Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1162

Archive 1155

←

Archive 1160

Archive 1161

Archive 1162

Archive 1163

Archive 1164

Archive 1165

Re-submitting autobiography as biography

FYI

 – A massive copyvio in this post was removed by another user and revdel requested. I'm reposting the bits that weren't a violation, in case someone would like to comment. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 18:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi,

The following is the latest version of my bio. It was originally written by other writers who became exhausted with the Wikipedia administrators that posed as obstacles and were discouraging with no direction as to further development of the article, but rather cited rules and a maze to try and navigate. Anyway, the latest has a PDF with many references linked. However, the PDF doesn't work on Wikipedia, thereby unlinking the references, and the "Cite" process is just confusing. If anyone would like to help with simply linking the references from the PDF, or I can send the URLs, it would be truly appreciated. Here is the latest "Bio" version with numbers that are associated with the unlinked references:

<redacted>

Bob Purvey Bobpurvey1 (talk) 18:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Previous, somewhat related Teahouse post. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 18:36, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobpurvey: Considering what you just wrote had to be removed wholesale as a copyright violation (if it's been published anywhere else without the copyright licence specified, we cannot use it per Berne) and the draft as written still existed at the time I started writing this, I am going to try and go over this in a more granular fashion, with explanations as to why what is on the draft is unacceptable. I behoove you to pay attention rather than ignore the criticism.

• We can't use IMDb (no editorial oversight). IMDb is a wiki, and while they claim to have fact-checking, it's always been found to be severely lacking to the point they may as well not have it.
• We can't cite Wikipedia (circular reference). We never cite Wikipedia, mirrors of it, or sister projects as that's essentially citing ourselves, and even if that weren't a concern, we're still a wiki with subpar fact-checking relative to news/scholarly sources.
• We can't cite https://www.surfertoday.com/surf-movies/follow-me (too sparse). Name-drop, not significant discussion of the subject. We also cannot link to, let alone cite, the embedded video on that link (connexion to subject, no editorial oversight, unknown provenance); YouTube videos are only usable if (1) the outlet has an established editorial/fact checking policy and the report is presented by identifiable journalists and (2) the resulting video is uploaded to that outlet's verified channel.
• https://www.britannica.com/biography/Duke-Kahanamoku is a non-sequitur (in other words, Purvey isn't even mentioned, let alone discussed in depth). A source that does not even mention the subject is naturally going to be completely useless as a source on that subject, Wikipedia or no.
• For the Surfer's Journal cite you need to use Template:Cite magazine and cite it as an offline source; the link leads to a "buy this article" page, which is completely useless for practically any purpose related to Wikipedia. We do allow cites to print magazines provided the following information is provided: Publication name, publication edition (i.e. Jan 1923), article name, article byline (i.e. who wrote the article), and the page(s) the article is on. By the same token, we allow cites to books, and require a similar-but-different set of required information for those (title, author, publisher, year of publication, page(s) being cited, and either the ISBN or OCLC#).
• We can't cite online fora and message boards (no editorial oversight). The same applies to any other source which amounts to random people just talking about things (such as Reddit, Twitter, Facebook, Not Always Right, etc.)
• https://ecomalibu.org/bob-purvey-bio/ and https://ugly-garb.com/ugly-enterprises/ are useless for notability (connexion to subject). Anything Purvey (or his associates or organisations) controls doesn't help because we require sources to have no connexion to a subject whatsoever. People lie to aggrandise themselves, whether blatantly or by omission; a disinterested third party is far more likely to present things in a accurate fashion. (Those same third parties writing about a subject is also a good indicator of that subject's notability in the grander scheme of things.)
• https://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles/water_issues/programs/stormwater/municipal/watershed_management/malibu_creek/index.html is a non-sequitur. I should also note that we don't consider government documents/websites to be third-party sources, as their subjects (generally) have a disproportionate amount of input on the page's content.

So much for the sources. Now for the content (which is why the page got deleted this go around):

• An Eclectic Artist - Opinions like this must always be attributed to a third-party source. This should not be in Wikipedia's voice (i.e. it shouldn't come across as Wikipedia saying it).
• By age four he started playing tennis and first showed the qualities of becoming a performer to entertain audiences. - Every claim that could potentially be challenged requires a citation to an in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly source written by an identifiable author and subjected to rigourous fact-checking that can corroborate the claim. If no such source can be found, the claim must be removed in its entirety. This is not negotiable, as the relevant policy has legal implications.
• In 1967, television commercials, magazine ads and notoriety[...] - This is an incomplete sentence.
• Purvey was not the first or the last surfer to try his hand at acting[...] - This entire run-on sentence is irrelevant and adds nothing of substance to the article. It would fit better in an article about surfers in acting in general or on articles about those specific people.
• After returning home to Los Angeles. Bob trained with director and actor[...] - The claims being made here are what I refer to as "notability-by-osmosis", i.e. making an argument for notability based upon the relationships and connexions the subject has. We don't accept notability-by-osmosis, so this does nothing for the draft except make it come across as promotional.
• He advanced by working in London, New York and Los Angeles. - This requires a source of the calibre described above. (I know this is pedantic, considering the film credits do not require citations, but we do need a source that explicitly says this.)
• His film credits include[...] We don't need exhaustive lists of films he's been in, and they don't need to be in prose form, necessarily. Just the most notable films he's worked on can go in a list in a separate section. We also don't require citations for his film appearances as long as he has been credited under his own name or a known pseudonym. (Uncredited roles or unfamiliar pseudonyms still require a cite.)
• Since 1967, he has been a member of the Screen Actors Guild (SAG); Equity in London since 1969, and American Federation of Television and Radio Artists (AFTRA) since 1976. - Both these claims require a cite of the calibre described above.
• Bob also performed in over forty regional and thirty national television commercials[...] - This claim requires a cite of the calibre described above, and the list needs to be removed.
• All this happened through the 70's and part of the 80's, and Purvey divided his time between acting and surfing. - Redundant. The reader should be able to suss this out based on the sources you provide and the prose. It should be patently obvious he's doing this if he's getting credited roles during years where he's winning surfing competitions.
• In 1979, he returned to competitive surfing and won the Church Noseriding Championships. - This claim requires a cite of the calibre described above.
• His endorsement garnered numerous sponsors, including O'Neill, Ugg, Kennedy, Miyata and Images, to name a few. - This list is another notability-by-osmosis claim and needs to be removed as promotional.
• Purvey won the 2nd Morey Pro Noseriding Invitational in 1966[...] This claim requires a cite of the calibre described above.
• [...]helped make famous his Ugly surfboard model, manufactured by Con Surfboards since 1966, which today is considered the measuring stick for most noseriders. - The former half of this sentence requires a cite of the calibre described above that explicitly links this win to that board's popularity. The latter half (...which today[...]) is irrelevant and should be removed.
• [...Malibu Surfrider Beach is] one of the most famous beaches in the world. And, one of the most polluted beaches in the Santa Monica Bay. Mostly irrelevant and the latter half is an incomplete sentence. The "most famous" part can go, while the "most polluted" can be incorporated into the sentence.
• In an effort to remedy the problem, Bob participated in a group that organized to address all the issues of concern with Stakeholders in the Malibu Creek Watershed - a 109 square mile landmass and network of streams that terminate at Surfrider Beach - and come up with an action plan. - This claim requires a cite of the calibre described above, and everything between the endashes can be removed in favour of linking Malibu Creek#Watershed.
• Over the course of the first few years, Bob spoke out about the various violations endured by swimmers and surfers at world famous Malibu Surfrider Beach. - This claim requires a cite of the calibre described above.
• He initiated the organization of the Malibu Lagoon Task Force in 1995 and organized the first "State of the Malibu Creek Watershed Conference" in 1997. - These claims both require cites of the calibre described above; what is presently there, as I've explained already, is deficient.
• Even today, despite certain advancements, Bob presses on to clean up the water at Surfrider, which remains one of the most polluted beaches in the Santa Monica Bay. We can presume he didn't just quit, but this is a situation where expanding on events since the 90's with regards to this that he had a direct hand in would help (provided they're properly cited, of course).
• In 1994, he realized that he wasn't reaching a big enough audience, so Bob turned to the skills he developed as an actor and started producing his first documentary, Malibu Creek and It's Surrounding Watershed, which in 1996 won 3 Falcon Cable awards: Best Producer, Best Communicator and Best Music.^[sic] - No cite is needed for the documentary provided he didn't Alan Smithee out, but the awards part (especially the Best Music one) should be in an article on the documentary, not here.
• Ugly's innovative board short has set a new standard in functionality and contrary to the name - aesthetics. - This claim requires attribution.

And before I forget - anyone who wants to work on this would need to address this literal laundry list of issues, even if they're writing the article from scratch. You cannot just copy-paste stuff you've written for elsewhere (we do not use standard all-rights-reserved copyright, which is completely incompatible) and you cannot make the article into a shrine of adulation. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I need a writer

I need a writer to edit my bio. The bio has many magazine and video artcles as references. It should be easy for anyone who knows how to navigate the Wikipedia maze and link up the references. The bio is well written and should easily conform to Wikipedia's standards. I own the copyrights. The writers I paid for became frustrated with Wikipedia and burned out. Any writers who can navigate Wikipedia and provide editing sollution out there? Bobpurvey1 (talk) 18:54, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Another previous, very similar Teahouse post - you may want to review the responses you got there, @Bobpurvey1. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 18:57, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Bobpurvey1 Yes, paid editing, while permitted, is not usually encouraged and many are skeptical of such editors(including, usually, me) Most don't apologize for that, as we are here in our free time volunteering because we believe in this resource.

My advice is that you abandon this effort and allow independent editors to organically take note of your career in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write an article(not a bio) about you. If they do, it is not for your benefit in any way, and there are in fact good reasons to not want an article. There may be benefits, but those are on the side. 331dot (talk) 19:02, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks or your time and reply. However, you are wrong in your interpretation. I am not offering to pay a writer from the Teahouse. 2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (talk) 19:10, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Please understand, I am looking into the Teahouse to see if there are any volunteer writers knowledgeable about the Wikipedia maze and who would want to take on the task of linking up the bio and submitting it. I think it would be simple because the bio is practically written and the URL's linking the references are readily available. 2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (talk) 19:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

We can't use what you've written. It's under Berne-standard all-rights-reserved copyright; Wikipedia uses a licence that allows for reuse for literally any purpose as long as the original writers are credited and any derivative works made with it are released under a functionally identical licence. The two are mutually-exclusive and incompatible. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:34, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

IP editor/@Bobpurvey1 (please sign in to your account!), Jéské Couriano has taken a great deal of time to explain in detail, just above, why the sources you have are insufficient. We can't use what you've already written and published, and we can't use your sources to start over. What you're asking would not be the small task you think it is. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 19:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Please understand, giving Ben Marcus credit is not an issue at all. Bobpurvey1 (talk) 20:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobpurvey1, I don't know what you mean by "giving Ben Marcus credit". No one has mentioned that as a problem. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 20:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps you should read what the Berne standard is. It requires giving credit once a work is "fixed". While Ben was a writer when the work was fixed, I was the authority of the work and paid Ben for his contribution. Thus, I am the producer of the work and copyright owner. So, like I stated, I am willing to give him credit but since I am the producer of the work and responsible for "Fixing" the work (publishing) I am not obligated to give him credit. But I will to avoid any argument with you, if you wish. 2603:8001:9BF0:430:801F:821E:A3C7:CA5B (talk) 20:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

You completely misunderstand what I'm saying. We can't use it regardless of whether or not he's credited because all-rights-reserved and Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike are not compatible licences. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:39, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

To try to be as explicit as possible: This IMDb bio seems to be a copy of the one you posted here. It was published on IMDb under a license that is incompatible with Wikipedia's. That is the problem. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 20:49, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

It's not a matter of giving the original writer credit. We literally CANNOT accept material published under all-rights-reserved copyright because it is mutually-exclusive with Wikipedia's copyright licence. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:27, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Bobpurvey1 I didn't think you were soliciting us to be paid. I'm encouraging you to abandon attempting to see something written about yourself here. 331dot (talk) 20:36, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

e/c It seems that competence is required is relevant here, all advice seems to be falling on deaf ears. Theroadislong (talk) 20:38, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Bobpurvey1 now blocked. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Bob, you may be very popular, but you are not notable. No professional, disinterested journalist or biographer has written an in-depth article or book about you anywhere published material can be found. You may have a million YouTube followers or as many Twitter followers; even a billboard in Malibu (I haven't checked), but nobody known for objective coverage, who you don't know, writes about you. If you win a California Assembly seat, you qualify for an article, but you currently need to drop that stick with which you beat a horse which has been dead for some months

Your obvious desperation is a poor reflection on both your character and your reasoning capacity. I somewhat fear that your next step will be to reference your ethnicity re our "racism", to reference your sexuality, or to point out that your country/village is too obscure to be covered in the international media, and that we therefore ought to make an exception and publish your bio. Guilting is ineffective on Wikipedia.

Notability is what we want, and you may achieve it one day. As a surfer, you may be old, but you may live long enough to "make it onto Wikipedia" one day. Should you die, you may, like many others, receive laudatory coverage in obituaries, including in prominent media such as the NY Times or the LA Times. At that point, your career will have reached its end, but, you will likely merit an article in Wikipedia. That is how we roll. Unfortunately, as your board shorts will likely be considered too trivial for mention, we'll be no help with those posthumous royalties. Best--Quisqualis (talk) 21:27, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Burn! Wow - but I can't disagree. As someone who writes about well-known mountain climbers and obscure scientists, it's a sad fact that many only become notable by Wikipedia's standards after they have died and independent people then write about them. Usually in major obituaries. See Martin Moran (climber); Andy Nisbet; Michael Proctor (botanist) and John Webster (mycologist), for example. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Please!

Please, I'm so sorry. I accidentally messed up the page for "The Invasion" album by P-Square. I'm so sorry. Please help me fix it, I'm begging you! 2600:1700:B8F0:7250:AD99:CFCF:64AE:2D23 (talk) 01:18, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done. I reverted your edit. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 01:20, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Best way to add an IP address to a sockpuppet investigation? and protect pages being edited by sockpuppet?

I noticed a revert of a previous edit of mine on Vaishno Devi. The IP that made the revert restored content that was added by a now-blocked user. When I looked at the history of the IP's edits, I saw they edited multiple articles that were also edited by blocked user Keshavv1234. What's the best way to report an IP that is probably the blocked user? And can the pages in question be protected from edits by the IP? Andrew Englehart (talk) 01:59, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Try WP:SPI; just carefully follow the instructions there, Andrew Englehart.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:05, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, Quisqualis. I went through the instructions and it looks like this page was updated. Did I do this correctly? Also, should I ask for page protection on the protection requests page, or is it a better strategy to ask for the IP range to be blocked for a while, since multiple IPs are being used from the 103.*.*.* range? Andrew Englehart (talk) 02:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC

I've undone the unredacted edits by those 3 IPs. Hope the blocked user is not feeling too energetic when they realize what happened. It may only be a matter of hours until the IP rangeblock turns on (I hope). Given that it's the weekend in most countries, I'm not requesting protection, though you may do so.--Quisqualis (talk) 02:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Disambiguation page for Press Play

Hi I just noticed that the disambiguation page for Press Play has the wrong date for the movie. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Press_Play It should be 2022 not 2002 but I don't know how to edit this page. Thanks Debbie Lakelady2282 (talk) 10:37, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for pointing this out, Lakelady2282. Incidentally, you edit those pages just like any other, by using the "edit source" tab, assuming you are using the source editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much Mike. Will do that in future.

Debbie Lakelady2282 (talk) 05:31, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Help with editing a stub

Hi there. I hope all you teahouse people are having a good day. I'd like to work on expanding Balag. The article currently lists just one source and doesn't contain any inline citations. I'd be more than happy to add inline citations but the source is in Hungarian (which I do not read). I'm aware that on the English Wikipedia that it's perfectly fine to use non-English language sources - it just means I cannot comment on the content that is there. What does one do in this situation? Thanks in advance for your advice. GuineaPigC77 (talk) 04:42, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

GuineaPigC77, the article Balag certainly needs improvement. Two things you may be able to fix:

• Does "harper" mean "harpist", or something else?
• Does "before ersemmas" mean before the ersemmas are sung, in the order of service? Or, historically before the genre of ersemma was invented?

Your task will be much easier if you have access to some relevant sources in a language you can read. Maproom (talk) 06:05, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Maproom. Yes, I have several sources which I've added under Further Reading in a language I can read, and those will be very helpful. I'm curious whether / how much I can edit what is currently written in the article. For example, if my source doesn't support (or contradicts) something that is written by the previous editor, how do I handle that? GuineaPigC77 (talk) 06:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source that contradicts an unsupported statement in the article, you should replace that statement by the supported one (but in your own words), citing your source. Maproom (talk) 07:25, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

short cut to add edit summaries & issue on Stetson Hatters

is there any shorcut to add edit summaries, i mean adding widely used summaries by me. there seems to external link (FIRA (men's rowing)) in infobox. is it ok to ask multiple questions at a time? or should i create multiple queries. jindam, vani (talk) 06:23, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Jindam vani. In your preferences page, under 'Editing', you can check the first box, which will help provide commonly used edit summaries. But I am not aware of any other tools. You can ask multiple questions in one thread, but keep it clear. Regarding your question about the external link, can you elaborate? Kpddg ^(talk) 06:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Kpddg yes, its under "gadgets"... jindam, vani (talk) 08:02, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Shall Insurance in the United States wiki page be branched into sub-pages?

There are 3 different classifications of vehicle Insurance in the US; preferred, standard and non-standard. These classifications set the insurance rates for the consumer, but are not related to insurance coverage. Would an individual insurance classification page be considered to be a sub page of Insurance in the United States? Lybon21 (talk) 10:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Lybon21, if you don't get a good reply here, you could try Talk:Insurance in the United States or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Finance & Investment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Lybon21 I don't think that making those sub-pages would improve coverage of the subject. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:54, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, how to join wiki projects?

I am new as a wiki editor and would like to know the procedure to join a wiki project. Dr.Sayan900 (talk) 07:53, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Dr.Sayan900 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It depends on the project, but most that I know of have no formal joining process, people just declare themselves to have joined. The ones I have seen have lists of members that new members simply add their name to. 331dot (talk) 07:57, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay thanks. I will try that. Dr.Sayan900 (talk) 08:10, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Dr.Sayan900 You mentioned elsewhere wanting to join the physiology project. See WP:Physio for their Project Page with details and instructions. A full list of science projects is at WP:PROJDIR/S. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:49, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Tutoring for beginners

Hello everyone. I was told by a friend that Wikipedia had a tutoring feature for newcomers so that experienced users can teach them the basics of Wikicode and stuff but I do not see that feature anywhere... Does it still exist ? And if so, can someone give me a link to it or something pls ? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craffael.09 (talk • contribs) 08:32, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Craffael.09 Hello and welcome. I think what you are looking for is the new user tutorial. 331dot (talk) 08:35, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Craffael.09 and welcome to the Teahouse. Another introduction is at Help:Introduction. With the Visual Editor many things can be done without using Wikicode. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:40, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Craffael.09 I suspect you might have heard about, and be thinking of, our Adopt-a-User scheme. It pairs up committed new editors to more experienced users for in-depth support and guidance over a prolonged period of time. I'm afraid that program is not suited to absolute beginners because far too many simply want to create one page and then disappear forever. Adoption is a process of teaching keen, committed editors more about what we do over many weeks or months, and takes a lot of coommittment from both parties. To be honest, this Teahouse forum is probably the best place for you to ask questions after you have tried to follow our self-guided help at Help:introduction. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:23, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I think OP was looking for WP:GTF. Sungodtemple (talk) 13:47, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft proofreading needed

Hi, my draft article (Draft:Qupital) just got rejected for having too much advertisement content. I have already updated and resubmitted the article but would be very grateful if someone more experienced takes a look at it in case I missed something. Thanks. 1205edit (talk) 19:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

1205edit It was Declined (not as severe as Rejected). David notMD (talk) 22:22, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 1205edit. Looking quickly at the citations in your draft, it looks to me as if every one of them (with the possible exception of the ones in Chinese, which I haven't attempted to translate) is either derived from Qupital, or a routine business announcement. You need several sources each of which is all three of: 1) a reliable source; 2) independent of Qupital - not written, published or commissioned by them, or based on a press release or interview with them.; and 3) contains significant coverage of them. Then the article should be based at least 90% on those sources. Which are your three best sources?

