the newbie who wrote it. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: This is about Marine resources, which was draftified, then reverted by Clayoquot. David notMD (talk) 09:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

For good reason - that looks more like a PowerPoint slide than a Wikipedia article. casualdejekyll 12:46, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

However, it's worth noting that participating in the AfC process is entirely voluntary in most cases, including this one casualdejekyll 12:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Anachronist: I agree it's good to encourage more eyes on an article if an experienced editor feels it's not ready for mainspace. The usual place to do this is AfD. If a newbie moves an article that has been draftified to mainspace, which I think is what you meant by "start move-warring", would it not be appropriate to nominate it for deletion if you still feel it's inappropriate? W.r.t WP:DRAFTS, good point that it's not a policy. On the other hand, it represents the collaboration of 235 editors since 2013 and is actively watched by 63 editors so I think it's fair to say it has a solid level of acceptance in the community. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 13:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

@Clayoquot: I routinely make small edits to essays, but that doesn't mean I agree with them. Only a handful of editors contributed the majority of that content. I disagree with the assertion that "it's fair to say it has a solid level of acceptance in the community." It's an essay, the essay expresses a valid viewpoint, but that viewpoint does not have community consensus.

As to your question about AFD being inappropriate, the answer is yes in many cases it's inappropriate. The purpose of AFD is to judge whether to keep an article on a topic based on its notability. AFD isn't a place to canvass other editors for improvements. You propose an article for AFD when you have policy-grounded reasons to believe that the topic isn't suitable. If an article topic may be notable but is written in an incomprehensible or non-encyclopedic way, or without sufficient evidence of notability, or in dire need of cleanup, it is appropriate to move it to draft space. If someone other than the author reverts the move to draft, that's fine. I draw the line, however, at the article author doing this.

In my experience, every time an author of an article attempts to revert a move to draft space, that author has a COI or a promotional intention. Some of them end up being blocked, and I've seen some become good editors after my mentoring. Bottom line: COI editors have no business deciding what content should be in main space. That has community consensus. They can write drafts, and the drafts can be approved by someone else, but they do not get to decide when an article on their pet topic is ready for publication. That is why I often create-protect articles I draftify, with a protection level that allows experienced editors to un-draftify. I have no objection if an editor other than the author reverts a draftification. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)

I really appreciate the work of volunteers (like yourself) who are on the front lines of COI and promotional editors. A lot of our usual processes are understood to be different if one of the editors involved has a COI. I think it's fair to assume that the processes described in WP:DRAFTOBJECT shouldn't be used by COI editors.

What about the case when I'm the author of an article that's been draftified and I don't have a COI or promotional intent, and I want to object to the draftification? I could follow your recommendation to ask the page mover to move it back to mainspace, but what if the page mover refuses? That would bring me back to my original question - where would I go to start a community discussion if the page mover and I disagree? Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 05:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Clayoquot: See Wikipedia:Dispute resolution (Wikipedia:Third opinion is useful if it's just two editors disagreeing), or, if that's undesirable, you could state your case here and ask for another review. Better still, you could address the concerns expressed by the person who disagrees with you and revise the draft accordingly. I'm a pretty experienced editor, I've been editing Wikipedia for 16 years, and while I am capable of writing a good article directly in article space, I will still occasionally submit a draft for review if I suspect my investment of my time in the topic has colored my viewpoint. I have one such declined review at Draft:Mark Cheverton. And I will not move it to article space myself if another experienced editor disagreed that it should be there. But I haven't gotten around to recasting it in the context of the only notable thing in it. There are no deadlines on Wikipedia, after all. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Editing question: Company rebrands

Hello!

General editing question. A company has rebranded, and the Wikipedia document still references the previous brand name - whilst the document references the new, and in the infobox references the old brand name as "formerly". My assumption is that this document title (and reference URL) won't change, unless there is substantial need/cause for further disambiguation amongst other namesakes. Am I correct in this assumption? This is the article in question: Proton Technologies - I saw the question raised in the contrib notes and this got me thinking as I can't see any direct guidance on this. Taylordanrw ([[User talk:|talk]]) 17:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Taylordanrw. I verified the current name and moved the article to Proton AG. Cullen328 (talk) 18:51, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

How do I use the talk section of Wikipedia?

How do ask a question, or reply to somebody?

Requity (talk) 19:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Requity. If you want to ask a specific editor a question, you can do so on that editor's talk page. If you have a question about how to improve an article, you can ask on the article talk page. If you have a question about a policy, you can ask on the talk page for that policy. And so on. Cullen328 (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @Requity! You can ask a question by clicking the new section button on the top of the page. You can reply by clicking the reply button next to a comment. Always remember to sign your posts with the ~~~~! 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊|🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦|☎️|📄 19:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Requity you can read more at Help:Talk pages 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊|🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦|☎️|📄 19:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thank you!

Requity (talk) 19:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

List of songs about animals

I don't see a list of songs about animals, though I see several other lists about categories having numerous members, such as List of songs about cities. Am I missing something? If not, then what should be done to start one?2603:6010:4E42:500:55A1:1870:CE12:CB2E (talk) 19:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. It seems that nobody has gotten around to it. Register an account and start editing. After four days have gone by and you have made at least ten edits, you will be eligible to create the list article. Read Your first article for guidance. Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Grr...I wrote so much you beat me to making a reply. 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊|🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦|☎️|📄 19:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hey, and Welcome! There is the page List of songs about animal rights but no, there is not a page about songs about animals so as a turtle I am very sad . If you are willing to put in the time and energy, be bold and make one! However, I would strongly recommend making an account and spending more time on Wikipedia and learning more skills before your right an article. (I have 1000+ edits and when I started I wanted to make an article. You can see how far I got in my sandbox.) Once you have decided to and you are ready, read Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:Stand-alone lists. In the mean time, create an account and try working at the Task Center! 𝕸𝖗 𝕽𝖊𝖆𝖉𝖎𝖓𝖌 𝕿𝖚𝖗𝖙𝖑𝖊|🇺🇦🇺🇦🇺🇦|☎️|📄 19:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Regarding a draft page/article