It appears that you have created an account, and immediately plunged into the most difficult task there is, that of creating a new article. This is like having your first violin lesson, and immediately giving a recital: not only will the critics pan you (if they bother to pay any attention at all) but you may well not understand what they are saying, because you haven't spent any time learning the technicalities of what you are trying to do.

Also, when a new user comes in and immediately tries to create an article about a company, they are very often connected with that company, and under the misapprehension that Wikipedia is like social media and you can create a "company page" where the company can tell the world about themselves. It is not like that at all: Wikipedia has articles only about subjects which meet its criteria for notability, and the article do not belong to the subject, are not for the benefit of the subject, and should preferably not be written by the subject or their associates.

If you do have a connection with Qupital, you are not forbidden from creating an article about it, but you are discouraged; and you should make clear your connection: see conflict of interest. If you are in any way employed or remunerated by Qupital, then you are a paid editor and making a formal declaration of this is mandatory. ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I genuinely don't work for them. I'm a student on summer vacation and wanted to find something to do. I heard of the company from my parents (who work in finance but don't work for them). 1205edit (talk) 03:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying that, 1205edit. But the rest of my reply still stands. My suggestion would be that you put Qupital on hold for a while, while you spend time coming to grips with Wikipedia's policies, and getting experience by making small improvements to some of our existing articlesw. ColinFine (talk) 15:08, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Unacceptable terminology

Apologies for reopening an old can of worms: The article Apex Clubs of Australia, to which I was a major contributor, alludes to several Clubs being involved in spastic children's charities. A member of the public has objected to use of the term "spastic" on the article's talk page, as being hurtful. I replied to the effect that it is historically correct terminology, both clinically and as used by the Clubs. I promised the I.P. I would open the subject for consideration by other editors. Doug butler (talk) 16:04, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I've changed the text to read "children with cerebral palsy". It is not acceptable to say "spastic children. Polyamorph (talk) 16:13, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Rejection of Article

My article was rejected for 2 reasons:

1) It says it is an autobiography, which it is not. It is about my father, James B Taylor III who died in 2003 and was a notable person in business aviation. I am James B Taylor IV but am registered as James B Taylor

2) It says my father is not notable. I provided many articles written about him and his accomplishments. See below. References are at the bottom.

Thanks,

Jim

Extended content

References[edit | edit source] The Legends of Cessna: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1997-Cessna-Book.pdf The Marketing Man – BCA Jan 1994: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1994-01-BCA.pdf Mr. BizJet - Wings of Gold, Spring 1993: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1993-04-WOG.pdf NBAA Awards Program – Sept 1992: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1992-09-24-NBAA.pdf James B Taylor, The Art of the Sell -  AOPA Pilot, Sept 1992: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/07/JBT3-1992-09-AOPA.pdf Winging It, The Making of the Canadair Challenger: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/01/Winging-It.pdf My Name’s Taylor. I Sell Jets – Professional Pilot, March 1989: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1989-04-PP-2.pdf Taylor Leaves LearJet, All Goals Accomplished - Aviation International News, March 1988: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1988-03-01-Aviation-Intl.pdf Air Force & Gates LearJet Reach Agreement on Purchase of C-21As - LearJet Press Release, Sept 1986: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1986-09-30-Lear.pdf Gate’s LearJet Gears Towards the Future - BCA, Sept 1986: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1986-09-BCA.pdf Gates LearJet Elects James B Taylor Vice Chairman of the Board & CEO - LearJet Press Release, , April 1985: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1985-04-16-Lear.pdf Marketing by Walter Wentz: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/JBT3-1979-Marketing.pdf Selling Paper Airplanes for $4 Million-Plus Each - Industry Week, April 1979,: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1979-04-30-Ind-Week.pdf Corporate Flying, Changing the Way Companies do Business - Business Week, Feb 1978: http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1978-02-06-BW.pdf A Citation in the Cessna Stable - BCA, Nov 1969 : http://gallery.jbtaylor.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/01/JBT3-1969-11-BCA.pdf

Jim Taylor 15:27, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Jamesbtaylor and welcome to the Teahouse. You provided a link to your sandbox - posting the entirety of its contents here was not necessary, so I've collapsed it and adjusted the headers a bit so they don't mess with the Teahouse's page formatting. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 15:36, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Content now removed as a copyright violation of this. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 15:44, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

• Comment: to Mr. Taylor, we appreciate your bringing the subject to the attention of editors in the Teahouse. This is exactly the place to ask such a question and we thank you. The issue with such contributions is your connectedness, raising the potential problem of conflict of interest, an essential guideline which I encourage you to read. From a reasonable WP:BEFORE, I have found additional sources I feel reliable and have boldly added them to your sandbox. Based on my cursory search, I believe the subject meets WP:GNG and a worthy biography could be constructed from sources already applied to the sandbox. I suspect that research in databases like newspapers.com might be able to further directly detail the subject. I'm going to cut across the normal grain in this discussion and offer to help you create a policy-compliant draft for someone else to review for possible addition to the pedia. While helpful volunteers here at the Teahouse will be happy to caution you against COI contributions, I see an opportunity to properly utilize the unique advantages of working with a connected editor on what some might view as a WP:MEMORIAL, which Wikipedia discourages for obvious reasons. I may be able to help you navigate the process. You've already learned we take copyright seriously on Wikipedia. Mr. Taylor, would you work with me on the draft? This may take a few weeks, but only a few actual hours of our time. Interested? BusterD (talk) 16:23, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Image Upload

Hey lads! I have tried to upload this image below I made this (below) using https://textcraft.net/ which allows you to use the images you make with it to be used on social media, this probably includes Wikipedia userpages, but bruv, it won't let me because it used WIkimedia Commons, it is for my damn userpage, I am very familiar with MediaWiki as I have my own wiki, I just wanna know why it will not let me upload my flipping image.

Below is a link to the picture.

https://postimg.cc/m1xWPY32 DragonsBreathUP2 (talk) 16:45, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@DragonsBeathUP2: Commons has their own help page: commons:Commons:Help desk. Be sure to include the exact message you received when you tried to upload the image. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 16:58, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Olfactory Art

Hi there, May I further expand on your wikipedia site on "Olfactory Art", the list of your "olfactory artists" is confusing and should ideally be further defined. Olfactory Art is predominantly Art , perfumers who have merely created commercial fragrances should not really be listed under this umbrella.

I would be interested in discussing this subject in more detail with you. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Olfactory_art 178.189.58.30 (talk) 16:09, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your interest in improving Wikipedia. You may be bold and update the Olfactory art article. You may also discuss potential improvements to the article with other interested editors at Talk:Olfactory art. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:00, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@178.189.58.30 I have removed two people from the list, whose Wikipedia articles clearly mentioned no artistry. Did you mean those? Feel free to make further edits. --LordPeterII (talk) 17:22, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Brexit

Why is it not described as a factually incorrect term? Britain did not exit the EU, the UK left the EU. ? 2A00:23C4:3E0D:7D01:59A9:76C5:CC77:E124 (talk) 16:58, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Is your question about the Wikipedia article Brexit, which describes it as "the withdrawal of the United Kingdom (UK) from the European Union (EU) at 23:00 GMT on 31 January 2020 (00:00 CET)", or about the term in general? Cordless Larry (talk) 17:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

IP Editor: As far as I'm aware, very little indeed has been published on the subject of the term "Brexit", and whether it is pedantically/semantically accurate or not. Note that Wikipedia articles are titled according to what they are most often called. All apologies to Northern Ireland.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:43, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Anyway, Brexit is usually interpreted as "British exit", not "Britain exit". British usually includes the whole UK and Britain also does in many cases. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

A misplaced article

I have wrote an article here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Lord_Milner/Lord_Milner_Timeline that I believe is misplaced. It is ready for publishing on wikipedia. Can someone please take a look and publish it or place it back in my sandbox? Thanks so much. Lord Milner (talk) 10:46, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Not commenting on the content, but think this needs to be moved to draft, in the same way that other editors have moved items by Lord Milner to draft in the past. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

To clarify, 'Lord Milner', Wikipedia editor, has been contributing and creating since July 2020, but is not to be confused with 'Lord Milner' (1854-1925) the subject of this draft. David notMD (talk) 11:50, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thanks for checking that, I was just going to point to WP:COI! I guess we can assume with relative certainty that these two are not the same... but you never know! On the internet, nobody knows you're a ghost writing an article about yourself. (And believe me I should know, since I am myself an incarnation of Lord Peter Wimsey.) --LordPeterII (talk) 17:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

So you're not even a real ghost! ColinFine (talk) 18:17, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse,

Recently, I mean, really recently, my new article was put up for speedy deletion for "copyright infringement" from the bettycrocker.com website. 1, I do admit I copy and pasted a portion of what is on that article, but revised some of the words so that it wasn't word by word. Anyways, I'm not sure why they would say the article is already made after I made that page. Their article is about Crocker herself, but merely mentions any information about the 40s, in which she was prominently most popular. But I do see why this would happen, given the similarities.

Yours Truly,

BettyCrocker321 (talk) 00:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Closely paraphrasing a source is still a copyright violation. Write it in your own words. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Copyright issues aside for a moment, why create Draft:Betty Crocker (Character) when its subject seems indistinguishable from that of the article Betty Crocker? -- Hoary (talk) 02:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Disruptive editor

Hello, I'm having a problem dealing with a user with confirmed user and rollbacker user rights. He is blatantly whitewashing the Iraqi regime and describing the US occupation of Iraq as the "criminal occupation" in the summary of his edits and also changing rebels to resisters in a battle involving US/Iraqi forces against al-Qaeda. He is also complaining and describing me instead as supporting the occupiers. This problem is happening now in Arabic Wikipedia, but unfortunately no one has done me justice yet. How can I go further? Sakiv (talk) 23:29, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I would settle this on Arabic Wikipedia if I were you. English Wiki isn't connected to other languages AFAIK (though I could be wrong). Liliana ^(UwU) 23:35, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Sakiv, welcome to the Teahouse. If you have a complaint about another user's behavior here on English Wikipedia, the place to take your complaint (with evidence in the form of diffs) is WP:ANI. No one here can take action on something happening on Arabic Wikipedia - you would have to use their own processes. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 23:36, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your response, however the English Wikipedia is concerned because those articles have been translated from it. With this, he questions the impartiality of this wiki. Such users who advocates for repressive regime like Saddam, their place is the forums, not here.--Sakiv (talk) 00:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Sakiv, do you have any evidence of bad behavior occurring here, on English Wikipedia? Then WP:ANI is the place to take that evidence. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 00:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't currently have any evidence against him on enwiki. But it is important to warm him quickly, even if he is doing it on another wiki.--Sakiv (talk) 00:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Sakiv, if nothing is happening here, there's nothing our processes can do about it. You need to use the processes where the disruption is happening. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 00:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

What if they are unwilling to take action on him? I don't know why we don't have an authority or court for all of Wikipedia. He is clearly a propagandist and edits with deep hatred for Iraq's "enemies". He even regards al-Qaeda as a resistance. This has been going on for a while now... Since June. First it was this article ([1], created by me) and now there are tens of them.--Sakiv (talk) 01:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Sakiv! what if they are willing to take action on them? you won't know until you try.

there's not really anything we can do about them from here in the english wiki if they don't actively edit here. even if they're blocked here, since they don't even use the english wiki, that block will do nothing and they'll remain editing in the arabic wiki. in addition, different-language wikis have different policies and different communities which aren't shared between wikis, so your best bet is using the ar-wiki processes.

there are processes to globally ban people sitewide like Global bans, however these are only used when the user has and is actively disrupting multiple wikis and has already been blocked through the community processes in at least two wikis. 💜  melecie  talk - 01:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Sakiv. Editors are not sanctioned for ideology but rather for misbehavior. Melecie is correct that editors who disrupt multiple projects can be globally banned. When you mention all of Wikipedia, you need to keep in mind that each language version is self-governed and has its own policies and guidelines. So, generalizations across all Wikipedia versions are not necessarily accurate. Cullen328 (talk) 02:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

How can I add information to this entry about exhibition games this team played?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1886_St._Louis_Browns_season

I have a newspaper article from the Alton Telegraph, a photo of the ballpark, and a copy of the box score from the paper of one of the games. I think this should be added to this entry but there really is no heading for this information to be added to. Jmhardaway (talk) 19:37, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jimhardaway. The talk page Talk: 1886 St. Louis Browns season would be the best place to discuss this. If nobody looks at that talk page (and there's nothing on it yet), you could drop a note on WT:WikiProject Baseball pointing to the discussion you've started. ColinFine (talk) 20:14, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jmhardaway, you can always be bold and add a new heading or add the photo wherever you think it's most relevant. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

This is bad...

I recently forgot my Wikipedia password... I barely remember it...— Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.198.231.128 (talk) 04:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

If you did not have an email address in your account preferences, and you cannot remember the password, unfortunately you cannot regain access to your old account. You will need to create a new account; once you do, you should identify it as a successor to your old account("Hello, I am User12345, I was previously User6789"). 331dot (talk) 07:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Article proposal - meet notability criteria?

Hi all. My father (John William Verrier, deceased) was Manager of the Team GB Olympic Swimming team for the 1972/Munich Olympics, team coach for several other Olympics, Director of Education for the Amateur Swimming Association (ASA, now Swim England), founded the British Coaching Association, and worked for the Federation Internationale de Natation Amateur (FINA) to develop squads from poorer countries following the LA Olympics. He authored 3 books.

I am aware that you don't advise that people write articles where they have personal involvement, but I believe I am mature enough to write a neutral article.

I feel his contribution to UK swimming is material enough to warrant a short obit-style article, but I would like to obtain your opinion. I would obviously need to substantiate this according to Wikipedia standards, but for example: - he was interviewed for a special ITN bulletin billing the 1972 Olympic prep camp as 'the most ambitious training camp in the history of British Sport. He was interviewed on a similar subject by the BBC. - 3 books published - as Director of Coaching for the ASA he focussed on quantitative methods to develop athlete strength & stamina, which (unbelievably now) was not very systematically practiced in GB swimming.

Does this seem to meet the notability criteria? Jonverrier (talk) 17:24, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jonverrier. Please read the Notability guideline for people paying special attention to the requirement for independent coverage. Interviews are not independent and neither are books that he wrote. So, based on the information you have provided so far, it would nor be possible to write an acceptable article about your father. Cullen328 (talk) 17:30, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. I am looking at the guidelines now. I would have thought ITV & BBC, as national UK channels, would qualify as secondary sources on the topic of impact to UK swimming. There are probably others on the ASA website. I will evaluate against the people notability criteria before sinking too much work in.

Either way I note your view & your substantial experience on Wikipedia. Jonverrier (talk) 17:40, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jonverrier, they are secondary sources. But interviews are not independent. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 17:43, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jonverrier. Thank you for asking, and for being upfront abou your connection. The way I often expain about independence is to observe that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

The other thing I will note is that, even without the confict of interest, writing an article is hard, and people who try it before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works often have a very frustrating time. I see you've been here a couple of years, but you've only made a handful of edits so far. I'd encourage you to put your father aside for a while and do some more improvements to articles, learning what the requirements are. ColinFine (talk) 18:07, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

User:Cullen328 is quite correct in their assessment of where your draft is at this time, based on presented sources. I have referred to WP:MEMORIAL in a thread above, as well as conflict of interest. These links may help you understand any wikipedian apprehension about a son writing about his somewhat-notable father. That said, the qualifications you list do not by themselves meet Wikipedia's threshold for notability; WP:NOTABILITY is based largely on sources, not qualifications per se. I'm doing a preliminary gsearch for "John William Verrier" and "John Verrier" +coach. I'm seeing a small number of sources which cumulatively might be argued to meet WP:ANYBIO. Three books written may weigh somewhat towards notability; if we could find a few reviews of such books, these would strengthen the argument for inclusion. If I were you, I would continue to accumulate sources as you can find them and apply links and found sources to the draft as you locate them. That his coaching was done largely in a pre-internet era would mean we're looking for offline sources like journals and newspapers. This source is not immediately useful, but implies information which might be found at more reliable locations. Here is another source which we couldn't normally use, but the head coach's initial brag that we was coached by Verrier seems to imply folks already know how important a figure coach may be to others. So you're looking for sources, and you may well know people (like students of your father) who might help you find such sources. If I were coaching a national Olympic team, I might have had profiles written about me and have been written about by other swimming authors. BusterD (talk) 18:06, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

FYI, a newspapers.com search for "John Verrier" + coach gives 51 hits between 1950 and 1995, and based on cursory reading, these are all about the swimming coach (and mostly from around 1972), some directly detailing. So there's hope. I want to credit User:ColinFine with an excellent response; it would be wise if an inexperienced editor were to gain experience OUTSIDE their specific personal interest. Not everyone's dad warrants an encyclopedia article; based on a prelim exam, yours may well do so. BusterD (talk) 18:30, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you and @ColinFine for detailed & helpful responses. Jonverrier (talk) 09:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Feedback on Festuca ampla

Anyone please send feedback on this article and will surely change on what needs changing. Anyone? Also check my userpage about me if useful. BloxyColaSweet (talk) 10:14, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I've made some edits to the page, you can combine references using the "name=" parameter. Polyamorph (talk) 11:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

How much of this article to delete?

Hi. I'm a new editor (but have done my research).

I found a terrible article. It's about a small, private Indian college. The article reads like a giant advertisement. It's full of unsourced content. Most content I would describe as "not notable".

I'm inclined to prune the article down to basics, to suit a general audience. But I'm not sure there'd be too much left.

Am I being too harsh? I would appreciate feedback from experience editors! Thanks in advance. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 04:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

p.s., I've already deleted quite a bit. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 04:31, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I totally agree with you. The entire article looks like it is written to advertise the college and its facility. For me, its almost like a college brochure and that too without enough citations for most of the information. I will be happy to help if other users agree that it should be trimmed to basic and appropriate information. ANLgrad (talk) 04:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement, @ANLgrad. -- Doktor Züm (talk) 05:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

This should be deleted wholesale. We do not assume secondary education institutes are de facto notable, and so it's possible this article was created before the debates that killed that notion. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:22, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, most of the article is gone. I believe I was fair.

I expect someone will notice soon enough! -- Doktor Züm (talk) 07:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Doktor Züm You may hear from Wikishooter, who created the article in 2009 and has been editing it as recently as Jan 2022. You were wise to start a dicussion on the Talk page about rationale for your cuts. David notMD (talk) 11:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft Review

Hello, Wikipedia!