Hi, Could you please kindly let me know the process how a draft page gets published as a Wikipage permanently? And how long does it take? What does the submitter need to do? Thank you. NepLekhak (talk) 16:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Relevant courtesy link: Draft:Badri Bahadur Karki. 97.113.167.129 (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @NepLekhak, and welcome to the Teahouse! Before being moved to the mainspace (becoming an article), a draft should be submitted and reviewed through the WP:Articles for Creation (AfC) process. An AfC reviewer will then decide whether or not to Accept the draft article, decline the draft article for later improvement and resubmission, or reject the draft completely. This process can take some time due to the high backlog of about 3,000 articles, although it is unlikely it will take any more than 4 months between each submission. Happy editing! HenryTemplo (talk) 18:42, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

In addition to what HenryTemplo said, articles aren't necessarily permanent once they enter mainspace. They can be nominated for deletion if they don't meet certain guidelines or by editor consensus at Articles for deletion. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:58, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I need help with the article to be worked on for approval

I have a strong belief that all my articles are best on people that require the wikipedia kind of recognition

However the rules of notability do not seem that clear for me maybe to understand

Aanywell wisher will be grately appreciated

thank you Andrew Kayiza (talk) 19:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Andrew Kayiza Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume this refers to Draft:Prince Abul Alqasim Ssemuggala Mulanga Mutatembwa Lukeberwakutta Kimera. Wikipedia is not a place to merely tell about someone, and is not meant as a form of recognition for someone(there are, in fact, good reasons to not want an article about one's self). A Wikipedia article about a person must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the personm, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Being a prince may very well be notable, but only if independent sources write about him, without his involvement or that of associates. Your draft has virtually no sources. Wikipedia is interested in what other people unaffiliated with the Prince say about him. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 19:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Article and category that do not stick to subject

The article Dichotomy is supposedly about dichotomy in logic, yet contains a slew of example from outside logic. I'd like to remove the lot of them, and if someone wishes to reuse those in a different article, then that's great. However, if the article is to be limited to logic, then perhaps it could be retitled something like Dichotomy in logic, or Dichotomy (Logic)? Also, one of the Categories to which it has been assigned is Greek words and phrases, but Dichotomy is not a Greek word, it is a word with Greek etymology. In fact, the entire Category suffers from this confusion, as it is a hodgepodge of Greek words, words that are same in both languages, English words with Greek roots, and English translations of Greek phrases. I'd like to delete at least all the English words, unless 'close enuf' is what to aim for. Knoitalno (talk) 18:46, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I agree with your first paragraph. Dichotomy starts off well, by saying what it's about. It sticks to that subject for a while, and then wanders off into other uses of the word. I consider that inappropriate. An article should be about a topic, not a word and its various uses.   Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Maproom (talk) 21:24, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Kevin Millar (baseball player)

Go to the article, go to: Replacement player section. Reference needs to be cleaned up. Thank you for your time. Theairportman33531 (talk) 02:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Fixed. The 1st reference was missing a close tag. Thanks.Slywriter (talk) 02:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

How to resolve "Category:Rejected AfC submissions"

Hi, I need help resolving this issue with a wikipedia page that was rejected. What should I do? MaryamZahedi (talk) 00:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

MaryamZahedi Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It would help to know which draft you are talking about, as your account has no edits(other than here), but generally a rejection means that nothing further can be done. If the draft was "declined", then something can possibly be done. 331dot (talk) 00:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for getting back, the original submission was sent with a different account and I'm here to help figure out how we could publish a new page on Wikipedia. It does meet all the guidelines and I don't know what needs to change in order to have it go through the next time. Really appreciate your input. MaryamZahedi (talk) 00:34, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

MaryamZahedi Again, it is difficult to help you without knowing what the draft is. Who is "we"? Do you represent an organization? Wikipedia does not have "pages", it has articles. 331dot (talk) 00:42, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm new to Wikipedia and its terminologies and trying to help a friend who is also new to this, and has created and submitted an article that was published on everybodywiki.com instead of wikipedia and I'm trying to understand what needs to be done next time to help so that it goes through. Trying to figure out what caused the rejection so that it doesn't happen again. The article ended up being published under the name "Bioenergy Economy" in the everybodywiki website but this chat is not letting me link the URL here since it's an external site. MaryamZahedi (talk) 00:59, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MaryamZahedi. The draft in question is Draft:Bioenergy economy. It still exists. It has not been rejected. It is not in any such category. Instead, it has been declined, which is different. The draft has lots of problems and several reviewers have offered good advice about how to improve it. Read all that advice and heed it. Study Your first article and follow that advice as well. If you have a Conflict of interest, be sure to declare it. Cullen328 (talk) 01:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

The original author is User:Ghz91. Cullen328 (talk) 01:15, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, that is super helpful to know. Thank you for referring me to that page, I will take a closer look and read through it all. Thanks! MaryamZahedi (talk) 04:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

regarding everybodywiki, it seems that bioenergy economy's draft has been forked there. it's not officially related to wikipedia or any of its sister wikis, and has been recognized as a fork of wikipedia that scrapes pages using a bot (which is the case with your draft). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Didn't know that could happen, thanks for informing on that! MaryamZahedi (talk) 04:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Help reviewing status and class of article

Hi there everyone, I'm new to editing on Wikipedia and have made a number of edits on the research station article. I would love to get some feedback and help reviewing the class status of the article which was formerly tagged as a stub. Thanks! Bubbleteafiend (talk) 02:11, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Good question, i would like to know the answer to this as well. I have seen good articles with a low rank, or no rating at all. YonasJH (talk) 02:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

It's certainly more than a stub now! I'm no expert in quality ratings, but I suspect someone here will be able to give you their assessment. For classes of B or below, you can make the assessment yourself against the quality scale. Also, if you would like feedback on the article, WP:PRG might be a good place to look which tells you both how to ask for a peer review, and how to improve the article before asking for one. RandomBlobby (talk) 02:33, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thankyou! I'll check it out Bubbleteafiend (talk) 07:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

B and below, how articles are rated primarily depends on when the last review occurred. If you think the rating should be different, feel free to change it. Dege31 (talk) 08:35, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

That's great to hear, thankyou. Bubbleteafiend (talk) 04:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Grading is unimportant. Improvement is important, and it's needed for this article. Sample: In Europe, some early field stations (which are still in operation today) included Concarneau Marine Biological Station (Station de biologie marine de Concarneau) which was founded in 1859 in Concarneau, France. Concarneau Marine Biological Station is a marine biology station which was founded for the purposes of conducting research into coastal fishing by the request of Napoleon III. In Asia, [...] First try: In Europe, one early field station still in operation today is Concarneau Marine Biological Station (Station de biologie marine de Concarneau), founded in 1859 at the request of Napoleon III by Victor Coste in Brittany for research into coastal fishing. In Asia, [...] (Though I'd probably cut the bit about Napoleon III.) Tip: Try reading an article out loud. -- Hoary (talk) 04:44, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