I'm new here and I would really appreciate if you could tell me how to submit a draft for review? This is the draft I am asking about Draft:Marina Valmont

Thank you! :) Viorelia.c (talk) 09:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Viorelia.c Hello and welcome. I have added the appropriate information to your draft to allow you to submit it; this information is provided if you create a draft via Articles for Creation. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Heey,

Thank you for the warm welcoming and for the help. Have an amazing day!

Cheers,

Viorelia Viorelia.c (talk) 09:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Viorelia.c You need to read and pay attention to the mandatory requirements for biographies of living people. In particular, any material likely to be challenged must be supported by an inline citation to a reliable, published source. You have large portions of the text and all of the "early life" and "personal life" sections without any such sourcing. The draft has nil chance of being accepted without sources for verification of the facts stated. Mike Turnbull (talk) 09:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, will do. Thanks! Viorelia.c (talk) 10:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Many of the references need to be removed. Saying Valmont did ________ and then having a ref to that person or podcast that makes no mention of Valmont is not a valid ref. David notMD (talk) 12:16, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

About Template:Infobox gene

Hello. I was translating English pages to Korean, and I found something is wrong in RNA expression pattern. When we see ko:락토페린(en:Lactoferrin), RNA 발현 패턴(RNA expression pattern) segment is displayed as n/a. I collected opinions at Korean wikipedia already, but had difficulties solving problem. I found that when I set Korean label at wikidata, that item does not appear at RNA expression segment. What is wrong with this? --LR0725 (talk) 03:47, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LR0725, I'm afraid I'm not understanding what your problem is. But in any case, it is unlikely that anybody on en-wiki can help you with a problem on ko-wiki. Going to ko:락토페린, it seems to me that the link ko:RNA 발현 in the infobox works, so maybe the problem is fixed? Or is it that you want the whole of "RNA 발현 패턴" to be the link? I'm afraid I can't help then. ColinFine (talk) 08:46, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ColinFine! Surely, I know that asking at ko-wiki is the best choice, but it wasn't solved at all. Problem is that when we see 'RNA expression pattern' space at Lactoferrin, it appears like "Human: Top expressed in trachea, cancellous bone...". But at ko:락토페린, nothing but n/a is shown at corresponding 'RNA 발현 패턴] space. I have no idea why this happens. LR0725 (talk) 19:13, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

You will understand when you press [show] at enwiki. Maybe I should have more discussion with kowiki users. This problem is making me crazy. LR0725 (talk) 19:14, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I see it now. I'm afraid I can't help. Templates are not shared between Wikipedias - they must be copied and edited. I think the same is true of Lue modules, though I'm not certain. So you probably need to be talking to somebody who is familiar with ko:틀:유전자 정보 - perhaps on its talk page ko:틀토론:유전자 정보 (though I don't think anybody's created that yet)? ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Oh, thanks for your advice. I tried to solve the problem at ko:위키백과:질문방, kakaotalk, and discord, failing to solve though. I heard that Template:Infobox gene is not gaining data from wikidata from other user at kowiki. ko:틀:유전자 정보 is copied from Template:Infobox gene, so I thought we could get some adivce from here. LR0725 (talk) 12:23, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Los Angeles Intl Airport reference fix (minor)

Hello. Go to Los Angeles International Airport page. Go to second paragraph where references 4 and 7 are apart. Can you fix so reference citations are together? Cant fix this one. Thank you.Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Theairportman33531  Done, there was a space between the <ref /> tags. – Berrely • ^T∕_C 12:44, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Climate data info graphs

Are the very detailed and informative climate data info graphs being fazed out or replaced? I've seen new "climate data" entries with only small vertical temperature range bars and ZERO other climate data? Is this a intentional systemwide change, or a anomaly?

Changing from detailed informative graphs to difficult to read posts with virtually zero information is EXTREMELY "unhelpful" to say the least.
Is this intentional? 71.193.175.250 (talk) 14:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! in which article/s are the new climate info graphs you're talking about located in? the graphs in The weather in London have both bars {{climate chart}} and tables {{weather box}}, if you're referring to either of them. 💜  melecie  talk - 14:53, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Archiving links automatically

Hi. How do I archive links in an article automatically? What's the correct bot for that? Castlepalace 15:50, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace: Hello Castlepalace! The bot you are referring to is Internet Archive Bot. I'm not completely sure hwo it works as I know it will archive pages automatically, however there is a tool that will allow you to archive a page manually with the bot. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Does a double murderer meet wikipedias notability requirements

i was wondering if a double murder met Wikipedia's notability standards, Brittany Vontress is the individual in dire need of an article

I checked if there wasn't already an article and there wasn't but my checking skills are lacking Caucasianhamburger (talk) 16:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

No murder, double or otherwise is inherently notable. And I see no evidence that Brittany Vontress or the murder is notable. PRAXIDICAE🌈 16:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Caucasianhamburger, and welcome to the Teahouse. Notability as Wikipedia uses the word isn't about what a subject is or has done, but almost entirely about the quantity and quality of what has been written about the subject. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict × 2) Hello Caucasianhamburger. Any subject will have to meet the notability guidelines, have significant coverage, be backed with reliable sources, and comply with the biographies of living persons policy. In this case, it should also meet WP:CRIME and WP:NCRIME. Kpddg ^(talk) 16:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Caucasianhamburger. I found a newspaper article that says she pleaded guilty to "aiding kidnapping with a deadly weapon", and did not know the victim would be killed, so calling her a double murderer is incorrect. Our notability guideline for people says that a perpetrator of a crime should have an article only if The motivation for the crime or the execution of the crime is unusual—or has otherwise been considered noteworthy—such that it is a well-documented historic event. Generally, historic significance is indicated by sustained coverage of the event in reliable secondary sources which persists beyond contemporaneous news coverage and devotes significant attention to the individual's role. That does not seem to be the case here. Cullen328 (talk) 16:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Earn money from Wikipedia

Hi.How can I earn money by contributing to Wikipedia? EVRRVE. (talk) 17:09, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@EVRRVE.: Welcome to the Teahouse. In short, you don't. The project is volunteer-driven, and no one receives monetary compensation for their work on here. There are some contests that run every once in a while that might offer gift cards to winners, but that's about it, as far as I'm aware. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:41, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Citing with Kindle

When referencing a book accessed on Kindle, is there anything special that should be done with the cite? -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC) Pete Best Beatles (talk) 20:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Nope - you cite it like you would a printed book. How the book is accessed ultimately matters little; we'd still need the title, author, publisher, year of publication, page(s) being cited, and ISBN/OCLC#. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing wiki article "Priest (writer)"

Brand new editor to Wikipedia, I thought I'd get my feet wet with picking a random article that needed copyediting. Of course the first one I pulled up was a doozy, Priest (writer). The article appears to be full of quotes translated directly from Chinese, and the citations for the most part don't even link back to the original articles correctly due to the way the links are structured. There also seems to be a lot of unnecessary information added by fans, such as the table of works including the specific sexual orientation of romances and whether there are fan-adaptions of the works.

In short, I have no idea how to begin to tackle an article like this. I sort of poked around the style manuals but I couldn't really find anything that provided an obvious answer to these sorts of issues. Are these the sort of articles that end up getting essentially nuked and completely rewritten, and are better suited for intermediate/advanced users? Does this need to be handled by someone who has a good grasp of both English and Chinese languages? Please let me know, I'm eager to learn how to become a better Wikipedia contributor! Mintopop (talk) 19:43, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mintopop, welcome to the Teahouse and thanks for being willing to to work on Wikipedia. Start by just sticking to copyediting, which is correcting for grammar, spelling, readability, or layout, not rewriting the article. See Wikipedia:Basic copyediting for how to do it. The things you are talking about are problems, but they aren't what caused the copyedit notice to be placed on top of the page. Or just move on to another article. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mintopop, having bilingual fluency would make the task of fixing this article much easier for you. However, given that its deficiencies are so gross, machine translations of the sources would probably suffice for your purposes. Feel free to be bold, but first, announce your intentions to other editors by posting in some detail on the article's talk page. I hope none of the fans respond to your post and/or edits with objections, but you may freely and gently respond to them with WP:FANCRUFT arguments should that happen. Good luck! Any problems, ask here at the Teahouse.--Quisqualis (talk) 20:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@StarryGrandma and @Quisqualis, thank you for your assistance! I've tried to do the best I can to fix things up within my abilities and learned a few things about Wikipedia along the way. Going to just leave it where it is now and hope someone with more experience is able to solve the remaining issues. Thank you for welcoming me to the community! Mintopop (talk) 22:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hon. Victor Ofobrukueta

He's a Nigerian politician and a Pharmacist Ethiopemedia (talk) 07:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ethiopemedia: hello, and welcome to Wikipedia? Do you have any specific questions with regards to editing an article? ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 07:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Or are you suggesting an article be created about Ofobrukueta? You are welcome to try, using guidance at WP:YFA, but new editors are strongly advise to gain experience editing existing articles before attempting a new article. Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to create or co-create articles. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

If you do not want to create an article yourself, you could add it to the appropriate place in Wikipedia:Requested articles. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

...but I would add that requested articles is more like a place for editors who want to create articles to find things to do, not like a place where editors try to write everything on there. Weeklyd3 (talk) 23:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, i have no idea how to use Wikipedia, please help.....

Hi Everyone,

Could anyone help me out with an article i just drafted?

I wanted to make a page about a robotics company, but it was flagged as being an infringement of copyright. I thought it would be OK if i stated the relevant citations, but i pretty clearly don't know what i am doing.

I must admit i felt very proud when i finished the draft, and now it's flagged for speedy deletion i feel like an idiot.

Anyway, if you have any advice, tips, or suggestions for me don't hesitate to let me know.

Kind regards,

Spidersinthecupboard

Spidersinthecupboard (talk) 10:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Spidersinthecupboard and welcome to the teahouse! you have to write everything in your own words, you absolutely cannot just copy stuff from another website even if you change it up a bit (unless you are copying direct quotations from a speech, as long as it isn't excessive). copying from another website is a copyright violation and is strictly not allowed. unfortunately that does mean basically starting over if needed. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 10:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Melecie, thanks for the advice. I am going to rewrite it today in my own words. Luckily or unluckily depending on your view point, i am still in lockdown so i have plenty of time on my hands. Fingers crossed i will get it write this time! Spidersinthecupboard (talk) 01:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Apart from what melecie said (WP:COPYPASTE), WP:NORG and WP:YFA may be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:01, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Spidersinthecupboard, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. As I said to another editor a little way up the page, trying to create a new article as almost the first thing you do is like going to your first violin lesson and then giving a recital. Creating articles is much harder than it looks (and most of the work isn't in what you see - the text - but in the research), and editors who try it before they've got a feel for how Wikipedia works typically have a very frustrating time. I suggest you put Flexiv on one side for a while and come back to it when you've got a few hundred vluable edits under your belt (which are likely to be of more aggregate value to Wikipedia than an article about another company that hasn't so far come enough to anybody's notice that anybody's written an article on it. ColinFine (talk) 13:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, thanks for dropping the links. I checked them out and i think it has pointed me in the right direction. You are right with the violin analogy, but that's how i like to do things! Jump right in and hope for the best! I think its the fastest way to learn, well its definitely the most challenging anyway! I will continue to make edits, but i am going to give Flexiv one more shot. I think robotics and automation systems are going to become ubiquitous in a couple of years, and people will want info on them. Anyway, worst case i mess it up again! Thanks for the info and advice. Spidersinthecupboard (talk) 01:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

How to add a picture in living person biographies page

Hi, I want to add a picture. I have the picture as I am the first source but not sure if I can directly upload a picture by giving credit to my wiki ID? Thanks

Pr1311 (talk) 05:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Pr1311, both "I have the picture" and "I am the first source" have various possible meanings. If this is a photograph, were you the photographer? If it is and you were, then go to Wikimedia Commons and upload it there, truthfully saying that it's your own work. Pr1311 will then be credited. (You won't be asked for your real name.) If this is a scan of a photograph, or if the photographer was somebody else, please explain here. Once an image is at Commons you may use it within a Wikipedia article in any language, of course including English. -- Hoary (talk) 07:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks.

Its a picture I have clicked. Pr1311 (talk) 07:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

It's unfortunate that in Indian English (apologies if that's not the proper term), the phrase "I clicked the picture" means "I clicked the shutter on the camera", and not "I clicked on the image on the internet and copied it". A bit confusing. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 03:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pr1311 If you mean that you took the picture yourself with your own camera, you can upload it here: [2]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:13, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you. Pr1311 (talk) 07:21, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

While I uploaded the picture on the Wikimedia Commons, I am not able to place it under the info template next to the lead of the article. Can I get help on how to place it correctly. It needs to be placed on the right side, above the crisp bio details like nationality and all. Pr1311 (talk) 08:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Pr1311 I've fixed it for you(you used the entire url which is not needed). So you took that yourself? It is very professional in appearance. I also notice that your username contains "pr" which often means "public relations". Do you work for Mr. Sharma? 331dot (talk) 08:06, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I work at National Health Authority. As far as this is concerned, it is not part of my work. I am just doing it personally to contribute on Wikipedia. I have started to enjoy this platform so started with Dr Sharma. Thanks for the help. Pr1311 (talk) 08:24, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Pr1311 Thank you for your answer; this does make you a paid editor under our rules; please read the paid editing policy for information on how to disclose- which is a Terms of Use requirement. I'll also post information about this on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Pr1311 Furthermore, if you work for the Indian government or its agencies, that complicates the issue of copyright, as it could be owned by the government and not you. That depends on what the law is in India regarding copyright of images produced by government employees, which I am not aware of. In the United States, images produced by our federal government are public domain, but that is not the case everywhere. 331dot (talk) 08:32, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Mayor of Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines in 1998 - John L. Elizaga

Add to the the list of mayors of Cagayan de Oro City, Philippines, the name of Mayor JOHN L. ELIZAGA who succeeded Mayor Pablo Magtajas in 1998. Mayor John L. Elizaga served as mayor in March to April 1998 when Magtajas ran for reelection of the same office. 222.127.223.187 (talk) 04:02, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

He was a vice mayor, not a mayor.[3] Provide sources if you disagree. Aman Kumar Goel ^(Talk) 04:06, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Horace Randy Holt

Hi my name is horace Randy Holt currently residing in lloydminster Saskatchewan canada. 

I know I've sent things in the past and I don't know what to respond on as every one of my devices and accounts are being messed with seemingly as the people around me are going from being friendly to arrogant pricks. I've had issues and I've asked for help but seemingly people just want to toy people or try to entrap people further. I'm currently having issues with my cell phone my Roku my laptops every device in my possessions also all my cell phones I've had before and give out are still having access to my account so people invading my privacy and using it to benefit anybody but myself. Seemingly otherwise there's a lot of people around here getting hurt and the cops aren't reporting it and continually trying to set me up on things. To do with attempted murder back in 2019. I'm looking for help to try secure what's left of my life and to try a closer to my children seemingly as they are dangling kids in front of people as Leverage or to make people listen to what shouldn't be listened to. And I have been giving advice out here as to what should be given as a good human being and people contorting it to either cause harm or act like they're causing harm either way it's wrong because I can't get hurt what needs to be heard in court and I don't know if that's the issue where people are taking advantage of people's genuine kindness. I have to keep reminding myself they ain't helping me by not coming to talk to me so I understand this kind of sounds weird as sending out as an email but I am looking for help still in legal manners of a lawsuit on an attempted murder that's getting covered up. I know there's a lot here but I am looking for any kind of help possible that's basically I'm living one day at a time it's not even living.

I'll say it... lloydminster needs help or is it normal for people to lie about people dieing daily and people setting one another up and crap behaviour being the norm? ..... I'm just a father doing what I can with basically nothing now. Not to forget what has been happening.... just throwing that out there and hi from lloydminster Randy dove (talk) 13:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry if this is way different then what's use to here. I'm alone and getting screwed with literally and worse Randy dove (talk) 13:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Randy dove: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! The Teahouse is friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia. Did you have a question about Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 14:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Randy dove - welcome to the Teahouse!

The Teahouse is for asking questions about using Wikipedia, the free online encyclopedia. We are not equipped to help you with general life problems and I recommend you find a friend to talk to about it. Additionally, I have removed your fundraising link: although I am sure that your cause is admirable, we do not allow fundraising links on Wikipedia: the relevant policy is at WP:SOAP.

I hope this helps! Happy editing casualdejekyll 02:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll, @GoingBatty I think that's also a Gofundme link on his user page. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Neutral article about a criminal

How do I write an article about a criminal that doesn't violate WP:NPOV? 2A01:36D:1200:4512:3C37:56CB:3185:467 (talk) 13:17, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

You summarize and cite the WP:BLP-good WP:RS you have about that person in a WP:DUE manner. If you have no (or not enough) such sources, write about something else, or somewhere else. See also WP:CRIME. Living criminals are a difficult WP-topic, especially if you have no previous experience in WP-editing, so it is recommended to get some of that first. Knowing how to cite sources properly is essential. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:36, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Could you elaborate? Who? Is it just allegations, or has the person been proved to have committed crimes? Are there reliable sources?

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:38, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Looking at some decent WP-articles about criminals can be helpful for inspiration. Try Category:Criminals by crime. But again, look at good ones. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:40, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, my IP changed. The person I want to write about was arrested on cases of child sexual abuse, and was also the member of a pedophile ring. --2A01:36D:1200:4512:C46B:F682:67F8:1177 (talk) 16:00, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

And what sources do you intend to use? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:10, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Arrested, but not convicted? Is "member of a pedophile ring" proven? I don't like pedophiles, but this person might not actually be a "criminal" (until convicted of a crime). 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:10, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, see Cullen328's reply below on a similar thread. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:15, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Online tv channels

Hello! Add info, please in this article (table): 2022 European Championships Станислав Савченко (talk) 19:02, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia. If you have a suggestion to improve an article, please start a discussion on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 19:19, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

It's clear, thank you!--Станислав Савченко (talk) 04:49, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Klima

Moved to Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science § Climate

The True History of Covid-19!