That's a good point thankyou, I'll be sure to have a look over some of the wording. Bubbleteafiend (talk) 07:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Redirect Depp and Heard to Depp v Heard

We all know about the ongoing defamation trial between Johnny Depp and Amber Heard. Search up Depp and everything that comes up is Depp v Heard. Same thing when searching up Heard. I just think for the time of the trial (until sentencing date and as long as the word "Depp" is associated most with Depp v Heard and the word "Heard" is also associated most with Depp v Heard) both Depp and Heard should redirect to Depp v Heard, as most searchers will be looking for the trial and scandal and not Johnny Depp's life and film career or the super basic word heard that everybody knows the definition of usually. --Otis the Texan (talk) 03:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Otis the Texan and welcome to the teahouse! this will probably be  Not done, for the former as Johnny Depp still remains as the main topic. anyone who knows of him through the case may still want to research who Depp is, and given that he's the most notable person with the surname Depp, it redirects there. for the latter, Heard is a very basic word where outside of Depp vs Heard and to most people unaware of or just don't care about it, it will relate to hearing. there's also lots of notable people with the surname Heard including Amber Heard, so it makes less sense to redirect either Heard or Heard (surname) to Depp v Heard, a case which is not even the main topic since both people are notable and have their own articles, since relevance isn't really a reason to change the redirect target. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

...oh, and a relevant essay you might want to read: Recentism. 💜  melecie  talk - 04:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

It would just be a temporary redirect. Is that allowed on Wikipedia? Also while I totally agree about Johnny Depp becoming best known as an actor and not an abuse victim, but do really think Amber Heard if found guilty will ever be best known as a good actress? Otis the Texan (talk) 04:34, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I'd still believe that if you're searching for Depp, you're looking for Johnny Depp himself and not the case Depp v. Heard (or maybe the bits of Depp's article that provides background behind events in Depp v. Heard). same thing for Heard, which is a disambiguation by the way, plus she already has her own article that details her acting career, this defamation case won't be her entire life covered by the news (which is often the case for person articles redirecting to event articles, like Jennifer Willbanks -> Runaway bride case, see WP:ONEEVENT for more on this). regardless, the proper place for this to be brought up would be Talk:Depp v. Heard as Hoary pointed out below, or the relevant talk pages Talk:Johnny Depp or Talk:Heard. 💜  melecie  talk - 04:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

But please, Otis the Texan, don't post it to more than one talk page, don't present your opinions on this case, don't speculate about the future, don't ask others for their opinions, and don't ask others to speculate about the future. Best of all just drop the whole matter. -- Hoary (talk) 05:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Well then, Otis the Texan, the best place for you to suggest this would probably be Talk:Depp v. Heard. This page certainly isn't the place. -- Hoary (talk) 04:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Otis the Texan You said most searchers will be looking for the trial and scandal and not Johnny Depp's life and film career. Really? How do you know this? You must have access to Wikipedia's internal user and search statistics, right? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Each biography gets several times more page views than the trial, and that's during the trial.[10] There are many redirects with both their names.[11] It doesn't make sense to redirect one of their names to the trial. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for that, @PrimeHunter. Nice chart and tables. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 05:10, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Library books as a reliable source

Are library books a reliable source even though I read them? Should I use the text from the book I read to edit on articles? It is called research. This will be a good idea to help improve Wikipedia and contribute on building an encyclopedia. Books and literature tend to have more information than the Wikipedia itself. Respond when you are ready. -- 76.20.110.116 (talk) 04:38, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Books can be excellent sources but you must develop the ability to evaluate the reliability of any given book. Does the publisher have a good reputation? Does the author have a good reputation? If you have determined that a specific book is reliable, then it does not matter where you read it. Libraries books are fine. Books from new or used bookstores are fine. Books that you can read online are fine. Books you borrowed from a friend are fine. If you pull a book out of a garbage can, then that book is fine, as long as the author and the publisher are reliable. Cullen328 (talk) 05:13, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 This IP is an editor avoiding a block. They were blocked for a year as 2601:205:C002:D1E0:0:0:0:0/64 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) for long term trolling, disruptive editing and vandalism, they are currently avoiding their block as 76.20.110.116 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) and various IP addresses in the 204.129.0.0/16 (talk · contribs · WHOIS) range. I opened an SPI about this a week or so ago but they're a bit backlogged there at the moment, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/76.20.110.116. If you look at the edits of those two IP ranges you can see the obvious overlap in topics and pages and the good hand bad hand editing, e.g. they vandalise the page Wikipedia:Size of Wikipedia as 204.129 [12] and leave some trolling on it's talk page [13] before showing up again as 76.20 to do some good hand editing [14]. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 05:20, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Please file a report at WP:SPI. I am not willing to investigate on my own at this time, because I am not a particularly skilled sockpuppet investigator, plus I am busy with other things. Cullen328 (talk) 05:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Fair enough, as I said I filed an SPI a week and a half ago but there's a perpetual backlog there, especially for cases that can't rely on checkuser. @Bbb23: You've been cleaning up a lot of the mess coming out of the 204.129 /16 range, would you be willing to have a look at 76.20? 192.76.8.78 (talk) 05:35, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Alvin Ailey Page

I look up celebrities on Wikipedia all the time. In the “early years” section, the celebrity’s parents are always listed. I just now looked up Alvin Ailey after watching a PBS documentary on his life, and was surprised to see that his mother’s name was not included in his early years description. Her presence was mentioned, but her name was omitted. She was a very important figure throughout his life and the absence of her actual name seems terribly disrespectful. I honestly can’t think of why, when among all the many celebrity entries I’ve read on Wikipedia the parents are named, this oversight of Alvin Ailey’s mother’s name has happened.

Can someone please look into it and correct the exclusion? They both deserve better.