Condense
The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it.
Covid-19 was made many years ago as a UK virus weapon to be used in place of a nuclear one. to help stop destroying our world. our army, navy, and air-force and civil service etc, would take the anti-virus but the invading army would all get ill or die or be weaken from it. it was on a number of documentary's about nuclear weapons and what is to replace them. going back many years. someone else knew about the covid-19 and that it was made with a pig virus and a bat virus forced together in a lab, ie man made. they made a film of it called contagion in 2011. but that took 2 years to make the film. that means they knew back in 2009, they did not know its name. i did before then, and i knew it took 5 years to join the bat and pig virus together. it was only ready as a weapon with a name if they have the anti-virus otherwise its just a test item that wont be mentioned. i knew the name of covid-19 before the film easy. now imagine my shock when PM Boris Johnson told me on tv.... there's a new virus called covid-19....lie! and we will have a anti-virus for it in 6 months time....another lie! the UK had tons of anti-virus ready by 2019. i once worked with citizen advice and still look up things for others, one day saw an item on a Ultra-Nations site (2 letters and rough name are a clue to what site) and there on it was a shocking page, it told me about how they needed a virus to be released because their specialist have worked out at the rate of humans are having their young ie 2-4 kids per family, there wont be enough food for everyone in 100 years time. it then said "the UK PRIME MINISTER HAS NOW ALLOWED COVID-19 TO BE RELEASED" [The only one with the authority to do this] i got all the details from there and it match the documentaries i saw. our PM MR B JOHNSON HAD RELEASED A UK VIRUS WEAPON THEN ALLOWED PEOPLE TO DIE BEFORE HE RELEASED THE ANTI-VIRUS, WHICH HE KNEW HE HAD TONS OF STOCKS OF. I also knew they would keep altering it and issue more anti-virus again and again. they would make money doing that and win public support as saving lives- when in fact they made it and released it, and PM knew he would kill by releasing it. it was stated covid-19/and all its forms would go on for 10 years. we have 7 years left before its stated end date. its 2022 now. everything i said is true. i told the UK MP'S all i knew, they must have checked it- because you can see what happened to the PM, the PM term was cut short by 2 years.

please you must keep my id private, give me a fake name and you wikipedia may contact me or others to contact me if by cost free account if you wish to set it up! this is a true story of covid-19 which many official people have told lies about it. The MP'S know so should the public! the PM lied before his parties shown here! i knew it was a weapon years ago, and a very official site confirmed our PM release it. this is the most important thing recently for you....ive made donations to you before, so i hope you keep my details private but you may contact me wikipedia. 209.93.183.26 (talk) 07:17, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia is for summarizing what independent reliable sources say, not what random IP users say is true. 331dot (talk) 07:21, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

To 209.93.183.26 and others - there is a firewall between the foundation that operates Wikipedia and the volunteers that maintain and contribute to it. Whether a person makes contributions or not has no impact on their editing. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I wonder why ths British MP's are the keepers of this knowledge... 71.228.112.175 (talk) 03:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

You should immediately go to the press, who will give you the attention you deserve. The real story of Johnson’s resignation is bound to sell papers (that it’s due to unleashing a severe bioweapon is a secondary matter). Also, they can ensure your anonymity better than any Wikipedian rando can (here’s the Guardian’s SecureDrop, for instance, but almost all serious papers have a similar thing going). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 19:29, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Huh. Who knew all this time we should have been blaming the Brit's. Bet the Queen was in on it. Oh well, we make better fish-n-chips in Alaska anyway. (Obvious tongue in cheek) --ARoseWolf 19:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Request to add more photos on articles without photos

Dear coordinator,

I am contributing to #WPWP but I was stopped whenever I reached 25. I was sent a post that I cannot do more than 25 in a day. I wrote through Talk, requesting for the sanction to be removed and allow me for at least 50 photos. I was told it has been approved but it is not, indeed. I was stopped again last night at 25 photos.

Please, that approval for 50 photos has not been validated. The order was given or rather spoken without action. Wikimedia is supposed to be a friendly space but it turns out to be frustrating and demoralizing space. This is not good for movement strategy and inclusive editing. I request that this sanction is removed for me. Please allow me to add at least 50 photos to articles without photos. Without the sanction I can add up to 100 a day. Please free my username. Thank you. Ngostary2k (talk) 21:03, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I've never heard of this limit, but I'm sure that it is in Commons, rather than here, so you should ask at c:Com:Help desk. My guess is that it is a limitation in the software, not a settable value in the user interface (but I may be wrong). If I'm right, even Commons admins won't be able to change it for you. ColinFine (talk) 20:16, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Ngostary2k, welcome to the Teahouse. Looks like you've hit the edit filter which serves to throttle contributions tagged with #WPWP. This is due to disruption the contest has caused on English Wikipedia in the past. I don't see any discussion in which you were given approval for the throttle to be lifted for your specific edits (I'm not even sure such a thing is possible) - this discussion on your talk page is about the Upload Wizard on Commons, not about the edit filter. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 20:18, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, @Ngostary2k, I see you were asking for an example of what not to put in an infobox, image-link-wise. Look at this diff to see what you entered and what Kj cheetham corrected your entry to read. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 20:33, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

A bigger problem is that @Ngostary2k entered a photo of an American lawyer in an article about an English footballer. That's plain disruptive. —Wasell^(T) 🌻 06:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

reliable sources

hi again!! if i were to use wiki fandom, or fandom wiki- im not sure what its called, but its this site. would it be credible/reliable, or no? Getting Freaky on a Friday Night, yeah. (talk) 03:57, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Getting Freaky on a Friday Night, yeah. The answer is absolutely not. That website is based on random user contributions and is pretty much the opposite of a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 04:01, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

oof. I see. well, i better get searching because "personal experience" isn't reliable either. thanks for the help @Cullen328 :-) Getting Freaky on a Friday Night, yeah. (talk) 04:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

FYI: wikis are not reliable. While wikis for stuff like Minecraft try to be factual as possible, something obscure like Jelly Jamm will be prone to MADEUP information by random contributors. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 06:49, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Richard III of England

Hi, my name is Matthew Leinheiser and I would just like to make it known that someone has vandalized the article on Richard III of England. They falsely claimed he was the first ever transgender king and added a photo that had altered him to look like a modern day school girl. 47.195.2.191 (talk) 22:15, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

It looks like another editor has been steadily reverting them. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 22:20, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

And the IP address vandalizing the article has been blocked. David notMD (talk) 07:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Translation from Czech to English

Hi, I want to translate few articles from Czech to English, but it's still a draft and I can't publish it. For example this from Czech: https://cs.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marketing_Miner to English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Marketing_Miner can somebody check my draft, if it's okay, or maybe review it? :) Peter Novácki (talk) 11:49, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

In the summary for your next edit, Peter Novácki, make it clear that this started as a translation from cs:Marketing Miner. Marketing Miner is a SaaS (Software as a service) tool that focuses on gathering marketing data about keywords, domains, and URLs. The tool (and the startup of the same name) was founded in 2015 by Filip Podstavec. By "focuses on gathering XYZ", do you mean "gathers XYZ"? How does anyone "found" a tool? (If it's software, did Podstavec write it? If it isn't, or isn't only, software, what is it?) These APIs: between what software and what software? Is it free software? Et cetera. -- Hoary (talk) 12:12, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I already edited the draft :) Can you check it please again and send your suggestions? Peter Novácki (talk) 12:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Maintenance templates

Is it possible to see a list of articles that currently have a specific maintenance template within a specific wikiproject. For instance, would it be possible to get a list of all pages with a citations needed template associated with WP:POD? TipsyElephant (talk) 00:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @TipsyElephant and welcome to the teahouse! for [citation needed] specifically, you can use Citation Hunt to get uncited statements per category (unfortunately not wikiproject, as far as i can tell).

other maintenance templates can be searched in a similar way by using two incategory: prefixes in search, like incategory:"All articles with unsourced statements" incategory:"Indie video games" to search for uncited statements in the Indie video games category (which unfortunately can't be done with wikiproject categories since they tag the talk page, while maintenance templates usually tag the article). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant You can for many wikiprojects, but not yet WP:POD. The list is here: [4]. I added WP:POD to the list just now - I think. (Edit here: [5]) I've never done that before so I'm not sure if I've done it correctly. The bot runs on Tuesdays, so check back in the next 24 hours or so (I forget exactly when it runs) to see if Podcasting is on the list. Good luck fighting your backlog! -- asilvering (talk) 02:12, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: PetScan can do it. Here is a filled out form: [6]. I specified {{WikiProject Podcasting}} first for efficiency because it has far fewer uses than {{Citation needed}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:42, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Where there ever a school #5 in Baltimore City in the 1960?

174.251.66.95 (talk) 13:26, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. The Teahouse is for asking questions related to editing Wikipedia. For fact-related questions, you may find help at the Reference Desk. Kpddg ^(talk) 14:00, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

How to delete uploaded image from Media wiki

Hello,

I want to delete some image which was uploaded by me, Endrabcwizart (talk) 12:20, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Endrabcwizart, assuming it's one of these [7], go to the specific image, then click "Nominate for deletion" in the column on the left, and follow instructions. Commons:Courtesy deletions may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:36, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång thank you, Endrabcwizart (talk) 14:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

External links on OECD Better Life Index page

I realized that there are multiple places in the page where it is linking to their website. I felt these need to be removed as per WP:EL. Also, reference number 8 links to their website. Before making these corrections, I wanted to get some opinions from other users. Also, citations 5, 6 and 7 are to their website and the page seems to rely heavily on citations that are their own website. In my opinion, there should be a notice on top stating that it relies heavily on primary sources and additional citations are required. Should I go ahead and add the notice on top so other users can help the page with appropriate citations? Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 04:27, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

ANLgrad Thanks for wanting to improve that article. You are certainly correct that the EL in the body text should be removed or, if valid sources, converted into citations. The article appears to have an adequate number of secondary sources, although more would be welcome. Primary sources from the OECD, which is a well-known and legitimate organisation are not problematic as such but if you can improve the article, please do so. Adding tags for others to work on is of less use in this case. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Mike Turnbull thank you for answering my question and doubt. I will try my best to find more sources and improve the article. If I have any further doubts, I shall post it here. Thank you.

ANLgrad (talk) 10:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull I had a question. I am researching and finding more sources for the OECD article. I added a BBC which is WP:RS. I found another one - https://www.thestatesman.com/opinion/the-gdp-paradoxii-1503092058.html

This is not a detailed article about OECD. However, it does mention about it and could be a good secondary source. Would you recommend this could be added? Thank you.@ ANLgrad (talk) 18:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

ANLgrad The source would be good for the quote "...which are far superior measures of the quality of life and well-being", I think, but I'm no expert on the topic. For that reason, you could be WP:BOLD and add something but should take further discussion to the Talk page of the article, where those interested in the subject would be more likely to see it than here at the Teahouse. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:10, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull I was thinking on the same lines as what you said. Thank you. I will add it as a reference and also mention on the talk page. ANLgrad (talk) 14:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Referencing

Can I use any kind of offline document as reference to verify topics on post? Offline documents could be certificates or event pictures. Also which kink of news can validate post? If a single news has all the details of a post can that verify the whole post? If possible then should I add the same news reference to the end of every topic? ARMahee (talk) 15:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, ARMahee, and welcome to the Teahouse. The format of documents does not matter: they can be online, paper books, PDFs, Videos, anything. What is crucial is that they have been reliably published. Furthermore, most sources must be independent secondary sources: certificates could be cited if a random reader could get hold of them, but they would in most cases be primary sources. As for pictures: copyright-free pictures are very welcome for an article, but it is rarely useful to cite them as a source. (I suppose if the picture has been published by a reputable publisher with a caption saying "The photo shows X at Y event on date Z" that might be OK).

Generally every paragraph should have a citation (except in the lead). If you are citing the same source multiple times, see NAMEDREFS. But if there is only one suitable source for the content of an article, then the subject is unlikely to meet the criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 15:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@ARMahee, welcome. Sources can absolutely be WP:OFFLINE, but they must have been published, like a book. And WP:RS, of course. WP:PRIMARY may be of some help.

On "what kind of news", there is a list of sources which has been discussed on-WP several times at WP:RSP, that may give you a general idea.

Generally, you should add at least one cite/ref per a paragraph, if that cite supports the entire paragraph, it is sufficient. WP:INTREF3 has info on how to name a ref so it's easy to use it severel times in the same article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Russia, the country of Terrorists.

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.

---

Why is Russia not described as a nation of degenerates and terrorists at this point? Thanks! Helpgetridofmorons (talk) 11:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Assuming you mean the WP-article Russia, some combination of WP:RS, WP:OR and WP:NPOV, probably. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:35, 23 August 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.

Regarding images

Hi, I am making a Google "clone" on my userpage using basic mediawiki stuff, am I able to upload images either to commons or on Wikipedia itself for use on my page? There are some images that aren't on Wikipedia that I need on my userpage. Let me know what I should do, thanks. HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 23:29, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@HolyNetworkAdapter: Find somewhere else to do this. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:34, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I think I can just not use those other images, sacrificing looks but its OK. Thanks for the suggestion though. -- HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 23:39, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@HolyNetworkAdapter Wikipedia's servers should not be used to host material that won't be used on Wikipedia: Notwebhost 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

This is just a basic clone of Google with mediawiki formatting. I don't need anymore help but thanks. --HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 17:12, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hockessin, Delaware map

Your map of Hockessin, Delaware which is the 19707 zipcode, includes parts of the 19807 zipcode, which is Wilmington, Delaware 2601:45:500:2435:39A8:8BE:C99F:7F6B (talk) 20:30, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @2601:45:500:2435:39A8:8BE:C99F:7F6B, welcome to the Teahouse!

Contrary to popular belief, ZIP Codes do not correspond to any defined geographical area. For example, Walmart's headquarters have the zip code 72716. If you were to do a survey of what addresses have what zip code, and map the results, you'd find a lot of fuzzy boundaries and other oddities. Additionally, a quick google suggests that the 19807 zipcode does indeed serve parts of Hockessin.

Thank you for your question! casualdejekyll 02:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

The area known as Houston, TX has dozens of Zip codes, and some of them may also cover suburbs. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, in general zip codes have no relation to city boundaries. In this case, I will note that the map in our article agrees quite closely with the boundary shown in Google Maps. However, it does not agree with the boundaries shown on what appears to be the official web site of the village[8]. So there does seems to be something amiss here. CodeTalker (talk) 17:20, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Tool "what links here"

I'd like to see the links excluding the ones to templates. I am writing currently on Swiss Federal Councillors and sincerely the ancient ones have mainly links to the templates and do not have wls into the articles themselves. If we could see to what articles they had a wikilink, we could read the source for the mention there, with which we could expand the original article we are working on.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 14:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Paradise Chronicle, see if this helps: Wikipedia:Help_desk/Archives/2022_May_15#What_links_here. If not, try asking T the M. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks a lot. Will check. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much dear Grabergs Graa Sang. The User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js tool was what I was looking for. Makes it also much more easy to wikilink new articles.Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:10, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Requesting deletion of User:HolyNetworkAdapter

I need my Meta-Wiki stuff to apply here, Not sure if this is the right place to ask so yeah. HolyNetworkAdapter (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Related: #Regarding images —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 19:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I deleted it but you could have used {{db-u1}} template. Ruslik_Zero 19:33, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Restoration of Page Bhavsar

Hi All,

There used to be a wiki page for a community called Bhavsar/Bhavasar , its a caste in Hinduism which even tho has less population. I belong to this community , And it is causing people to believe people of this community don't exists. K.amit89 (talk) 15:33, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Articles on Bhavsar have been deleted twice, the most recent time in 2018, by Explicit, with the edit comment I'm not seeing any significant and/or non-trivial coverage in any reliable source (books, scholarly dissertations et al), to justify a standalone article (Ref 1 fails on this ground).It may be further noted that a source from the State Series of The People of India covers the topic but has been determined to have heavily). The comment breaks off in the middle of a sentence, but WP:RSCASTE#The People of India discusses why many editors think that this is not a reliable source.

You may find it helpful to ask about this at WT:WikiProject India. ColinFine (talk) 15:57, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @K.amit89, the article Bhavsar was deleted in 2018 due to lack of significant coverage by reliable sources. Any article on Wikipedia should meet the notability guidelines. Kpddg ^(talk) 16:01, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Since this community is small and historically has moved from its place of origin, There are not many sources aside from government document confirming existence of such community. Hence causing confusing because many people trust wikipedia, Similar situation I faced today. If one wants I can provide my own certificate(redacted) issued by government as proof of existence of this community and I belong to this community.

Also another reason being that some people who moved down to further south in india , we are confused with Maratha (caste) because of both of our communities speak Marathi language. Hence causing more confusion. K.amit89 (talk) 17:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry for your predicament, K.amit89, but it is not Wikipedia's responsibility if people ascribe meaning to there being or not being an article on a particular subject. We see a similar concern from people in jobs that don't much get written about (for example production engineers in the music industry), and who believe that their career is being affected because there isn't a Wikipedia article about them. But Wikipedia is a private project with its own rules and purposes. If there are not enough reliable independent published sources to base and article on, then there will not be an article. ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) There used to be an article named Bhavsar, which was deleted in 2018 through the proposed deletion process, and in 2008 as a copyright violation. Since the 2018 version was deleted under the PROD process, anyone can ask for it to be undeleted at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion, however, you should be ready to address the concerns from 2018. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 16:02, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

This might be a challenging task if few published sources exist on the topic, K.amit89. It might not be much use me telling you, but people shouldn't trust Wikipedia articles unless they are properly supported by reliable sources (which ideally the reader should consult, rather than relying on Wikipedia's summary). Cordless Larry (talk) 18:45, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Easy editing assignments?

Hi, I am a newbie editor and I was trying to help out by doing a few of the "easy assignments" that came across my feed. (I know one subject really well: Electronic literature--the rest, I can help out where I can...). I got Mawuena Trebarh and what appears to be an older version of Digital Commons. Maybe I am just unlucky--but in both of these cases, the problems ran far deeper than a 5 minute clean up for grammar. Is the suggest an edit feature an automated one? or a volunteer-human one? Maybe it would be better to just have a button that volunteer humans can check to note actual articles that could use 5 - 20 minutes from an editor who knows absolutely nothing about the subject? Thanks! LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 12:45, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi LoveElectronicLiterature and welcome to Wikipedia. Yes, the "Suggested Edits" function of the newcomer homepage is generally automated, though it pulls from a category of articles tagged with issues by human editors and finds articles likely to be easy for newcomers. There's not much that can be done in these cases, so it's best to just skip the article. If you're interested in more long-term tasks, the WP:Dashboard and WP:Task Centre are good places to start. – Berrely • ^T∕_C 12:48, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

LoveElectronicLiterature, thank you for wanting to help Wikipedia. If you want to help it, I imagine that you find it useful (at least some of the time). And if you use it, surely from time to time (or very often) you find strange gaps, unreferenced claims, unparsable sentences, sloppy wording, mistranslations, etc, within the articles that you anyway want to read. I suggest you work on them. If fixing one such article threatens to occupy several days, nobody's obliging you to commit to that: you can instead just spend twenty minutes on it, and some time later perhaps spend twenty minutes more, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 12:54, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Berrely and Hoary.

I just looked at 10 suggestions, and every single one was flagged but the grammar was basically sound. This easy editing feature is not working--and could be scaring off us newbiews. I wonder if it might be possible to have a human check box for "needs easy editing" and put the human checked ones at the top of the queue? Or at the very least add a warning right under "Suggested edits" in the feed: "Note that these suggestions are automated. We appreciate your editing, but if an article has more complicated issues, please leave a note about those issues on the article's talk page."

I'll stick to what I know. Listing all of the notable electronic literature folks is going to take up enough of my lifetime. LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 13:04, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@LoveElectronicLiterature I felt similarly when I started. Most of what the homepage was suggesting to me was either perfectly tolerable (sometimes) or a disaster (more often), so it was a bit dispiriting. Joining a wikiproject can be a good way to dip your toe in. Some of these projects have cleanup pages that can help you find simple tasks. Here is the cleanup listing for WP:BOOKS, for example: [9]. This is almost everything that is tagged as a Books article needing attention, so it's very long and may look quite daunting, but several of the categories are the kinds of things that you can fix quickly (or at least quickly determine that they can't be fixed quickly). These tags are what generates the list of assignments you're coming across on the newcomer homepage. If you don't find going through cleanup tags fun (frankly, most people don't), improving articles on electronic literature and ignoring the homepage is the way to go. Glad to see someone working in that topic area, by the way! Literature articles in general need a lot of help. -- asilvering (talk) 22:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @LoveElectronicLiterature! I'm going to keep this brief to avoid flooding you with information. To be honest with you, the feed/homepage is a very new feature. We've gotten by 20 years without it and I'm not sure why they added it. But I'm very glad that you're finding it useful! If you have a subject you're interested in, you can see if there are any gaps in our coverage that you could help fill: for example, the article Electronic literature is currently rated C-Class, and definitely requires improvement (especially the History section). If you want to help out there, it would be greatly appreciated: it is a vital article, which means it is considered one of the most important articles on the encyclopedia and any improvements would be greatly welcomed. casualdejekyll 02:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm honestly not finding the home page at all useful!! I am really going to help out on the electronic literature and we are thinking about starting a project page. We are having meetings now. I just need to become an expert in wikipedia editing so I can help our busy volunteers (Assuming we get any). I'll also be reaching out to whoever edited any of the pages on elit. But my feedback to wikipedia so far is that their automatic editing suggestions are scaring people off! Please either fix the problem and actually just share articles that are easy (.ike the book project mentioned) that are curated by humans or put a warning as I suggested: Note that these suggestions are automated. We appreciate your editing, but if an article has more complicated issues, please leave a note about those issues on the article's talk page."