Thank you. 73.95.198.130 (talk) 06:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

I've added the names of his parents to the Alvin Ailey article. Maproom (talk) 07:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for making these changes. I appreciate how quickly the update was made. This is such an incredible site! 73.95.198.130 (talk) 00:33, 3 June 2022 (UTC)

Want to edit semi protected pages

How to edit? 49.204.141.134 (talk) 07:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

You need to register an account, then make at least 10 edits and wait four days. After that you should be able to edit semi protected pages. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 07:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

You should request an edit using the edit request process on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Unified Standard of Article Creation

I am confused by the double standard in creating new articles on Wikipedia.

I created Nano Energy based on hundreds of articles on Wikipedia for similar journals with the same set of references, but it was moved to draft. I raised the concern to the person who rejected it to restore it.

I re-submitted Draft:Exaly (I had no contribution to it) which already had several reliable and independent references (mostly from universities and academics), and it was rejected twice. I can give you tons of examples of similar articles on Wikipedia with much fewer independent references.

I understand that each reviewer/administrator interprets the requirements differently, but it is not justified to reject something when there are similar articles on Wikipedia. It is like the Common law in the justice system.

What is the strategy of Wikipedia for having a uniform encyclopedia?

I wanted to create the articles for missing journals, but I know I will encounter the same problem.MojoDiJi (talk) 12:49, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

it is not justified to reject something when there are similar articles on Wikipedia. Please see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. Unfortunately, few editors are motivated to plough through the thousaneds and thousands and thousands of seriously substandard articles improving or deleting them. (I include myself here). ColinFine (talk) 13:59, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

ColinFine, thanks for the link that indeed supported my point. An encyclopedia should be comprehensive at the level it is designed.MojoDiJi (talk) 19:13, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Our policy is not for articles to be "uniform", particularly if that means uniformly bad. We have standards we enforce, and those standards have been rising. Certainly, there are articles created years ago which would not be accepted if they were created today. If you come across such an article, you can work to improve it so that it meets current standards. Or, if you believe that would not be possible, you can propose it for deletion. (I'm surprised you got Nano Energy accepted. It seems to me to offer no evidence that its subject is notable.)   13:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC) Maproom (talk)

Maproom, you surprised me by questioning the notability of Nano Energy (which is now proposed for deletion). If Nano Energy is not notable enough for Wikipedia, there are at least hundreds of journals on Wikipedia which should be deleted (I can name tens of them on the top of my head). Out of curiosity, what is your standard for the notability of a research journal? Nano Energy has received over 320,000 citations so far. What is the purpose of a scholarly journal? What impact a journal should have on the progress of research to be notable? MojoDiJi (talk) 19:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Nano Energy may, for all I know, be notable. (I'm inclined to suspect not, because it's published by Elsevier and has a title comprising unrelated subjects, like the notorious Chaos, Solitons & Fractals; but I've made no attempt to check.) The article does not establish notability through WP:GNG: it does not cite sources showing "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject". Such sources may exist, but you haven't cited any. If there's a standard for notability based on impact factor, I'm unaware of it. If you are aware of such a standard, you should mention it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Nano Energy.   Maproom (talk) 19:55, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

maproom, Whether it is a written rule or not, people who are familiar with scholarly journals will judge an article about a journal based on its reputation (which is somehow represented by its impact factor). This is exactly my point. Someone who is familiar with scholarly journals should judge such articles. You may argue that there is a one single rule for the secondary sources of all Wikipedia articles. Then, there are at least hundreds of articles about journals which do not meet those criteria. In my practice, Wikipedia editors are excessively aggressive towards new articles without having the expertise. MojoDiJi (talk) 22:03, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure that there are indeed hundreds of articles about journals which do not meet those criteria. I believe there are tens of thousands of articles about subject (of many different kinds) which do not meet those criteria. Ideally, editors would go through those articles deleting them; but that doesn't happen very often - mostly because it can take considerable work to determine whether their subjects do in fact meet the criteria.

You are arguing for a change in the notability criteria for academic journals, rather like the criteria for academics: that makes some sense, but you need to achieve consensus that they should be changed, rather than simply assert it here. I suggest opening a discussion at WT:Notability. ColinFine (talk) 11:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC) I see that this was discussed in a later item, and there is such a set of criteria --ColinFine (talk) 11:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Contributions disappeared

Why did my contributions disappear They're gone from the pages I added them to KingBiscuitBlues (talk) 11:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello KingBiscuitBlues, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you look at the history of the articles you edited (such as Robert Petway) it is clear that Ojorojo has removed the paragraph you added to each of them with the comment "rv unverified, spam". That is to say, the information you added was not supported by a reliable published source, and contained an apparently promotional link (I know it wasn't an active link, but it was still spam). I think Ojorojo should have notified you that they were reverting you, but they didn't. ColinFine (talk) 11:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

2021–22 Tottenham Hotspur F.C. season

Can someone who is really good at English have a look at the article and tell me, why you need to have the season link in italics. I just don't understand why it needs to be emphasised. (page history) From what I understand, it shouldn't be done and it really looks like a strange formatting pattern to do that. Not to mention there seems to be somewhat of an edit-war over it. It really is driving me nuts! Govvy (talk) 12:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Well, it's not in italics in the first three similar articles I checked (for Arsenal, AC Milan and Aston Villa), and I can't see why there would be any need for it to be. On the other hand, it seems to me to be an utterly trivial point, which no-one would even notice if attention hadn't been drawn to it, so I'm not going to involve myself further in what seems to me to be an utter waste of time for everyone involved.

You might like to pursue the matter on the Talk page of Wikipedia:WikiProject Football. I notice that in the proposed model example at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/League season this link is not italicised. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.235.54 (talk) 13:10, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Merging "Abyssinian Guinea Pig" with "List of guinea pig breeds"

So, yeah. It isnt really that good of an idea to have a page for the Abyssinian Guinea pig itself, since Guinea pig breeds are quite similar to each other. The reasons to why are below.

The only main difference is really just the Guinea pig’s coat type. Each breed is the same size and body shape, all of them have a large variation of coat colors, and lastly, each one has the same personality, and really only varies by the individual Guinea Pig that you own.

In addition, the Abyssinian Guinea pig isn’t really a special breed itself, given that each breed of Guinea pig is diverse towards the type of coat they have. The only distinguishing feature they really have is spiky and frizzy hair that looks kind of messy.

That’s all I really have to say for why there shouldn’t be a page for Abyssinian Guinea pig. BoiBoi303 (talk) 13:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @BoiBoi303 and welcome to the teahouse! there doesn't seem to be an article named Abyssian guinea pig. what article are you referring to? it's best for you to discuss changes and ideas regarding an article to that article's talk page, which can be accessed over at the top of any wikipedia page. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

I meant Abyssinian Guinea pig, @Melecie.

BoiBoi303 (talk) 13:33, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

oh i dumb. anyways, you'd want to start a merge request over at Talk:Abyssinian guinea pig, plus read the merging guidelines while you're at it, which details when to do, how to do, and how to discuss merges. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Ping

how to ping anybody Saha86830 (talk) 09:39, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Simply link to their name, Saha86830, and sign your message (as I'm doing here). -- Hoary (talk) 09:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

If you use the [ reply ] link, there's a little-guy-with-a-plus button you can use. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Saha86830 (talk • contribs) 18:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

How to get a printable version of Encyclopedia.

Since Wikipedia Book Creator has been closed, do you have any reason why it is closed? If so, how will I get my own personal book with selected articles and have it printed on PediaPress? Any strategy? How can I find the way to create my own Wikipedia book? Thank you! 76.20.110.116 (talk) 04:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello. In brief, that project did not prove to be viable. PediaPress still seems to be in business, but they are no longer in a partnership with the Wikimedia Foundation. Also, there are countless self-publishing platforms available that will print a book to order for you. I used a service like that recently, that claimed to collect the best photos that I have posted on Facebook in recent years. Their algorithmic bot did a great job of selecting photos, although about 3% of them were incongruous. The algorithm clearly favors photos of flowers and babies. That was fine with me. Cullen328 (talk) 05:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 The book creator is still around and you can still use it to make books, the only bit that was removed was the "community maintained" book namespace which was mostly full of rubbish. To use the book creator you need to create an account (as you can only save books in your own user space now), then you can go to Special:book to start the process of collecting pages. The in-wiki pdf creation functionality has been broken for about 10 years, and the free pdf rendering PressPedia was supposed to offer was withdrawn about 5 or so years ago, so the only options for actually being able to read your book are to pay PressPedia to print it or to use the community maintained mediawiki2latex. If you have a short book there's a version of the software running on wmflabs, https://mediawiki2latex.wmflabs.org/, if it's too long for online rendering you'll need to set up a linux machine to use it. It sort of works, but the rendering of certain templates can be a bit dodgy. It's not a great experience for readers overall, hence all the warnings about everything being half functional. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 05:50, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, that is all far too complicated for me, and I have been a Wikipedia editor for 13 years. If I wanted to print a physical book consisting of various Wikipedia articles, I would use an "on demand" book printing service, copy pasting the articles, and attributing them on the fly. Cullen328 (talk) 05:58, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

What about any other website? Do they sell physical Wikipedia books? 76.20.110.116 (talk) 15:30, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Googling "buy printed wikipedia books on paper" seems to support 192.76.8.78's recommendation. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:23, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

trying to anchor a reference and it won't anchor

Reference 19 is supposed to go to its anchor and it won't. What am I doing wrong? Wikipedia:Sandbox#Governor_and_federal_judge and Wikipedia:Sandbox#References. If it reverts back on you by the time you get my question, this is the link to the old version. --Epiphyllumlover (talk) 20:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

@Epiphyllumlover: Since you've stricken through your post, it's probably fair to assume that you figured things out yourself. If that's the case, then great. For future reference, you can probably just remove your question in such a case if you want as long as nobody has replied to it and it wasn't posted too long ago. You can also strike through you post, but probably should follow the instructions in WP:REDACT if that's what you want to do. Just leave the section heading as is and strike through everything up to your signature. A subsequest post stating you've sorted things out would also probably be a good thing. The way you tried to strike your post created a formating problem that made it seem as if your post was part of a completely unrelated question asked by someone else. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:25, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, yes, I figured it out. I am sorry for creating a formatting problem.--Epiphyllumlover (talk) 19:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Bennedict Mathurin & Acknowledging Sexual Assault Allegations

On March 21, 2022, after a decisive victory, (then) college basketball player, Bennedict Mathurin, was accused of groping a cheerleader from the opposing team. This was captured in a viral video and widely reported by a variety of news outlets including the Associated Press and ESPN (https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/33579541/arizona-wildcats-bennedict-mathurin-says-reached-tcu-video-shows-possible-contact-horned-frogs-dancer).

I have been trying to work some kind of reference to these allegations into Mathurin’s page, but I have faced a great deal of resistance. I am not stuck on the actual words I used. I just feel like this information should be reported upon in some fashion. I feel like the administrator is misusing procedural recommendations to bury any reference to this incident.

I would love to have someone else edit my original write-up to meet Wikipedia standards or to write and submit something fresh. It just feels like it is wrong to bury something of this magnitude altogether. Truth Possum (talk) 18:01, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia works by consensus. If another editor reverts your edit, then it is up to you to build consensus by opening a discussion with that editor (and any others who may be interested) on the article's talk page, not by edit warring. There may be other editors who agree with you that the incident should be mentioned, but wadign in and accusing other editors of "wanting to suppress discussion" is not the way to achieve that.

It may also be relevant to read WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS and WP:TRUTH. ColinFine (talk) 18:48, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Truth Possum, according to the article you cite, he's not aware of having touched her, and she showed no reaction at the time. "Famous baseball player may or may not have touched woman's breast, neither of them noticed at the time." I really don't think that's worth mentioning in the article. Maproom (talk) 19:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Truth Possum You should read WP:BLP, which it is a requirement to follow if you are going to edit articles about living people, in this case especially the sections on WP:BLPCRIME, WP:BLPSTYLE and WP:BLPBALANCE. The policy on wikipedia is that people are presumed innocent until convicted in a court of law (WP:BLPCRIME), that articles on people must not overly focus on recent events (WP:BLPSTYLE) and articles must present praise and criticism fairly and in balance (WP:BLPBALANCE). The main issues with those edits are related to whether the amount of content added is giving WP:DUE weight to the event. In my opinion, no, this is not a fair and balanced representation of the event within the context of the article or Bennedict Mathurin's life or career. A "personal life" section should provide a balanced overview of the subjects personal life, not 2 sentences about his family followed by 4 paragraphs of content about how he might have brushed past a woman's breast and how this might have been groping according to people on social media. Following the video going viral there does not appear to have been any follow up coverage at all, it does not seem that anyone has pressed charges and it does not appear to have had any lasting impact on his life or career. If this is going to be covered at all in the article it really should not exceed one short sentence, but given the complete lack of any lasting impact, the extremely low quality of some of the sources used (e.g. the New York Post) and the complete lack of any kind of coverage more than a day or so after the video went viral I would lean on the side of not including it at all on the basis it is a complete non-event of no lasting significance. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 19:28, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Any further discussion of this matter should take place at Talk:Bennedict Mathurin where I have made my points. Cullen328 (talk) 19:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Reusing Articles