So far I have added the folks who write elit to the list of elit writers, with a justification for each addition in the talk page. And I've fixed a few errors as I come across them. My next task is to look at all previous drafts, see who is actually notable in the field. I am also compiling a draft doc outside of wikipedia so that as I comb through third party references (Like Electronic Book Review, Kate Hayles classics, etc. etc. ) I can put those good references in the correct pages.

I really appreciate your help and guidance in this task! Thank you! LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 13:59, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, also, I have been in the field since the 1990s when I interviewed everyone in the field--all 8 of them. Where should I say who I am as the instructions say not to put that info on your user page? I do want to declare any conflicts of interest, but mostly I am an expert in the field?--Just not in wikipedia--I had a full time job and no spoons before July 30 of this year. LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 14:01, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@LoveElectronicLiterature: You are allowed to say who you are on your user page. For instance, see Cullen328’s userpage (taking him as an example because he’s a Teahouse host and I knew he gave lots of personal details). There is a prohibition against "Inappropriate or excessive personal information unrelated to Wikipedia", but it is not as strong as it sounds - saying what your interests are is clearly OK especially if you’re going to edit in that area.

You might want to read WP:IRL before deciding to put personal info on your userpage (it describes the risks of doing so). Be extra careful before putting other people’s personal info - "I am married to X" is personal info of X.

Regarding conflicts of interests: if you intend to do significant edits on pages related to (former or present) employers, spouses, relatives etc. you are encouraged to disclose that. See WP:DISCLOSE for how to do that. Note that it’s not a formal COI disclosure as you would need for certain employers etc. - you don’t even need to declare the exact relationship if you don’t want to. Something along the lines of "I worked at company X, then company Y" would usually be sufficient. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 20:04, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Raymond Wadsworth Walters

Hello: I have been researching the life of Raymond Wadsworth Walters (1885-1970), the longest serving President of the University of Cincinnati for several years. There is a very brief Wikipedia entry on him with the barest of factual details. Raymond Walters I have published several articles about aspects of Walters' life, read the entire contents of his diaries (1925-1960), and other related research. I hope to turn all this hard work into a biography of the man at some point, but I thought, given my wealth of knowledge of a public figure that lived a mostly unnoticed life, it might be fun to write my first Wikipedia entry.

I want to know how to embed headers in my essay and footnotes for my sources.

Do I want to add on to the existing article or create a new one?

Full disclosure, I am my brain freezes up when confronted with lots of instructions. The easier and more user friendly you are able to keep the instructions, the better for me.

Thanks in advance for your help. I am excited to get started on this new project.

Cordially,

Bob Miller, PhD

Department of History

University of Cincinnati Historyprof1959 (talk) 20:59, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Historyprof1959, welcome to the Teahouse. The most easy and user-friendly way to get familiar with how Wikipedia works is (arguably) the Wikipedia Adventure. I say "arguably" because it's not entirely bug-free and doesn't support the visual editor. There's also this series of tutorials which tries to keep things simple and easy to navigate.

Once you've run through one or more of those, I'd recommend simply editing the existing article; a complete overhaul is a complex and difficult task. Start small. If you have ready access to good sources (in our sense of "good", i.e. reliable, independent, published sources), add a few sentences of properly cited, paraphrased information from them to the article. Note that citing your own work should be done with caution. Once you've got the hang of things, you can expand more boldly. And always feel free to ask questions here! 97.113.27.216 (talk) 21:45, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Historyprof1959, in its current state, the article Raymond Walters is dismal. It doesn't even succeed in its very modest ambition, having him "comply" stuff he presumably had compiled. Yes, you could make unambitious alterations and augmentations, till you've got the hang of this and can confidently make sweeping changes. Even better: Put Walters aside for a while and, of course using reliable sources, try improving the extraordinarily feeble article ("stub", as it's called hereabouts) on one of his successors, Henry R. Winkler. Meanwhile, some essential reading for you: Wikipedia:Expert editors. -- Hoary (talk) 22:11, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

• @Historyprof1959:, you have been given good advice above (in particular you should definitely read Wikipedia:Expert editors). Just a few more points.

Wikipedia is exactly the kind of place where you get lots of instructions, often conflicting ones. The good news, however, is that most of those are second nature to academics - cite your sources, write in a "dry"/emotionless tone, etc. Here are a few more instructions

• I want to know how to embed headers in my essay and footnotes for my sources. For headers, see Help:Section#Creation_and_numbering_of_sections. For footnotes/sources, see Help:Referencing_for_beginners#RefToolbar (I linked to a specific section, but do read the rest of that page if you have time).
• Try to make the article understandable by a general audience.
  • Avoid jargon and complex sentences as far as possible. (Sometimes, it is unavoidable - nobody can hope to learn about the Pauli exclusion principle or the adiabatic flame temperature without some background knowledge about physics; but those articles should require an undergraduate degree rather than a PhD.)
  • Do not assume obvious context - for instance, the reader may not know Cincinnati is in Ohio, or even in the US. (Do you know where the city Ibadan is? It probably has more English speakers than Cincinnati.)
• Do not make original research. Ideally, cite everything you say to a secondary source; usually, a book or scholarly article. Do not cite primary sources (such as the diaries), and especially do not make your own interpretations of primary sources. Cite secondary articles that have already done that interpretation. (Citing your own journal articles is OK is done with moderation; make sure to fairly represent the various viewpoints if there is a controversy in the literature.)

Make sure to come back here, on the Teahouse, if you have questions, even seemingly stupid ones. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 20:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Nedeljko Čabrinović

Hey there!

I need some suggestions regarding this draft. My main focus is on the assassination, however you can give me any suggestions or problems in the article. Have a good day-er, night. :) Sarrail (talk) 23:35, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Sarrail, I don't discern any significance other than being one of seven people who conspired toward Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. How would an article on him be helpful? -- Hoary (talk) 23:51, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Wasn't he the one throwing the bomb at the Archduke? The other six have notable features that were promoted to an article, why not Čabrinović? On top of this, there may be reliable sources of Čabrinović. I don't know if I should abandon the articleship, or keep continuing. @Hoary:, I am open to your answer. Sarrail (talk) 23:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

I haven't looked at any of these six articles, Sarrail. I also know nothing about Čabrinović and am quite willing to believe that there's plenty more to say about him. Forget the other six articles/people, and ask yourself if there is more of consequence to say about Čabrinović. If there is, then continue. -- Hoary (talk) 00:41, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Sarrail An article already existed for Nedeljko Čabrinović, and has been redirected, initially with this edit: [10]. You may want to discuss this on the talk page of Assassination of Archduke Franz Ferdinand. If you do so, you might want to tag in czar, who redirected the article. -- asilvering (talk) 02:05, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

If they're only known for the assassination and reliable sources largely do not cover other aspects of their lives, then we usually redirect and cover within the parent article as a biography of a living person known only for one event. Some of those other biographies might be worth redirecting too, by that note. czar 02:40, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Here's the history of the article before it was turned into a redirect. Of course, it's imaginable that you have found or are about to find sources that are better than those used for the earlier article. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I am pretty sure Gavrilo Princip is the more notable of the seven. That article falls clearly under BLP1E, but Gavrilo_Princip#Legacy has stuff that would make it very uneasy to make/redirect. (As an irrelevant aside, that’s the only one whose name I was taught in history class.) I am not seeing anything of that sort in the Čabrinović draft at the moment: if you remove stuff about the assassination and the subsequent trial, all that’s left is that he had tuberculosis and his remains are at the Chapel of Vidovdan Heroes. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 21:01, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Article deletion

I created an article with sufficient sources. It was deleted, as in a prior afd several years ago, the consensus was to delete. I decided that time has passed, and the subject has become more notable. However, the article was speedy deleted, without proper afd procedure. I would like to send an AFC on that article, but I would like the archived content I made on that article, sent to me, possibly through my Sandbox. Thank you. Bronoton (talk) 19:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bronoton: Welcome to the Teahouse! To request a copy of the deleted content, you may contact someone in Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:35, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bronoton I took a look at the recently-deleted page and, as it stood, I couldn't see any sources that suggested she meets WP:NACTRESS. If you were to have the content restored, it would be necessary to work on it in your sandbox until you felt it did meet those essential notability criteria and only then to submit it for review at WP:AFC and not to try to move it directly into mainspace again. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I understand. Bronoton (talk) 22:22, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Conflict of interest and paid editing

Conflict of interest and paid editing concern

This post is in regards to a city councillor in Ottawa named George Darouze's page being locked on wikipedia, whilst one of his challengers in an upcoming election did not have his locked. I am a constituent in his area and am curious about your comments regarding paid editing or conflicts of interest. I was looking through candidates for my local area for the upcoming election, and couldn't help but notice stark differences in 2 candidates pages. The Darouze page had A) pushed negative media articles in reference to the councillor to the top of the page B) referenced his previous support for the man who is now running against him (relevance) and C) after checking the page of both Darouze, and another candidate named Doug Thompson, I couldn't help but notice that there was an individual making a large amount of edits for the Thompson page whilst also posting the slander pieces against Darouze. Does this not constitute a conflict of interest or paid editing situation? I think it is worth looking into the person in question who has been actively editing both websites during a campaign and posting favourable/unfavourable sections based on what I perceive to be their own conflict of interest. Thanks OttawaResident74 (talk) 00:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: George Darouze and  Courtesy link: Doug Thompson. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, OttawaResident74. The proper place to discuss these issues is the Wikipedia:Conflict of interest/Noticeboard. Cullen328 (talk) 00:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

City Councillor Edits

I am attempting to edit information in regards to a city councillor running for re-election this fall, and feel the the information is important to update. For some reason, his page was just locked from further changes, when the changes being made were minor ones such as: adding a profile photo, promoting legislative and community successes as opposed to slander articles, ect. The wikipedia page in question is for George Darouze, who is a city councillor in Ottawa. OttawaResident74 (talk) 23:13, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I can confirm that the page is protected. I think that was because a blocked user kept removing controversy sections, which is often a sign of either conflict of interest editing or paid editing. However, you may still make changes on the talk page. Thanks! Weeklyd3 (talk) 23:21, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response Weekly. I am just trying to update the incumbents page fairly. I believe there is conflict of interest being engaged in by a member on the platform due to the fact that there are changes being made to the incumbents page, as well as one of the other people running by the same person. I am updating the page in question in the spirit of fairness to all candidates. When I attempt to make changes now, it still states the page is protected and requires edit requests, is this proper? OttawaResident74 (talk) 23:25, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately, when the page is semi-protected, all non-autoconfirmed editors are prevented from editing the page, even if they weren't the one making problematic edits. I think you need to wait until your account is four days old (yours was created about an hour and a half ago at the time of writing) to edit autoconfirmed articles directly like that one.

Also, I see your edit requests were declined due to not getting consensus. To seek consensus, you can another new section on the talk page. To attract editors to the discussion, feel free to post neutrally-worded invitations to the discussion at the relevant WikiProject talk pages. In this case, it is Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography. Hope this helps, Weeklyd3 (talk) 00:03, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I personally doubt such a thing would get consensus. It's removing sourced information with a reason of "irrelevant" when it really isn't, IMO. (It's worth noting that as an American, literally the only Ottawan Politician I know is Gregory Guevara, so my opinion probably isn't worth any salt.) casualdejekyll 00:07, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

My personal reason for wanting it removed is moreso the fact that it may constitute a conflict of interest by the writer, due to the fact that the person he is said to be supporting is currently running against him in the upcoming election, thus promoting the opposition candidate further, when there is no mention of Thompson's endorsement of Darouze in 2014. OttawaResident74 (talk) 00:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Then instead of removing it, say that the endorsement happened, but they later ran against each other? casualdejekyll 01:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate the help man OttawaResident74 (talk) 00:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Guatemala

Guatemalan gastronomy 74.104.171.247 (talk) 04:15, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, IP user. The Teahouse is for asking questions related to editing Wikipedia. Do you have a question about editing? Perfect4th (talk) 04:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Are you looking for Guatemalan cuisine? Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

How Do I Report Myself?

How do I report the atrocious edit I just made and receive the punishment I so richly deserve? 2600:1700:42D0:4A60:5DB3:89E3:5F5E:9091 (talk) 08:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

We don't "report" edits unless they're part of a serious behavioural issue. We just revert and/or discuss them. See WP:BRD. ColinFine (talk) 09:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I NEED HELP FROM APPROVED EDITORS ON WIKIPEDIA

I am a native of ESA ODO town in OBOKUN local government of OSUN State in NIGERIA, WEST AFRICA in the continent of AFRICA . I want someone to help me write a Wikipedia (article) on my town. So that anyone that visit Wikipedia will see the name of my town. Other neighbouring towns are on Wikipedia but I did not see that of ESA ODO my town. Please help me and my people. Ajakayeezekieladekanye (talk) 12:42, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

ESA - ODO

Esa-Odo is a Yoruba town located at the Obokun Local Government Area of the Ijesa North Federal Constituency of Ife/Ijesa Senatorial District of Osun State, South-West of Nigeria. It is a native Ijesa (Ijesha) community and shares boundaries with other towns ; Imesi - Ile, Ilare - Ijesa , Iwoye - Ijesa and Esa - Oke. It's a land very rich in agriculture thus we have Esa - Odo agricultural farm settlement. Here in Esa - Odo we also have the River Osun. Esa - Odo has many industrious sons and daughters in nearly every nations of the world. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ajakayeezekieladekanye (talk • contribs) 13:07, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, . Ajakayeezekieladekanye, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. There are no "approved editors" - we are all editors, you and me, and tens of thousands of others. You are welcome to create an article on your town (towns are usually assumed to meet Wikiepdia's criteria for notability), but you will still need to find reliable published sources for the information: you cannot just write what you know.

Having said that, creating an article is probably the hardest task there is for an indexperienced editor, so I wouldn't advise trying to do so yet, until you have a few months' experience editing Wikipedia.

I suggest you head to WikiProject Nigeria, where you can link up with other people interested in working on articles on Nigeria. Perhaps you can work with somebody there to get experience of editing, and then create an article on Esa Odo. Before you try to create an article (whether now or later) I advise you to start by reading your first article.

One final point: please don't use lots of CAPITAL LETTERS: a lot of people regard that as SHOUTING. ColinFine (talk) 13:26, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ajakayeezekieladekanye:, although your town does not have an article yet, nearby Esa-Oke, another Yoruba town (which you mentioned above) and which is also in Obokun Local Government Area *does* have its own article. Have a look at that one (click here), to get some ideas of how to proceed. If you have more questions, please ask again. Mathglot (talk) 09:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

CAN SOMEONE HELP ME CREATE AN ARTICLE ON MY SCHOOL

I am a proprietor of a nursery and primary school. I want an approved editor on Wikipedia to help me submit an article on my school

https://www.flourishandshine.fflonlinesales.com/ Ajakayeezekieladekanye (talk) 12:56, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Ajakayeezekieladekanye: Hello Ajakay and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately, unless your school falls under Wikipedia's notability criteria, there won't be an article on it. Also note that Wikipedia is not a platform to give publicity to something or to promote something (see WP:NOT for a list of all the things Wikipedia is not). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:12, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Ajakayeezekieladekanye, welcome to the Teahouse!

There is no such thing as an "approved editor" - anyone can edit, and you don't even need an account to do so! To combat spam, however, new editors are required to submit articles through WP:YFA. Do note, however, that most primary schools are not notable, which is wiki-speak meaning "has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are independent of the subject". That's a mouthful, but what it means is that we don't write an article on just everything. We write articles on things that have coverage, either in news or in books.

I hope this helps, and I hope you stick around to write more articles in the future! casualdejekyll 02:14, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

You should not write about your school, yourself, your business, your family members or anything closely associated to you, because that's a conflict of interest. WP:COI A diehard editor (talk | edits) 09:21, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Explanatory translations in lead

What's the correct format for writing the original name (when the article title is a translation) or the translation (when the article title is in a foreign language) in the lead?

I've seen two contradictory uses and I don't know which one is wrong (if any of them is):

1. Teatro Colón (Spanish: Columbus Theatre)
2. July 9 Avenue (Spanish: Avenida 9 de Julio)

I'd say #1 is incorrect and it should say Spanish for xxxx, but I'm not sure. Are there some guidelines for this?

Thanks. --Angus (talk) 08:38, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

The principal name in the lead, as in the title of the article, should be the name most commonly used in the sources cited - see COMMONNAME. Sometimes this is a translation (eg Day of the Dead and sometimes the original (eg Eine kleine Nachtmusik). ColinFine (talk) 09:00, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm talking about the thing inside parentheses. As you see, the format in both cases is "(Foreign language: xxxx)", but in some cases xxxx is the English translation and sometimes the original name. --Angus (talk) 09:17, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, I see. Sorry I misunderstood. MOS:LEADLANG says that the second is correct. I haven't found anything that says what to do with case 1, but the paragraph preceding the one I cited has both a an example like your 1 ("The Good, the Bad and the Ugly (Italian: Il buono, il brutto, il cattivo)") and one that takes a different approach ("Las Meninas (Spanish for The Maids of Honour)").

I don't find the contradiction troubling, as the meaning is clear in context, and I find the extra word in the "Las Meninas" example unnecessary. But if you think it's important, and want to discuss it, I think WT:Manual of Style/Lead section would be the place to do so. ColinFine (talk) 10:25, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. --Angus (talk) 10:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Approval

@Akevsharma I have seen a draft on Indian musician K. N. Shashikiran with great content, kindly approve it Avbns (talk) 05:57, 20 August 2022 (UTC) sock of Sreeja Addala

Hello Avbns, the draft is not submitted for the review. Drafts are reviewed by AfC reviewers and there's no need to ping individual editors once you submit it for the review. Ratekreel (talk) 06:13, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Avbns it also makes sense not to submit it until it is ready for publication. Although it now has references, I suspect it will still get rejected. Wikipedia is not a promotional site. It is a dry and neutral site giving only information about people that can be found in sources that were not written at the behest of the subject of the article, that are not press-releases or promotional interviews; in fact anything from an interview is treated as very suspect. At the moment, this article reads like a fan-site, and it contains unsupported statements such as "He has won innumerable prizes and accolades for his prodigious talents and work for the promotion of Indian Culture through Carnatic Music". This simply won't pass muster. We cannot write "prodigious talents" unless we are quoting a secondary source, and unless the secondary source actually said it without the least prompting. The best you can do for the article at the moment is search for really good neutral sources, and remove some of the puffery. The awards section also doesn't bear scrutiny. If you start looking at these awards, many of them seem extremely difficult to trace, and possibly far from notable. The only awards relevant here are things that cannot be bought, can be proven to exist, and that carry real weight. I recommend that you try looking at the Jaycees one, for example, to start to see the problems: it's mis-spelled in the unconvincing source, Google produces no hits that aren't the product of the subject of the article, and the wiki-linked organisation doesn't seem to have anything to do with it??? 79.64.7.76 (talk) 14:04, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Article for approval

@KylieTastic I've seen a draft on K. N. Shashikiran with great content, please approve it. Avbns (talk) 06:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC) sock of Sreeja Addala

Discussion on the draft K. N. Shashikiran

@Akevsharma@KylieTastic and everyone else, I have made edits to my draft and published it again and there has been no discussion about it since then. My request to kindly check it again and let me know.