I want to use a number of wikipedia articles in a book I am writing. I know your material is free, but does that apply to publication usage or would I require your written permission to use? 2601:18A:C100:EE70:C15D:E350:EDB5:8F98 (talk) 20:32, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, you can reuse wikipedia content in a book as long as you provide proper attribution and follow the conditions required under the creative commons licence, see WP:Reusing Wikipedia content for details. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:54, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Also be careful when re-using images, as some of them are used under a claim of fair use rather than a free use licence. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 20:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

If you substantially duplicate content in your book, you must also license your book under the same license that it is here, which is the CC BY-SA 3.0 or the GNU Free Documentation License. This is because both are 'copyleft' licenses. (Disclaimer: IANAL) I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

is there any way to change to the old wikipedia look

i want to edit a page but the new look just make the editing page like a visual edit, i love the old one more. is there any way to change to the old wikipedia look? Mcaskil (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

If you want to switch from visual to source editing, just press "Visual editing" at the top right and select "Source editing" from the menu that pops up. I.hate.spam.mail.here (message me | my contributions) 23:44, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

if you meant the style of how you read pages, you can switch to the pre-2022 look at Preferences > Appearance > Vector legacy (2010). alternatively you could instead pick Monobook, which gives you the pre-2010 look. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:25, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

TV Films

Should I put them in the:

• Film categories,
• Television show categories, or
• Both Film and Television show categories? Danstarr69 (talk) 01:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

@Danstarr69 The subcategories of Category:Television films seem like they would be the best place. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 01:16, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm specifically talking about when it comes to things like:

• Category: Films shot in England
• Category:Television shows filmed in England
• Category:Films set in England
• Category:Television shows set in England Danstarr69 (talk) 01:24, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hello how to upload images at english wikipedia. Saha86830 (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Saha86830, The best thing to do is to use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard which will guide you through the process. Before starting make sure that you understand what the copyright status of the image is - the file will either have to be under a free content licence that is compatible with wikipedia, or you will need to provide a claim that the image can be used under fair use. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 18:52, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

For the great majority of images that would be helpful for English Wikipedia (let alone the Wikipedias of other languages), Saha86830, the best thing would be to upload them not to English Wikipedia but instead to Wikimedia Commons. (Images for "fair use" are exceptions.). -- Hoary (talk) 22:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary The file upload wizard automatically directs people to commons if the licencing information is compatible. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 22:57, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, IP Number. I hadn't known that. What I had observed were very many files -- of paintings by people who died twenty years ago, photos by persons unknown but clearly dating from before WW2, etc -- both (i) moved by some robot (I think it was) from en:WP (where originally uploaded) to Commons and (ii) falsely described as the uploader's "own work". I inferred that something about this procedure removed obstacles to the misdescription of what was uploaded. Is this just my imagination, running away with me? (And is there any advantage to uploading stuff to en:Wikipedia?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary The transfer process is done semi-manually with human review (not by a bot), mostly using scripts to assist. The "own work" claims are most likely people who don't know where the file came from filling in the inputs with bogus information just to get through the wizard and get it uploaded, or from a misunderstanding - a significant number of people seem to think that if you buy/digitise an old image the copyright is theirs. Theoretically images should be getting reviewed and files with obviously incorrect licences shouldn't be getting transferred to commons, but mistakes do happen.

There are 2 main advantages to local uploads - we can host stuff that is fair use rather than free use, and the fate of the image isn't tied to content policies on another project. I know of a few people who upload stuff locally and use {{keep local}} to make sure a local copy is kept. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 23:47, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Mistakes do indeed happen -- by the thousand. As for fair use, this can of course only be claimed if a set of conditions are met. Some of these images are very useful, but my impression is that the great majority of those uploaded by new users (and meeting the conditions) are of what I'd say are of little encyclopedic value: album covers, company logos and the like. -- Hoary (talk) 01:59, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

How to find the NYC edithons or Meetups?

How to find the NYC edithons or Meetups? Charles Smith123 (talk) 23:39, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Meetup will have a calendar with meetups and edithons in the future. Cherrell410 (talk) 02:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Seven Sisters

All 7 dots on the Seven Sisters Colleges map are in the wrong places. I have no idea how to fix it. 2600:6C4A:427F:E1BB:61E2:A659:C1B5:F90D (talk) 04:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! It appears you would fix the map on Seven Sisters (colleges) by fixing the coordinate location in the Wikidata entry for each college, such as d:Q167733 for Barnard College. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:37, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

The locations on Wikidata were correct, @GoingBatty; there was something else funky going on, possibly with the map template itself. I sidestepped the issue by converting it to the more modern {{Maplink}} format. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 05:53, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@GoingBatty @Sdkb The issue might be this recent change to the coordinates in the data template for the cropped northeastern US map? [15] 192.76.8.78 (talk) 06:03, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Shrikesong: Is there a chance your edit caused something? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:05, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Yes, somewhat. My edit attempts were trying to correct the map locations as well. Whenever it was changed to NE Cropped map the locations were very off. A comment was made that it wasn't correct and I looked into it to see what I could adjust. It turned out more complicated and I was able to get some places closer, but I really think it has to do with the settings based on that cropped map. I had been testing and was going to reach out to others, but then got sidetracked and left it as best I could at the time. Was going to come back eventually. I think the non-cropped version probably worked better if anyone wanted to go back to it. I kind of like the maplink format better anyway. Shrikesong (talk) 06:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Shrikesong @Sdkb Having looked into it a bit further I think I know what the issue is. Module:Location map/data/USA Northeast (cropped) currently has the data set up for an equirectangular projection, however the map it's been cropped from, File:Usa edcp location map.svg is a Conic projection. The different projections mean the maps need to handle distortion differently, if you look at the bottom boundary of Delaware the difference is obvious, in an equirectangular projection [16] it's a horizontal straight line, in a conic projection [17] it's a curve. To fix this the map needs to be set up to use a modified form of the x and y formulas used in Module:Location map/data/USA Midwest and Northeast to account for the distortion. 192.76.8.78 (talk) 06:27, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

The formulas needed are in the article Equidistant conic projection 192.76.8.78 (talk) 06:31, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I will work on that this week if no one else gets to it first. Shrikesong (talk) 02:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Circumvention and Internet freedoms impeached in Australia

Does anyone know why Australia is now allowing censorship and circumvention of the internet. No1 believes me and it’s ruining my life. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 120.21.81.64 (talk) 02:50, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia, not about the policies or laws of Australia. GoingBatty (talk) 04:11, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Missing TOCs! (with 2022 skin)

Am I doing something wrong?