Regards,

@Sreeja Addala Sreeja Addala (talk) 06:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

You have made one (admittedly sustantial) edit since the draft was last declined, and nobody has resubmitted it for review. Whole sections of the draft are unreferenced. This is not acceptable in a biography of living persons. There are also many external references in the text, which is not permitted: see WP:EL. ColinFine (talk) 08:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Unbold everything except the initial bolding of his name. Reference everything. If cannot be referenced, remove. Delete all non-significant awards. Delete most of the images. Cut the article length by half, including all the famous name-mentions (notability is not contagious). David notMD (talk) 09:59, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: Sreeja Addala blocked for three weeks for having created sockpuppet Avbns as a means of lauding the draft and promoting it to be accepted. Not cricket. David notMD (talk) 12:40, 21 August 2022 (UTC)

I predict that the editor mislabeled the image as "own work"; it looks like a professionally-done studio portrait (but it could be own work). is there a place at Commons to mention this, or do these always get found? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 03:26, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Good catch. "Those always get found" only if reported. The editor has uploaded many such pictures, including one with a watermark from the Hindu. I will try to follow commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/Mass_deletion_request, but please check if I did not miss any file. EDIT: see commons:Commons:Deletion_requests/Files_uploaded_by_User:Sreeja_Addala. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 18:42, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tigraan Thanks; I notice these sometimes, but I haven't nominated any yet. I should learn how... 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tigraan From my limited experience, it looks like you did this right. I predict that file #10 is not own work, due to the lighting and background. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 11:04, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

How to do footnotes rather than inline citations

 Courtesy link: Draft:Jess Wells

Hi there. My article keeps getting rejected because they say I don't need inline citations, but footnotes. I don't see a footnote choice anywhere! How can I change them from References to Footnotes??? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jess_Wells#References Desa062956boomer (talk) 17:57, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

There is nothing wrong with the footnotes as you are doing them (although I haven't checked them as being reliable sources or including the material) but there are multiple sections without any references at all. I have added "unsourced section" templates and a CN tag to these to highlight what you should be concentrating on. - Arjayay (talk) 18:05, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I really appreciate it. Desa062956boomer (talk) 18:58, 22 August 2022 (UTC)

@Desa062956boomer But assertions in an article are supposed to have inline citations. I think the issue is that your citations just aren't good enough. I must say, the message you got in the draft is confusing. Can a knowledgeable Teahouse host give some better advice? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:19, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Desa062956boomer:, "inline citations" *are* footnotes, so I agree you got some confusing advice, there. Well, there is a slight distinction between the two terms: the "inline citation" is the stuff you place in between <ref> ....</ref> tags right in the running text you are creating, and then the software automatically creates a a little, bracketed, superscript thingie in the text where you placed the citation, that points to the reference in the References section near the bottom of the article. So, if I write, This is a sample footnote and place it in this sentence, between "ref" tags, then you get the little superscript number you see here, and if you click it (or just scroll down), then you will see that it is linked to the footnote further down. Now does it make sense? See Help:Footnotes for a better explanation of this. Hope this helps! Mathglot (talk) 08:58, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mathglot Thanks for clearing that up!

@Desa062956boomer You don't want to remove the citations (references) that you already have in the draft. I hope that Mathglot's info helped. Good luck. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 11:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Scared to make changes

I don't know if this is the right place to ask but what happens if the info i put in an edit is wrong? Can i get in trouble? CosmiiWasTaken (talk) 03:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @CosmiiWasTaken, and welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia certainly can be intimidating at times. If you make an edit in good faith, you can rest assured that you won't face negative consequences. Cheers, 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 04:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello CosmiiWasTaken. One of the nice things about Wikipedia is that "do overs" are usually pretty easy. If, for example, you make a mistake and add something you found in an unreliable source, another editor may revert your edit (change the article back to how it was before you worked on it) and the person may write on your Talk page and make a suggestion on how to improve your edits. That might be a little embarrassing, but if you learn from your mistake, and go on to make a lot of useful edits, you can be proud of the improvements you've made. I've made an occasional blunder, but more experienced editors could tell I was trying to do things properly, so I never got in trouble.

It may be helpful to read Referencing for beginners. Just take it slow as your learn, look for good references, make your edit, click on the "Show preview" button to check to see if everything looks the way you want it to, add a short "Edit summary" (such as -- added birthdate & reference) and then click "Publish changes." Happy editing. Karenthewriter (talk) 07:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@CosmiiWasTaken This was a very sensible edit that you made. Posting on a talk page is always a good idea if you're unsure whether you've done the right thing with an edit. It's only vandals that intentionally disrupt articles who get into trouble. So don't worry. To be honest: I still have a moment's panic whenever I see a red message notification, and I've been here 10+ years and am now been given the trust of the community to act as an administrator! The fact that you were worried is a sign that you care, and want to do the right thing. Of course, you can always undo your own edit if you feel it was wrong just by clicking 'undo' in the View History tab. Our messaging can sometimes sound a bit harsh and clinical, but we can tell when a new editor like you is genuinely wanting to make improvements and 'do the right thing'. Keep it up! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

changer username

Gurlal Dhillon

how can i change my name Gurlal23Singh (talk) 10:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Gurlal23Singh Your account has made just two edits, so the best plan is to abandon it and create a new one with the name you wish to use. Don't edit from both accounts, except if you follow the guidance at WP:VALIDALT Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

wanna to change username Gurlal23Singh (talk) 11:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Like Mike Turnbull said, the easy way is to just abandon the Gurlal23Singh account and create a new one. However, you can also try this link: WP:CHUS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Movable lunar calendar bug: no idea where to report it.

I found a bug in lunar calendar date calculations. Current years are correct, the bug shows up as a 10 day discrepancy in 2024. I reported this on the talk page of the template where I found the bug, where editor @GreenC: verified the problem. However the buggy code is not in that template, but buried further down.

So I have no idea to where to report this bug. -- M.boli (talk) 12:31, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@M.boli Welcome to the Teahouse. That second template you referred to ({{Template:Ctime:x}}) was last edited in 2019 by Gonnym who is still active here. They may have an opinion, hence why I've pinged them from this page. However, if that doesn't elicit a solution, I'd suggest linking to your original thread from Template talk:Ctime:x and then going to WP:Village pump (technical) to raise the issue with the more technical folk there. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll try Village pump (technical). I didn't find a useful talk page for the Template:Ctime:x. -- M.boli (talk) 12:58, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

"The page [X] has been reviewed"

I constantly get notifications about "The page [X] has been reviewed." What does that mean? How and why does someone review a redirect I created? Castlepalace 15:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Castlepalace, when an editor creates a page, it appears on the new pages feed. It is hidden from search engines until a new page patroller marks it as 'reviewed', or 90 days elapse. Review will help ensure that there are no problems with the newly-created article. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Seeking Advise

Hello,

Hello, my name is Eugene Brill and want to introduce the term Wannabe Naturalist to the world. I am a landscape, nature, wildlife, and travel photographer and author. I'm the publisher of The Wannabe Naturalist™ magazine.

I submitted an article introducing the term 'Wannabe Naturalist' that was rejected - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:TheWannabeNaturalist?markasread=254679916&markasreadwiki=enwiki

Eager to learn how to improve the article, I am seeking guidance. I'm passionate about nature, the environment and natural history. I believe that Nature Deficit Disorder (NDD) is real, I agree that “forest bathing” (fully clothed, of course . . . 😎) makes us happier, healthier, and more creative.

Also see: https://wannabenaturalist.com/ https://www.eugenebrill.me/ https://eugenebrill.com/

Any assistance would be greatly appreciated.

Sincerely; Eugene Brill 2603:6080:EE01:6BA0:A101:7870:5ACE:AFFB (talk) 18:30, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

You need multiple reliable sources that have taken note of this magazine. That mere fact that it exists isn't enough. ValarianB (talk) 18:32, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@TheWannabeNaturalist: Absolutely not. One doesn't use Wikipedia to "introduce" anything. Wikipedia is never to be used as a publicity medium. Not ever. We have articles on topics that have already proven themselves to be notable independent of Wikipedia.

If you feel the topic is notable, see Wikipedia:Golden rule. Not a single one of the sources you cited qualifies. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Your draft at User:TheWannabeNaturalist/sandbox was Declined, not Rejected (a more severe option), but it has no potential to become an article. Your own websites, if used as references, will not confer notability. David notMD (talk) 21:31, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, you copy/pasted content directly from your copyright-protected website (ref #1), which is forbidden. David notMD (talk) 21:36, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Welcome to the Teahouse.

Wikipedia is not an advertising site. It is also not for coining new terms. Here at Wikipedia, we follow trends, we do not create them. That's by design - we only create articles for things after they've gained noteworthiness in their fields, or, more specifically, when they are notable, a piece of wiki-jargon that means "has been given significant coverage in multiple reliable sources which are independent of the subject." Which is a slightly longer sentence of wiki-jargon. It's jargon all the way down around here, really. The key words are "multiple", which means more then one source, "significant", which means it wasn't a passing mention (one sentence isn't enough), "reliable", meaning the source can generally be assumed to be factual (anything that issues corrections or has editors is usually more reliable - however, online blogs and the like are usually less reliable.), and "independent" (meaning it doesn't have a direct relation to the subject: a subject writing about itself. or for example, sponsored content or writing about a family member, wouldn't pass this.).

No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability, but since you asked, I'll point out the major problems with your article. Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Your article, which simply defines a term, reads more like a glossary or dictionary entry then an encyclopedia article. An encyclopedia article includes information about a topic that isn't a definition of the phrase. Another major problem is that what you've wrote reads more like an advertisement for Cornell than a neutrally-written Wiki article. Oh, and also, you've copy-pasted text from a copyrighted source, which is not only not allowed for licensing reasons but also probably illegal (but I am not a lawyer and this is not to be taken as legal advice. neither I, the wikipedia user casualdejekyll, nor wikipedia itself or the wikimedia foundation that runs it, offer legal advice, and you should talk to a lawyer for a conclusive answer on whether or not something is legal). casualdejekyll 01:17, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, @Eagleash, by the way, I'd like to know what your thinking was as far as choosing to not G12 this draft was. To me it seems pretty obviously copyvio - is there something I'm missing here? casualdejekyll 01:22, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Subsequently Speedy deleted for copyright violation. David notMD (talk) 16:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Notability criteria for entry

I've done an entry for a band who in my view deserve to have their wikipedia entry but the first version was rejected since the references used didn't fulfil the notability criteria. I was using too many primary links etc. just to demonstrate that the band had done certain things instead of using independent secondary sources etc. I am now doing a revision but wanted to check what is accepted. In order to demonstrate that the band is, indeed, notable, I wanted to also add links to interviews in German and Finnish national media but I was told by one of your editors that interviews were not accepted. I understand the point from the perspective of reliability of information (because it's an interview) but isn't the fact that, say, Deutschlandfunk want to make a feature programme/interview of someone also evidence of "notability"? So, are interviews in all cases a definite "no-no"? Furthermore, can album reviews, for instance, be used as references (I found some from respectable music magazines that could, again, demonstrate "notability". Many thanks for your answers. HeikkiHerttuainen (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @HeikkiHerttuainen! Welcome to Wikipedia!

The reason interviews don't count for establishing notability is because they are primary sources - they consist of material mostly written by the subject of the interview about themselves. They still can be used to support some factual statements. In order to "count" to establish notability, a source must be independent, reliable, and contain significant coverage. Interviews fail the "independent" part of that.

Specifically for bands, the notability criteria can be found at WP:NBAND. This is an extension of the general notability guideline. casualdejekyll 15:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I get that, though, in many cases this is not true. In the end, the editorial responsibility especially with quality media outlets stays clearly with the person who writes the story (the journalist). So, even if the interviewee said outlandish things about themselves ("I think I am the greatest operatic tenor of all times"), it is the responsibility of the person writing the story to exercise their journalistic responsibility to not publish those outlandish statements, or at least not to publish them as "the truth". Rather, what they can do is to write that the person they are interviewing has a bloated ego and an unrealistic understanding of their own talent and capabilities. So, I think that with interviews it all should depend a little, and I don't actually agree with the idea that all interviews are the same and all interviews are "primary" material. Havint said that, I get your point and I thank you for your response. Now I know a bit more about how WP approaches these things. HeikkiHerttuainen (talk) 16:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, HeikkiHerttuainen, I suggest that you read the informative essay Wikipedia:Interviews. Cullen328 (talk) 16:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Will do! HeikkiHerttuainen (talk) 16:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

question about an article

hello, I am a new editor on Wikipedia. I started to make an Article about a Photographer and I want to ask how can I improve it and encyclopedic article? Barsoume (talk) 15:33, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

COURTESY: Draft:Ali Shokri, currently declined twice. David notMD (talk) 16:28, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Barsoume: Hi there! The "Early life" section does not contain any references. Wikipedia articles are based on independent published reliable sources, so you'll need to add references showing where you read the information you provided. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you Barsoume (talk) 19:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Barsoume, welcome to the Teahouse!

Wikipedia articles are expected to be written neutrally, in an encyclopedic style. this means that your submission shouldn't seem like an advertisement.

Additionally, anything that is likely to be questioned is required to be cited. casualdejekyll 16:39, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Kindly help me to improve

I was trying to make an article for my website but it was declined help me to improve my article or make the article for y website Wolverine00003 (talk) 16:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Wolverine00003. I'm afraid that is not going to happen, for reasons explained to you on your talk page. You cannot use Wikipedia to promote your website. Use social media instead. Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Kurmaian.com Not a single independent third party source. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

How do I get a page posted?

how do I get a page posted Finnalexa (talk) 21:10, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Finnalexa Wikipedia calls them articles, not pages, and see WP:YFA for the process of creating and then submitting a draft to review. Standard advice is to put in months improving existing articles before attempting to create one. If I may ask, who or what is the topic of what you are considering Wikipedia worthy? David notMD (talk) 21:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Help to publish a finished article

I need help to make a USER type article to COMMON type article.

I worked on a huge page translating from the original Brazilian Portuguese into English. Now that the page is ready, how do I release this non-user article?

Data: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mvfurtado/Denise_Milan Mvfurtado (talk) 23:18, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mvfurtado. I have added a header so that you can submit your draft for review. ColinFine (talk) 23:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mvfurtado: This article would not be accepted in its current state due to its severe lack of sources and massive lists which make it come off as a curriculum vitae. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:55, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I am a new editor and I made a new draft page how does the review system work?

How does the draft page review work? Wikikoolr (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It appears you haven't read Your first article. I suggest you read it. Fabrickator (talk) 00:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wikikoolr: it appears that your draft is completely lacking in reliable sources which are required to meet Wikipedia's guidelines of notability. You need to find reliable sources and summarize what those sources say about the article's subject. Once you've cited a few good sources and summarized them you can click on the button that says "Submit the draft for review!" and a reviewer will eventually accept or decline the draft. If the draft is declined, the reviewer will leave some kind of note indicating what you need to improve and you can resubmit the draft once you've addressed the problem. If the draft simply isn't cut out for Wikipedia a reviewer may reject the draft without providing any way for you to resubmit. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Let's see by example, Wikikoolr. As its history will show, Jacob Owen is a one-day-old article. I converted it from a draft just yesterday. Its author submitted it; I made a number of very minor changes, I accepted it; three other editors and I made a few more very minor changes; and we get what you see now. Notice how the author has chosen a substantive subject, has done quite a bit of reading of reliable sources and has cited these sources. That's how the system works. (It also works to fend off a lot of junk.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:43, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Can I Have Coffee Instead?

I don't like tea. Is coffee allowed here? 2600:1700:42D0:4A60:5DB3:89E3:5F5E:9091 (talk) 08:47, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, coffee is allowed, but this is a place to ask questions about Wikipedia. We are an encyclopedia, not a teahouse roleplay community. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 09:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

A diehard editor I think this comment was simply in jest and not an attempt at roleplay. 331dot (talk) 09:16, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

A diehard editor Wow, you must be a delightful person at parties. Just a veritable laugh riot, you are.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:42D0:4A60:5DB3:89E3:5F5E:9091 (talk • contribs) 09:22, August 24, 2022 (UTC)

That's enough of that thank you, be civil. Polyamorph (talk) 09:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I have blocked the /64 range of this IP, having looked back at various offensive posts they have made over the last few days. Their third block will be a lot longer if they can't be civil. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:30, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for dealing with them. This IP person didn't affect me severely but they were annoying and the time I spent dealing with them should have been spent reverting vandalism. Also they commented about the cat on my talk page claiming it was "ugly".

Not very nice. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 16:13, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@A diehard editor You're welcome. I have felt it appropriate to take the unusual step of increasing their block to a 6 month period following some personal attacks that another admin has since revdel-ed and which were directed towards various editors. Such behaviour is not acceptable and won't be tolerated. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:21, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes The comments that were visible (yesterday) were bad enough. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 02:56, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Saving Article

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Upendra Mahato (2nd nomination). Can someone save this article. One psycho has marked it for afd. I think he is very notable person. Look at his achievements. Please add Keep votes. Thank You. 2405:204:3321:445F:24BD:C224:67BF:432D (talk) 05:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

IP, I would strongly rethink your post here. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

IP, hello and welcome to the Teahouse. In addition what Jéské has written above, please see Wikipedia:So your article has been nominated for deletion, which, while it doesn't exactly fits the situation here going by its title, still contains useful advice for the situation. Canvassing people to add keep comments will rarely work, as the result of XfD's is dependent upon the strength of the arguments provided, and not a mere headcount. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

IP editor, calling another editor a "psycho" is an utterly unacceptable personal attack on a colleague. You are not the other editor's mental health professional, and even if you were, your comment would be a violation of professional ethics. Overt campaigns to recruit "keep" (or delete) votes at an AfD debate are strictly forbidden. So, stop this misconduct now. Cullen328 (talk) 06:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

EDUCATION

IN Which field am i ahead that will make my life 163.53.179.207 (talk) 02:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

We aren't psychic. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 03:09, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

We couldn't tell ya, per WP:NOTCRYSTALBALL. Panini! • 🥪 11:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Teahouse is a place to ask questions about how to edit or create Wikipedia articles. Do you have a Wikipedia-related question? David notMD (talk) 10:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Marion Mann

I'm his son. He passed on August 20, 2022. Want to add that. Also, want to include a pic. I can send it to you if that's easier than me doing it. 2601:14D:8100:54C0:74A2:493D:AACC:54A8 (talk) 16:09, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Given you are his son, Wikipedia guidelines consider that a conflict of interest (see WP:COI). David notMD (talk) 16:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, and sorry for your loss. To avoid the conflict of interest, I suggest you use the Wikipedia:Edit Request Wizard and provide a link to the obituary. To upload a photograph, you can read Wikipedia's copyright and the image use policy, and then use Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard. Thank you for your interest in improving Wikipedia. GoingBatty (talk) 16:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I assume that your father was the physician and academic Marion Mann. I am sorry for your loss. We need a published source such as an obituary to verify his death. If you have photos that you took of your father, you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons and the best can be added to his Wikipedia biography. Cullen328 (talk) 16:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

• I could not find any obituary online (but the search is polluted by homonyms such as this one). Note that we don’t need a full obituary, a mention on the university website or something similar would be enough.

We could definitely make use of a photo (as said above, use the Wikipedia:File Upload Wizard). However, there are a pitfalls involving copyright law. If it is a "free" photo, you should upload it Wikimedia Commons; if it is not free, it should be uploaded locally to the English Wikipedia. To be "free", it has to be a photo you took yourself; being in physical possession of the photo is not enough. If it was taken by your father’s friend, or a university photographer, or a random passer-by in the street, it is (usually) not OK (for the "friend" case, if that person is still alive and you can get them to upload the file, it’s OK). (There are a couple of exceptions: if the photo was released under a free license already, if the photo was a work for hire, or if it was taken by an employee of the federal government - but it seems extremely likely none of those applies.) Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

attribution

A simple question I hope: I use Wikipedia as a source for much of what I do. As an informal source for facts, it can steer me to other sources. I'd like to use Wikipedia as a source for what I do. I'm an aerial photographer and have assembled a set of picture files that I have arranged into a book. It's mostly about the photography but a few facts (or fictions) regarding the state that I live in adds to the photo and makes the book more interesting, and hopefully saleable. How to I attribute the material I use that I have gleaned from Wiki (via cut and paste) or is that a forbidden practice? I would like to attribute the material to Wiki as well as add to the system by submitting this very large collection of picture files for use by Wikipedia. Lenemeryphoto (talk) 12:18, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Lenemeryphoto. See the answer to the nearly identical question just above. Also, you're welcome to submit any photographs you own the rights to to Commons (link to Upload Wizard) - I'm assuming you took the pictures and haven't published them anywhere else. Note that by submitting them to Commons, you'd be releasing them for reuse under its very permissive license. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 12:32, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Attribution

A simple question I hope: I use Wikipedia as a source for much of what I do. It can steer me to other sources as an informal source for facts. I'd like to use Wikipedia as a source for what I do. I'm an aerial photographer that has assembled a set of picture files that I have assembled into a book. It's mostly about the photography but a few facts, r fiction regarding the state that i live in adds to the photo and makes the book more interesting, and hopefully saleable. How to I attribute the material I use that i have gleaned from Wiki or is that a forbidden practice. 66.220.237.31 (talk) 12:10, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. You can read about reusing Wikipedia content and the necessary attribution at Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. However, I'd also advise you to read Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:15, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I've been using wiki as a source for years, read only, but this is a large project that I've published in the past but without cont, IE, photos only....boring as the dickens. SO to that end, it was suggested that I add some written content to add interest to the project. I'll continue reading the "Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content" pages for a better understanding. Lenemeryphoto (talk) 12:40, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

For the avoidance of doubt, Lenemeryphoto, I was recommending Wikipedia:Researching with Wikipedia not as a guide to how to use Wikipedia but by way of caution against treating it as necessarily reliable. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:55, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

link stuffing vandal?

I stumbled on this edit, in which an editor changed an image link. I have some questions:

1. Do you revert this with the "undo" button; do you revise it in a new edit? There are so many edits after the problem edit.
2. What is going on here? the original image doesn't seems to appear in the history of the page just prior to this edit, so I'm not sure if restoring the image is actually the right thing to do.
3. This user has been recently blocked. Is it ok to just go down their history and revert/revise (this is how I found this edit.)

So many questions. Thanks, Teahouse! -- LumonRedacts 14:03, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

1. Either of these options work. Undo will revert the addition of the link, while keeping later revisions. You could also edit the most recent revision to fix it manually. Check the help page on reverting for a more in depth explanation on how these work.

2. The page in question has an infobox in the source, which is commented out so it cannot be seen on the live article itself. Even though the spam link wasn't visible, it's definitely better to remove it to make things easier for future editors (who may wish to uncomment the infobox to add it back to the live article at some point).

3. There's absolutely nothing wrong with looking at the contributions of blocked users to find non-constructive edits to fix. However, a user being blocked isn't in itself a reason to revert their contributions. Check each individual edit, and revert/revise if necessary. WindTempos ^{(talk • contribs)} 15:05, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

That all makes perfect sense. Thank you! -- LumonRedacts 23:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@WindTempos: @LumonRedacts: I think if you try to undo an edit after subsequent edits were made, you may get a warning The edit could not be undone due to conflicting intermediate edits; if you wish to undo the change, it must be done manually. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: thanks! Glad to know there's something in place to prevent me from doing major damage! LumonRedacts 13:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

How should I tackle making my first article

I want to make a small article on a steam train, nothing major, just wanted to know some tips! Player.exe (talk) 13:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you haven't already, you should check out the your first article help page. Make sure your article has proper reliable sources. You could also consider using the article creation wizard to make the process easier. It certainly helped me when I did my first. Good luck with your article! Have a good morning/evening!

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

What's the steam train about? What's the name of it? I'm very interested. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 13:49, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Player.exe, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm delighted that you want to contribute to Wikipedia, but I would caution you about plunging straight into possibly the most difficult task there is: creating an article. You say "a small article, nothing major" - that's a bit like "I'd like to build a small house, nothing more": you still have to do all the crucial but unseen work like surveying the site, meeting legal requirements, arranging utilities. In the same way before creating a small article you need to do the research to find suitable sources, as Asparagusus says. My advice always is to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles (some of which are dreadful). As well as probably giving you a much less disappointing and stressful experience, it is likely that in that way you will be adding much much much much more value to Wikipedia than by trying to create a new article when you haven't yet had a chance to learn what that involves. Happy editing! ColinFine (talk) 14:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Metaverse

Are any of you alive out there or is everyone part of the Raphaimite hive mind now? 71.115.86.235 (talk) 00:47, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

we are all certainly alive here at the teahouse. do you have any Wikipedia-related questions? 💜  melecie  talk - 00:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm alive as well, but let's not be hasty in our judgement @Melecie! I know several living people in real life (in fact, most of my acquaintances are alive); but since I've not met any Teahouse Host irl yet, I can't be absolutely sure they are all alive. Unless being alive is some sort of requirement for editing on Wikipedia; but I think I would have heard about that. --LordPeterII (talk) 20:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

I am aware of several wikipedia editors who are not alive. ClueBot NG comes to mind. casualdejekyll 00:15, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

What is the "Raphaimite hive mind"?

If you do decide to explain, please be brief about it, this is the Teahouse, and Wikipedia isn't a forum to discuss the Metaverse or the Raphaimite hive mind, I'm sure there are better places for that stuff on the internet. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 14:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia Style Guide

Hi to anyone who happens to care, does anyone have a quick link to the Wikipedia style guide? I would like to wean myself off of the source editor and move to using the visual editor.

Thanks- A1139530 A1139530 (talk) 15:41, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, A1139530, and welcome! You might be looking for Help:Wikitext, which explains the wikitext that is used in the source editor (here's an introduction to it). Alternatively, you might be referring to the Manual of Style. Hope this helps! Happy editing, Perfect4th (talk) 15:51, 24 August 2022 (UTC) Misread the original comment, but Kpddg listed visual editor links below. My apologies! Perfect4th (talk) 15:58, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello A1139530. The Help:VisualEditor and Help:Introduction to editing with VisualEditor are a couple of helpful links regarding the VisualEditor. But I am not sure what you mean by the 'style guide'; do you mean the Manual of Style, or perhaps Help:Wikitext? Kpddg ^(talk) 15:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Manual of Style. -A11 A1139530 (talk) 15:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Madagascar article update suggestion

Hi, Just a suggestion: The Madagascar article should have a link to the 2021-22 Madagascar famine article. I was specifically looking for that info, and the main article did not have it. There is nothing about the current situation. I hope this is not a pain in the butt suggestion since i am not doing anything else about it. I just wanted to provide the suggestion for someone who has more savvy to address it. Hope that is of some help! 2001:1970:555C:C7F0:354C:7C35:123D:4EB2 (talk) 16:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Wikipedia has an article called 2021–2022 Madagascar famine. It should be mentioned in the main Madagascar article. It might be simplest to copy the lead of the famine article (as it applies) into the appropriate section of the main article, noting in the edit summary that an editor has copied the content from the Madagascar article. Importantly, one needs to use the sources found in the famine article to support the material being added to the main article.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:17, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

For some reason the past question I asked they said you can press submit button I don't see it

Wikikoolr (talk) 02:13, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wikikoolr: Welcome to the Teahouse. When you feel like your draft is ready you can add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the page. With that said, it is in no shape to be accepted into mainspace; please read Wikipedia:Your first article and Easy referencing for beginners. The lack of inline citations pretty much is a straightforward decline on its own. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Nintendo Switch Errors. Without inline references, it will be Declined (if not Rejected). David notMD (talk) 03:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

There is a backlog of thousands of submitted drafts. The review system is not a queue - reviewers select what they want to review next. A draft can be reviewed within days, but sadly, also weeks to several months. David notMD (talk) 03:03, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikikoolr, at this point, your draft has pretty much zero chance of being accepted. Please read and study Your first article, and edit the draft to bring it into compliance, if that is possible. Cullen328 (talk) 06:19, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks but I have one followup question, I read the Your first article article and I did not see any instruction on what I should do to make the page appropriate for wikipedia. Wikikoolr (talk) 19:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Signature date format

I don't like dmy format dates, I prefer mdy dates. How can I make my signature use mdy dates instead of dmy?

- A diehard editor (talk | edits) 08:35, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

A diehard editor Click on Preferences > Appearance, then use the radio buttons to select a date format of your choice. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:42, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

It's already set to mdy, I'm trying to change the date at the end of my signature. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 08:44, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@A diehard editor: not possible, sorry. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 08:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Are there any plans to allow specifying signature date formats, via modifications to MediaWiki itself? A diehard editor (talk | edits) 09:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

The problem is that the date and time a comment was written are sometimes critical to understanding the comment in the context of a surrounding conversation, particularly when the comment has been posted out-of-sequence. If date formats could be customised, some people would inevitably choose ambiguous formats, causing confusion. It would be better to find some weird technical way to change how dates are displayed to an individual user, than to allow an individual editor to display their dates to the world in a personalised way. It's bad enough having people whose signatures are unrecognisably different to their underlying account names, or whose talk-page links are customised in a way that makes it hard for a new editor to recognise what they are. (oh, aren't I grumpy!) boringly-signed: Elemimele (talk) 11:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

While Elemimele rightly points out that allowing arbitrary customization poses problems for signatures, I suppose having a choice out of a limited number of options for the date (for instance, picking between "24 August 2022" or "August 24, 2022") would not break things. On the other hand, that might not be the most urgent thing to add to the dev backlog. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Don't forget the ISO 8601 standard too! (2024-11-10) A diehard editor (talk | edits) 13:53, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

And that most of the world (and the US military) use DMY. We have an article on it Date format by country - X201 (talk) 14:17, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm wondering if I should just convert to DMY and stop using MDY. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 14:41, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

According to Date format by country, The Philippines uses both, so it wouldn't hurt. {The poster formerly known as 87/81/23-/195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 19:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Article Merger for American Civil War Subject

Hello, I have only been editing sincerely for about a year or so and I consider myself an amateur historian so I'd like to get some more experienced advice before attempting an article merger. The two articles are Anaconda Plan and Union blockade. Me and another editor already posted in both talk pages asking if a merger was a good idea but so far there have been no responses. The other editor initially proposed a merger last year.

Is there a way for me to sort of "boost" that question so that others may weigh in? Is this the spot to do that? And, if I am able to do the consolidation myself, is this the spot where I'd ask someone about creating a redirection?

Thanks in advance for any help and please let me know if this question is best suited elsewhere. Cheers! Amscheip (talk) 18:45, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Amscheip. Please read Wikipedia:Merging, paying special attention to the sections on notifications and tagging. Taking those steps will draw other interested editors into the conversation. Cullen328 (talk) 21:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Help me to improve

Hi, Hope you are doing well, my draft article has been declined. I need your help to improve it. Please guide me in this regard. @Numberguy6 IABDULLAHXHEIKH (talk) 19:23, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Asif Peer Please read the instructions you were given about the decline, on the article draft's page by Numberguy6. If you are unable to show that Mr. Peer is independently notable, per WP:GNG, you could add a line or two about him to the Systems Ltd article, under a leadership section, as long as that info is also properly sourced. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:58, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @IABDULLAHXHEIKH: Welcome to the Teahouse! As stated at the top of Draft:Asif Peer, "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes. For instructions on how to do this, please see Referencing for beginners." The text on the draft includes links to Wikipedia's guidelines and help pages that I hope you have read. Instead of having three footnotes after his name in the first sentence, I suggest having a footnote after each sentence showing where you read the information. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:58, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, I have tried to correct the errors according to my knowledge. Can you please review and let me know before review? IABDULLAHXHEIKH (talk) 21:04, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

They (The AFC mods) think that I copied a existing page that is the Nintendo switch page

I put the submit button with intent to submit when I finished and the mod speed reviewed my page in less than 10 secs acclaimed me of copying,and said in their own words this page appears to be a replica of a existing page, Nintendo switch's page. Wikikoolr (talk) 20:11, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wikikoolr: Hello Wikikoolr! It appears that Theroadislong made a mistake when they declined your draft. However, with the status of your draft, it wouldn't be accepted into mainspace regardless as it is completely unsourced (just saying you got the info from Youtube and Google is not sourcing) and is also not shown to be notable enough to have a separate article. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks I was worried because if you get declined too much it will delete your page Wikikoolr (talk) 20:20, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikikoolr, the reviewer was recommending that you add to the existing article, Nintendo switch, rather than creating a very short, entirely separate article about the console's bugs. You would need to have reliable sources to back up your additions - links to published articles written by professional journalists, for example. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 20:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

You would need to start by giving us a citation of two or three places where reputable jounalists or other writers had written at length specifically about Nintendo Switch errors, and been published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking. If you cannot find these, then the subject does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for Notability, and you are wasting your time trying to make an article on the subject. If you can find such sources, then we could possibly have an article. But Wikipedia is not interested in what you know (or what I know) or what random people on the internet know: it is only interested in what these reputable writers and publishers have said about the subject. Your personal knowledge of it is of no use to Wikipedia, unless it is backed up by these sources.

I'm guessing you are a bit where I was fifteen years ago: just discovered editing Wikipedia, and wanting desperately to "make my mark" by creating a new article. I now know that that is not the only, or (usually) the best way to make a significant contribution to Wikipedia. I have made over 20 000 edits, but only created a handful of articles. ColinFine (talk) 21:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Update Official Member Photo

Good afternoon,

Congresswoman Marjorie Taylor Greene's Official Member portrait has changed and should be updated to the image provided to the Library of Congress.

Her wikipedia page is Marjorie Taylor Greene.

I would like a reply.

Thank you! Aernsthouse (talk) 21:23, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Is that an airbrushed photo? It says "Image courtesy of the Member" and doesn't look like her skin in other photos. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:29, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Aernsthouse, and welcome to the Teahouse. While the subject of an article, and their associates, are welcome to suggest changes to the article, it is up to a consensus of Wikipedia editors to make the decision whether and how to implement such changes.

A more concerning problem with that image is that it is not clear that it has been licensed in a way compatible with Wikimedia Commons' requirements. I know that many works of the US federal government are put in the public domain, but the site hosting the image says "Not all images are in the public domain; some images may be protected by the U.S. Copyright Law (Title 17, U.S.C.). Do not duplicate without permission from copyright holder". Generally Wikipedia (and Commons) takes a conservative view of this: if there is no explicit statement releasing an image, it is taken to be copyright and cannot be used. ColinFine (talk) 21:46, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

A link is not good

Hi On this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peterborough_Lift_Lock, the link to Trent-Severn should <, I think, relate to a river, but it links to a singers band. May be somenone could make the correction ? Thanks 93.27.133.123 (talk) 21:25, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

It seems this has been fixed by user:Praxidicae. I spent a good minute looking for the issue before I noticed. small jars tc 21:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Check the notability for a person

Can someone help me to check the notability for 'Ansspvt'

Thank you Bhatti31 (talk) 22:14, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Ansspvt doesn't start to show notability. I can't be bothered to look at any of the numerous references for the claim that he got an education, because hundreds of millions of us got educations. (Even I did.) Getting an education is unremarkable. So, he won one or more awards. Which awards? What reliable sources do you have for his having won them? Are these awards of any note, or are they just pay-to-play, CV-stuffing awards? If he creates "unique designs and portraits", then what reliable sources can you produce for their uniqueness, their renown, or both? -- Hoary (talk) 23:26, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Passes notability guidelines

I have submitted the article at Lasmid for review as it passes general notability guideline as seen by a simple GNews search as seen here. Also, the entity passes criteria 1, 2, 9 (Winner of MTN Hitmaker),11 and 12 of WP:MUSIC. Siagoddess (talk) 23:24, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Siagoddess, the (eventual) reviewer of Draft:Lasmid won't see your comment above. Just make sure that your draft makes it obvious that this person satisfies either WP:GNG or WP:MUSIC. -- Hoary (talk) 23:31, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Hoary — Preceding unsigned comment added by Siagoddess (talk • contribs) 23:38, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:DE

Hello. So, I heard about WP:DE, which calls "Disruptive editing". And to be honest, I still don't understand after I read it, so I probably need a summary. Dedhert.Jr (talk) 17:47, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Dedhert.Jr. Disruptive editing is an ongoing pattern of editing that harms the encyclopedia. It comes in many forms. If the disruption continues after warnings, an administrator may block the editor to stop the disruption. Cullen328 (talk) 18:21, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dedhert.Jr Welcome to the Teahouse. Unlike vandalism (which is always intentional and damaging) disruptive editing can be from someone whose actions disturb other editors in a way which is not constructive, yet could be well-intended. e.g. a hyperactive or over-inquisitive child in a classroom, always calling out the answers when they've not been asked, or constantly interrupting with possibly valid questions, but which are incessant or timed inappropriately, but which affects the other students' learning opportunities. I think the lead paragraph of WP:DE sums it up quite well:

"Disruptive editing is not always intentional. Editors may be accidentally disruptive because they don't understand how to correctly edit, or because they lack the social skills or competence necessary to work collaboratively. The fact that the disruption occurs in good faith does not change the fact that it is harmful to Wikipedia."" Nick Moyes (talk) 22:12, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328, @Nick Moyes. So far, am I doing something "disruptive editing"? This is the first time that I am contributing here, so I have to be more careful. If your answer is yes, how can I avoid it so I can freely contribute here without being blocked, or even indefinitely? Regards, Dedhert.Jr (talk) 00:10, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Dedhert.Jr, focus on improving the encyclopedia rather than commenting on things like mathematics where you admit that you lack expertise. Improving encyclopedia articles is always the top priority here. Cullen328 (talk) 02:50, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Why our article was deleted ? we need to do some changes in it, and resubmit it as per Wikipedia article submitting policies.