After some mild mannered and kindly "robot" suggested that I switch to some new "skin" -- (I do not even really understand what a "skin" is, ... in this context!) -- eventually I started noticing that, on all "Talk:" pages, the TOC ("Table of contents") was missing.

Then (today iirc) I started noticing that, ... the same thing was happening in "article" space. NO Tables of contents!

Just on a wild GUESS, I tried going back to my "Preferences", and changing my "SKIN", from "Vector (2022)" ... << (back) >> ... to "Vector legacy (2010)".

All of a sudden, my TOCs resumed working as they usually do! ... and as they have been working -- just fine! -- for years.

Any advice? (Are there any questions that I perhaps SHOULD be asking, at this time, but that I do not even know to ask?)

Thank you, Mike Schwartz (talk) 15:49, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

"Perhaps" one [question] that I should *** "avoid" *** asking, -- (right?) -- is: ... whether or not this new "skin" is causing similar issues for THOUSANDS of other Wikipedia readers (and editors). I would expect that if something like *that* were taking place, that ... then ... in that case ... some Wikipedia experts ... way more clued-in than the average bear ... would have already either [a] fixed things, or ... (at least) [b] issued some kind of "notice", to rescue [persons like] me from having to submit a new "TOPIC" like this, on a page like this. --Mike Schwartz (talk) 15:50, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Schwartz: Welcome to the Teahouse. The new skin moves the table of contents onto the left side of the screen. You can follow discussions about it at mw:Talk:Reading/Web/Desktop Improvements.
Please don't go crazy on formatting like using the big tag multiple times; it's somewhat irritating. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:04, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Thanks for that kind reply.

I have done *** some *** (but apparently not enough) reading, at places that I found, starting with the help that you provided.

My question << Am I doing something wrong? >> still stands.

When I use the "OLD" interface ("Switch to old look") I can find the TOC (positioned kinda sorta within the body of text on the page) ... and I do not mind navigating "from" -- and even back "to" that "OLD" TOC ... which can sometimes be done using the << back >> feature [or 'button'] of my web browser.

When I use the "New" interface ("Vector 2022" or whatever it is) ... I cannot see the TOC. I do not know "what to do" (to cause it to become visible), or ... where it is, if it is already there (maybe right in front of my nose?)

Please forgive me if I am not specifying very expertly, what it is that I need to know (I need to find out). I suspect that, if I knew that, I would then be able to ... not only

• [a] do a better job of asking my question here,
  but also
• [b] answer the question myself, instead of having to "ask" it.

Thank you. -- Mike Schwartz (talk) 17:48, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Schwartz: It should be there on the left. I took a screenshot and marked it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Thank you.

I am not seeing that TOC that you are seeing (and sending).

I mean, I do see it in the attachment ... I just do not see it in the screen snapshot that I probably should create, and post here. (and maybe I am about to do so ... it might take a few minutes).

Seeing that (screen shot) ["IOU"] might not enable you to figure out the full answer to ... :

My question << Am I doing something wrong? >> [...which] still stands.

But it might be a step in the right direction ... and it might cause me to not seem [quite so] crazy ... as I perhaps did when I first asked ... :

<< Am I doing something wrong? >>

Thank you. -- Mike Schwartz (talk) 18:06, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: (and anyone else who is interested.)

I regret the delay.

I have 3 ["snapshot"] files. TWO of them are ".PDF" files, which show relatively small Wikipedia articles, both of which allow their TOCs to be visible to me when I use the (OLD) "Vector 2010' skin.

I am not sure how to (figure out how to) attach those 3 files to this message. I am tired, now, so ... I am just going to include a link to the place "on the cloud" ... (on "Google Drive"), where the 3 files are resting now. Here is the LINK:

https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Gn8iAwQHqQ5r3E7ONLODe1yWWXNGMK5D?usp=sharing

NOTE that, even though ... one of the two "smaller" files (they are *.PDF files) does appear to "IMPLY" that there was a TOC shown on my computer screen, before I took the "snapshot" (using "Ctrl-P" meaning "Print", and then using "Save as .PDF" instead of the name of an actual ink-on-paper printer) ... it is lying ("pants on fire").

That is the purpose of the THIRD file ... which is a *.JPG file ... namely, to *show* that the info that was actually being displayed on my computer screen -- when using the "Vector 2022" skin -- did not include a TOC at the top of the article. (nor on the side ... I looked all over).

Actually, I just added a 4th file ... once I saw that I could download a .PDF of an article "directly", without using Ctrl-P and "Save as PDF". That (4th) file is in a sub-folder.

Thanks for listening. Any advice appreciated. -- Mike Schwartz (talk) 22:44, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

_{The text in this section is very weird. I like it.} Thefficacy (talk) 06:37, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I do not like it. Wakes it SIGNIFICANTLY harder to follow. (eospecially after the user was asked to refrain from crazy formatting) Happy Editing--IAmChaos 11:22, 28 May 2022 (UTC)

I don't like it either... 73.127.147.187 (talk) 06:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

about logo of srtm university nanded

i have updated logo of srtm university nanded. but removed by wiki...

Swami Ramanand Teerth Marathwada University Madhukar.alse (talk) 06:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Madhukar.alse and welcome to the teahouse! it seems that you have uploaded two school logos, one of which has been deleted at Commons and another of which is undergoing a deletion request. instead of claiming that these images are your own work, what you should do is upload it to Wikipedia instead of Commons over at Files for upload (since Commons only accepts logos that are too simple to be copyrighted and also review the policies on Fair use content. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 06:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

please publish this logo of institution from your side. Madhukar.alse (talk) 09:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

How to add content online

I want to add my business content and also about me... please provide me guidance that how can i add my content on wikipedia ? Hitu 079 (talk) 07:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Hitu 079 and welcome to Wikipedia! to save you a long time of explaining, unfortunately you don't. unless what you have done in life is already particularly notable enough for coverage in reliable sources, you can't get an article, and so won't your business. and even if it was, it still won't be a place for you to tell the world about or advertise yourself or your business, it would just cover what those reliable sources that are independent of you will, the good and the bad sides. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 07:12, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @Hitu 079, and welcome to the Teahouse! First of all, I think you fundamentally misunderstand the purpose of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is not a platform where anyone can write an page about themselves or their company, Wikipedia is a free online encyclopaedia where anyone can start and contribute to articles about notable subjects. Also, It is strongly discouraged to edit articles where you have what's known as a Conflict of Interest. If you or your company is actually notable, chances are another random editor will start an article about you or your company. Regardless, have a great day! HenryTemplo (talk) 07:18, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

New page

Hi fellow teahouse host, Can anyone tell me that how to create new page in wikipedia? ADP Dahal (talk) 06:14, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@ADP Dahal: See WP:WIZARD. If you're new, it's best that you create a draft page first and get it reviewed. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:51, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@ADP Dahal Start with making sure that you have the sources to meet the demands of WP:GNG. If you don't, pick another subject. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:07, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@ADP Dahal - Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you do not have a lot of experience editing Wikipedia. To learn how to edit, you could view Help:Introduction and The Wikipedia Adventure. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:16, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

I'm sure you meant "months of waiting, declines, and rewrites". 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:10, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Thanks all for your time to address my problem. ADP Dahal (talk) 07:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Soul Jain

My article on sales blunder got rejected. I didn't know what went wrong. Can you help me with my article and allow me to revise my article? reply Soul Jain (talk) 03:29, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

In your strangely titled Draft:Soul Jain, which Jimfbleak very rightly deleted, you plagiarized from this page, a how-to guide. In User:Soul Jain/sandbox, which I have just now deleted, you did the same. Wikipedia is not a place for people to paste web pages (even their own) from elsewhere. It is also not a place for how-to guides. -- Hoary (talk) 04:44, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Right, LinkedIn claims a copyright in the material on that page which you copied. 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Draft Declined: Sanctuary of Refuge

Hi, can you all please help? This is my first wiki article and I've followed the tutorials as much as possible. I am trying to have the following article reviewed, resubmitted and approved (Sanctuary of Refuge). Feedback states the sources used were not secondary and the format was not encyclopedia based. There is a similar organization with a similar wiki page (Restored Hope Network) in which I used there wiki page as a guide. Any help you can provide would be appreciated. Thank you Tai Curry (talk) 13:14, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

See other stuff exists, Wikipedia is not an appropriate venue for you to promote deeply offensive Conversion therapys. Theroadislong (talk) 13:17, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Unreleased music on artists' discographies

Hello Wikipedians! Good to see you again! Lately, a lot of artists play unreleased music which has not even been announced officially at performances e.g. Aespa at Coachella 2022, Bring Me The Horizon at one concert ofthem some days ago at Malta etc. Do we add those songs with TBA or we don't write them at all until the official announcement? I'm asking because it is already played music live but is not on music platforms. - Fisforfenia (talk) 06:25, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Fisforfenia, and welcome to the Teahouse. The place to look for this sort of guidance is WP:DISCOGSTYLE, which suggests not. (see section "What should not be included"). ColinFine (talk) 11:45, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

@Fisforfenia A lot of artists play other artists' music during concerts -- Heart and Pink, among others, often play a Led Zeppelin song during a concert. But I presume this isn't what you are asking about, right? 73.127.147.187 (talk) 07:13, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

No, what I'm asking is when an artist eg. Bring Me The Horizon, go to a concert and perform a song of them but unreleased officially yet, see here, here, here and here, do we add it or not? I'm asking because this one is not released on any platforms but it has been announced on a performance. Fisforfenia (talk) 13:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

HEART

Hi, I'm a hot glass artist and just recently had tow stents placed in my heart. I want to make a piece or art meaning heart in Japanese for a gidt for the surgeon. How shall I shape it for most meaning to him? 2604:2D80:6514:CF00:25AC:8FB5:1DD8:DDA2 (talk) 13:22, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I.P, welcome to the Teahouse. I would suspect that perhaps the most meaningful representation for a heart surgeon would be based on the anatomy of the heart. You can find more about symbolism here. The Teahouse is however for asking questions about editing Wikipedia, do you have a question in that regard? Thanks, Zindor (talk) 13:36, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

...if you'd like to ask questions about non-wikipedia topics, the best place to ask would be the Reference desk. happy reading! 💜  melecie  talk - 13:56, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Created page for : Ali Sabri Musician

== Redirect request: Ali Sabri Musician

This request has been accepted. Please do not modify it.
Target of redirect: Marshallese language Reason: {{r from lang|mh|en}} (Marshallese in Marshallese) Source (if applicable): 49.180.240.221 (talk) 23:16, 27 May 2022 (UTC) Redirect created.Ali Sabri Musician → Marshallese language. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Happy Editing--IAmChaos 23:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC) Redirect created. Ali Sabri Musician → Marshallese language. Ali Sabri Musician → Marshallese language. Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia! Happy Editing--IAmChaos 23:18, 27 May 2022 (UTC)
This is an archived discussion. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

Baderantar01 (talk) 13:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

have a strong belief that all my articles are best on people that require the wikipedia kind of recognition

However the rules of notability do not seem that clear for me maybe to understand

Aanywell wisher will be grately appreciated — Preceding unsigned comment added by Baderantar01 (talk • contribs) 13:04, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

hi @Baderantar01 and welcome to the teahouse! you'd want to read the notability guidelines for music topics in this case.

• first, you would need Reliable sources: sources from stuff such as news outlets or trusted sites in the music industry that have a reputation for editorial oversight and fact-checking (not blogs, not wikis, not social media).
• if you do have them, check whether these sources prove that he fits in one of these criteria.
• if you do not have reliable sources or they don't fit the notability criteria, then stop: an article won't be created.. perhaps it may be too soon to create the article, you should wait until they get notability and outlet coverage first.

happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 14:03, 30 May 2022 (UTC)