Why our article was deleted ? we need to do some changes in it, and resubmit it as per Wikipedia article submitting policies. Shivprasad1966 (talk) 05:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Shivprasad1966, and welcome to the Teahouse! You may not use Wikipedia to advertise your products or services. Please see this deletion discussion, which resulted in your sandbox being deleted. Cheers, 🥒 EpicPickle ^{(they/them | talk)} 05:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Shivprasad1966. When you write Why our article was deleted ? we need to do, the use of "our" and "we" indicates that more than one person is using this account. A Wikipedia account is for one person and one person only. So please clarify. Your draft article was deleted for copyright violations and failure to establish that the topic is notable as Wikipedia defines that term. If you want to write an acceptable Wikipedia article, then you must comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 06:07, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Untitled comment

@colinfine 2001:44C8:4204:946D:B52E:108A:4C14:BC8C (talk) 01:23, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP. You have an odd list of contributions. Do you have any Wikipedia-related question? -- Hoary (talk) 01:34, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

????? Please do not use Wikipedia for promotion (WP:PROMO), profanity in TimedText namespaces, and do not notify users without explaining why. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 06:51, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@WannurSyafiqah74 That IP was complaining about (accurately-rendered) profanity in TimedText material (song lyrics, etc.). The answer was that this is fine, as Wikipedia is not censored. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 11:27, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay? Look at their contributions, though. The guy said their edits were strange - some summaries are in caps lock and a foreign language... WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 12:47, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@WannurSyafiqah74 Yes, that is certainly a strange bunch of contributions. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

At least they're not doing anything bad, but of course that person's inactive. (Weirdo anonymous contributors are always like that... especially when they're up to a hoax.) I thought you were defending them by the way, sorry for being confused. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:06, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

WannurSyafiqah74 please no personal attacks. Even anon users are people. Polyamorph (talk) 07:26, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

What is an "OP"?

Just "original poster" of a post? I assume from the context, but I wanted to know what it stands for precisely, and hear it used in a sentence. Thank you. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 02:25, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Th78blue, and welcome to the Teahouse! Indeed, OP is usually used on Wikipedia to refer to the original author of a post (original poster). An example of this being used is "the OP has a signature with a heart". Cheers, 🥒 EpicPickle ^{(they/them | talk)} 02:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. That answered my question. I love your pickle signature by the way. ♥Th78blue (talk)♥ 02:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Either "original poster", or also "original post" (= the first post of the thread). Wikipedia has an article a redirect about everything: original post. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:48, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Discussion_Tools_/_Reply_Tool_-_find_user_is_not_working

In case someone else was wondering. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:12, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

And now fixed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Incomplete Template

I am trying to remove the the Incomplete after many citations were added to Louise Wareham Leonard (which my publisher set up six years ago but I have added to!

LouiseWLeonard (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Louise Wareham Leonard - 97.113.27.216 (talk) 18:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I've gone in and reviewed the article for citations and removed the template. Amscheip (talk) 18:52, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @LouiseWLeonard, and welcome to the Teahouse. You appear to be the subject of the article Louise Wareham Leonard. This is a conflict of interest, and it is recommended that you do not edit the article any further. Wikipedia is not a place to write autobiographies nor promote your work. Have a good morning/evening.

Asparagusus (interaction) 20:06, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

However, further changes can be requested by following the instructions at WP:COIREQ. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:08, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I know, apologies. I was just adding the Citations as the publishers no longer really have time -I added citations of who published the books. I did say it was me! Thank you. LouiseWLeonard (talk) 20:35, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

@LouiseWLeonard Are you saying that your publishers, people who are connected to you, were previously editing your article? (this has already been proven in one case)

Asparagusus (interaction) 21:07, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

no, only that one of them set up the page LouiseWLeonard (talk) 01:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Please delete the page LouiseWLeonard (talk) 01:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

You can post at the biographies of living persons noticeboard, if you'd like.

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Certified Arborist - what to do?

This article is a bit of a doozy. Essentially, an article that would definitely be declined at AfC if written today managed to weasel into a keep a few months ago because of sources that apparently exist - but since then, there have been all of two edits to the article which have not added sourcing, and the article's been unsourced-tagged for almost a decade! Really, I think Draftification would be the best outcome here for the article, but since it's been up for AfD already, such a move wouldn't be "uncontroversial" by the Wiki definition. And I can't nominate it for AfD. because Draftification isn't deletion, although it's a valid outcome. I wanted to ask an experienced editor (read: you guys here at the Teahouse) what I could do in this situation. Is there some proposed draftification process? Do I ignore the rules, and if so, how? Would ignoring the rules truly improve the encyclopedia when it's contradictory to the previous keep consensus? I think at this point for something to be done it would probably need consensus. It really looks like the article is going to stay in it's current state, unsourced but impervious to deletion, for a really long time.

Should I just leave it alone? To me, I can see the potential of a totally valid perspective along the lines of "if you're complaining that no one is adding sources that exist to this article, why aren't you adding them yourself?" But frankly, if I wrote an article about anything other then a frog I don't think it would turn out very well. And that seems to be the story of this article: no one wants to write it, but no one really wants to delete it either. What do? casualdejekyll 01:33, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Casualdejekyll, perhaps either Uncle G or Invasive Spices would care to improve this thing, which they thought merited retention. They could thereby inspire a generation of Wageless juniors. -- Hoary (talk) 02:10, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

In the UK, we call these people tree surgeons, which currently redirects to arborist. Isn't this a clear case for a merge, since a certified arborist is just a tree surgeon with some U.S. qualification? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I remember this article. Michael D. Turnbull, the problem is that the current article is basically about a qualification rather than a profession. Yes, it could be merged. But if it's to be merged, it must have sources, and it doesn't. Uncle G who isn't obliged to do anything, found two books, which is unfortunate as it's unlikely anyone will obtain them just to sort out sourcing of the article. Star Mississippi, in keeping with AfD procedures, closed it as Keep based on the (true) fact that references do exist. So we're stuck in a limbo. I did complain at the time that this was a US qualification dressed up as global; Uncle G disagreed, but the reference he found is actually a piece of primary literature complaining that a unified status for qualified arborists doesn't exist in the UK. The current article, as well as being unsourced, is rather promotional ("As the program proved its worth..."; how can we say that, without sourcing??). The AfD nomination was correct. We have two other related articles, International Society of Arboriculture, which is also completely devoid of any sources and Master arborist which is supported by a single reference to the subject's website. This is a mess. I don't want to get involved in AfD as I find the environment too aggressive, but I stand by what I wrote in the last AfD. I shall follow this with interest. Elemimele (talk) 12:04, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Ugh. I remember weighing whether to relist that and deciding I didn't think further input was forthcoming. My only suggestion given challenges raised by you, @Hoary, @Michael D. Turnbull and @Elemimele is a renomination to see if further input is forthcoming since the sourcing doesn't appear to have solved the issue. It's certainly not too soon to re-nominate. Star Mississippi 13:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I've given the article a severe pruning of unsourced content. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Punderful! Star Mississippi 13:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

And I hope your tunderfal day! ^[Humour]

This pretty much fixes all my concerns other then the fact that the article itself doesn't demonstrate the notability that the AfD established the concept had. casualdejekyll 13:30, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

given the lack of follow up to the AfD, I think, aside from the no draftifying old articles RfC, drafting would just turn this into a G13 in six months. Better to solve it one way or another now. Just my personal opinion, not binding admin decision Star Mississippi 13:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I also agree that's a good solution. Thank you, Cordless Larry! If anyone's sufficiently interested, they can expand the article in due course. And yes, I meant to write (but didn't) that draftifying articles like this, while tempting, is probably de facto deletion because they'll just languish for 6 months and then get deleted as abandoned. I didn't know it had already been discussed. Elemimele (talk) 13:59, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Could someone make a DYK page for me

Hyderabad ePrix

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the Hyderabad ePrix track was designed by Driven International, the company that also helped redesign the Yas Marina Circuit in 2021? Source: https://www.autocarindia.com/motor-sports-news/hyderabad-e-prix-confirmed-formula-e-to-race-in-india-424950
  • Reviewed:

Created by 2A01:36D:1201:54A:2DC3:8932:3F4C:248C (talk). Self-nominated at 14:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC).

Here's the DYK I want to be made. 2A01:36D:1201:54A:2DC3:8932:3F4C:248C (talk) 14:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

If you log in and have made at least ten edits, you can nominate it yourself at Template_talk:Did_you_know#Instructions_for_nominators. There's a form to fill out. Valereee (talk) 14:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Sarah Hegazi Wiki Page in Arabic Missing

There seems to be an ongoing issue with the Arabic Wiki page where the Arabic version of the Wiki article of Sarah Hegazi keeps being redirected to the general Wiki about LGBT rights in Egypt, despite her having her own article in over 15 languages so she definitely fits the Wiki notability criteria. This is even referred to in the English version of the article. I recently tried to recreate an article for her in Arabic that is translated from English but someone seems to have protected the article to prevent editing. What could we do to bypass this intentional bias? FatalRebirth (talk) 16:22, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm sorry FatalRebirth, but this is like asking a British or American organisation to advise you in dealing with a government department in Egypt. The English Wikipedia has no influence over the Arabic one, and (unless by chance there are people watching this page who are familiar with ar-wiki) nobody here knows anything about how it works. Sorry. ColinFine (talk) 16:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

FatalRebirth (ec) Hello and welcome. We cannot help you with any issues on another language version of Wikipedia; each version is a separate project, with its own editors and policies. You will need to handle this using whatever processes the Arabic Wikipedia has. 331dot (talk) 16:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

hombre sigma

buenas puedo crear un articulo con reportes eh investigaciones de presa y youtubers o influencers gracias. 201.194.102.188 (talk) 16:32, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

(Automated translation: "good I can create an article with reports and investigations of dam and youtubers or influencers thanks.") —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 16:51, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. If you prefer to communicate in Spanish, you may feel more comfortable at Spanish Wikipedia: Wikipedia, la enciclopedia libre. If you want to attempt to create articles in English about subjects that meet our notability standards (WP:NPERSON), see here for instructions and explanations of how to go about it. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello to the English Wikipedia. If you want to create an article in Spanish, please go to the Spanish Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 16:56, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Significant Coverage

Hi, my submission about EngelliWeb is declined (twice) due to the "significant coverage" requirement. After the first decline, I read the notability guidelines and added two additional references from Deutsche Welle about the topic: article 1 & article 2

Could you please help me to understand why they are not considered as "significant coverage"? Baraka1000mg (talk) 17:26, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Baraka1000mg. I used Google Translate to read those two articles. To me, they appear to be straight summaries of reports issued by EngelliWeb, and are therefore not independent sources. Notability is established by coverage of the topic in reliable, fully independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. Cullen328 (talk) 17:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Baraka. Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 18:00, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Mentor

Hello. How can I get a mentor assigned to me. I sometimes get stuck while editing when I need help with something and need to ask someone a question. Soccerking.greg127 (talk) 19:03, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@Soccerking.greg127: You can always ask here at the Teahouse or the Wikipedia:Help desk. But also check out Wikipedia:Adopt-a-user. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:04, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@Soccerking.greg127 There is a feature now where most new accounts get assigned a mentor. If you don't have one, there is a list of those experienced editors who are willing to take on mentees at WP:Growth Team features/Mentor list. Some of those listed will say what sort of help they can provide and what their own interests are. You could then ask someone on the list, via their Talk Page, to help you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Page not showing up on Google

Hi. I'm guessing you get this question a lot - so please forgive me asking it again. I'm a copywriter. On 3rd December last year, I published a page for a client - Anthony Copping. It still hasn't shown up on Google. Please can you advise?

With thanks,

Helen Beckingham (Redacted) Helen Backagain (talk) 08:11, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Helen Backagain Hello and welcome. First, as you are editing for a client, the Terms of Use require you to make a formal paid editing disclosure on your user page(User:Helen Backagain). To answer you, new users cannot directly create new articles, and must submit drafts via Articles for Creation(you should anyway as you have a conflict of interest). I have added the information to your draft to allow you to submit it. 331dot (talk) 08:23, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Helen Backagain I would ask you about the images in your draft- they all say that they are your own work. Did you actually take them all with your own camera? 331dot (talk) 08:26, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

To add to what 331dot has said, Helen, your draft User:Helen Backagain/sandbox does not have a single reference, and therefore is likely to be declined very quickly. Please read notability and your first article to learn what a Wikipedia article needs to be. Presumably all the information in your draft comes from Copping. Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 08:35, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

• Hello Helen Backagain and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for being upfront about your relationship with the subject of the article. Please read our guideline about paid editing and make the mandatory disclosure before editing any further.

Sandbox pages such as User:Helen Backagain/sandbox never "show up on Google". Only mainspace articles do. When you feel the page is ready for mainspace, copy-paste the code {{subst:submit}} at the top of the page, and a reviewer will check it.

However, as it stands, that page has multiple problems, which I listed below by order of decreasing importance. It is very likely that it will not be accepted until at least the first two are solved.

1. It has zero references. The reader should be able to cross-check every assertion of the article from reliable external source; that is a core policy of Wikipedia. If there’s anything in the draft that cannot be sourced reliably, it should be removed.
2. The page needs to show that the person is "notable", which means that there are multiple reliable sources independent of him that have written at length about him. Such sources would 99% of the time means newspaper pieces, either reviews of his work, or biography profiles about him (but not interviews or thinly-masked interviews which are not independent of the subject).
3. I am rather suspicious that your uploaded files are your "own work". "Own work" means you took them yourself. Many of those files, such as File:Medicine_man_Mihianna,_Hauharii,_Malaita.tif or File:Chief_Tofor,_the_`last_sorcerer'.jpg, were probably taken during Copping’s expeditions, and they look professional; I presume they were not taken by you, the copywriter. I see that you already managed to do the paperwork (see WP:DCM) to verify File:Anthony_Copping.jpg; please do it again for all the other pictures (one ticket/email listing all the other images is fine, no need to do one ticket per image). Moreover, beyond the licensing aspects, we would be interested in more metadata about the photographs - who took the pictures, when, where, etc.
4. It contains promotional, fluffy language - that stuff is good for an autobiography, but not for a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia articles are supposed to be neutral and "boring" (facts-only). For instance, we are not interested in the heroic struggle of a self-made-man with not a copper to his name. Compare what you wrote about Copping’s early life with this other account of a destitute homeless orphan in 1909 (OK, maybe not the best example but that’s the one that popped to mind).

P.S. I redacted your phone number, we only use in-Wikipedia contacts. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:45, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Anthony Copping created in December 2021, but not submitted to AfC for review until 26 August 2022 (and Declined same day). Please address the query about WP:PAID that is on your Talk page before doing any more editing to the draft. David notMD (talk) 22:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

hello i have questions about editing and wikipedia sent me here

If a user has dozens of edits of him doing things like making statements without a source, editorializing or etc, will he ever be punished for it? i know its not considered vandalism but i see a lot of users doing this on wiki pages without repercussions Bobisland (talk) 21:19, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

We don't "punish" users here. If an editor's activities become disruptive, then they may be blocked for a period (or indefinitely), but that is to protect Wikipedia, not to punish them. If an editor seems to be unable to understand why their activities are not helpful, they may get blocked on the basis that or competence is required. ColinFine (talk) 21:29, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Bobisland (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We aren't in the business of punishing editors. Admins like me have the ability to block editors, but this is not done as a punishment, but to end the disruption that occurs. Behavior that is not clear vandalism may be reported to WP:ANI as a last resort if other attempts to resolve the problem fail. 331dot (talk) 21:31, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

331dot Do users who editorialize and fail neutrality a bunch get any sort of punishment? I see rules regarding against this but no rules stating it’s punishable, only that edits shouldn’t be editorialized or fail neutrality Bobisland (talk)

Again, we do not punish users here. If you are referring to a specific situation, please tell us what. 331dot (talk) 21:41, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

331dot there is no specific situation i’m referring to, Wikipedia sent me here to ask questions do you know where I can ask questions specifically about the rules? I also have questions about where to find user page editing rules but I don’t know where to ask to find them I’m using my phone and it showed up once for me in a pop up but never again. Bobisland (talk)

User page rules may be found at WP:USERPAGE. You may ask questions about rules but I'm wondering if your intention here is to contribute to this encyclopedia or be an enforcer. 331dot (talk) 21:58, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

331dot I don’t know what you mean by enforcer and I’ve already contributed a lot Bobisland (talk)

Your query about how to punish people justified asking if you want to be involved in enforcement of rules and guidelines. You yourself were recently temp-blocked for edit warring. In general, the first level of repercussions is having one's edit reverted. If you see good-faith edits, i.e., not vandalism, you can revert those. If the editor in question persists, invite to a discussion at the article's Talk page. David notMD (talk) 22:43, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok and no I’m trying to learn what to expect when editing and resolving conflict and the rules in general Bobisland (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 22:55, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Searching for citations to a specific website

Hi, I'm looking for a way to search for articles with citations to the International Energy Agency (IEA.org). Do you know of a quick way to search for URLs that point to this domain? Thanks in advance. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 15:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Clayoquot. See Special:LinkSearch. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:34, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Perfect. Thanks PrimeHunter! Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 00:23, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

How to upload image of logo of non-profit without it entering the speedy deletion process?

I am in the process of trying to upload an image that is not mine, but there is obvious rationale for its inclusion (e.g. logo of non-profit whose article is already on Wikipedia).

In the UploadWizard, after I mark that the work is not mine, it automatically gives me the notification that the image is in the speedy deletion process. What am I doing wrong? BugsMeanee (talk) 01:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Fair-use images MUST be used in articles (not drafts). If it isn't in an article, it's at risk for speedy deletion. See WP:NFCC for details. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, BugsMeanee. When you upload a non-free image, you must include an acceptable rationale. Please read Wikipedia:Logos for the guideline about logo usage. Cullen328 (talk) 01:22, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

I understand. I believe I included the rationale in the wikitext licence, but I still get a message saying, "This gallery may meet the criteria for speedy deletion." BugsMeanee (talk) 01:38, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

I was uploading it to Wikimedia Commons when I was receiving the speedy deletion message. Are you saying that I can upload it directly on the Wikipedia article? I thought images in Wikipedia articles needed to reference Wikimedia images. BugsMeanee (talk) 01:36, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@BugsMeanee: Commons doesn't allow non-free images. You need to upload it to English Wikipedia instead. You can use Wikipedia:File_Upload_Wizard and select the non-free file option. RudolfRed (talk) 02:17, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much; it worked! BugsMeanee (talk) 04:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, I often edit twice and add citation templates

Long title is sort of long. (See my contributions for context, ignore me talking to old IPs I vividly remember using)

I'm not sure if it's okay that I'm a messy editor, sometimes I get hasty and make mistakes, and don't feel like citing things. As such, edit history on pages like Wikipedia:List of hoaxes on Wikipedia involve me revising a few times. Advice would be 100% appreciated. Thank you! WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 06:46, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, WannurSyafiqah74. You wrote sometimes I get hasty and make mistakes, and don't feel like citing things. Please log out and stop editing Wikipedia when you feel that way. Return to editing when you are feeling careful and cautious, and sincely want to avoid mistakes, and feel like citing things properly. This is a project to expand and improve this encyclopedia in a productive and collaborative fashion, and a proper attitude is required. Cullen328 (talk) 07:03, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

While there is nothing wrong with making an edit, and then revising it, consider using your Sandbox as a draft space, and only when completely satisfied, move to the appropriate article. David notMD (talk) 07:11, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 @David notMD I see. I was late to replying, so it's good to suggest that I should take a break. And yes, I am aware of using the sandbox for drafts. As for finding citations, I really just don't have the time to look. Just a reminder. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 07:54, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@WannurSyafiqah74 If you "don't have time to look for citations", then absolutely do not edit, and do not add uncited material that should be cited. References are not optional. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 11:31, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

What the hell? I just keep a lookout on TV show articles. I don't need to edit if I want to, I just try my best in this site. But not everyone needs to find a citation?? It's not forbidden as much as I know. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 12:49, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, I've sent a message to your talk page. Please do not use vague wording like this. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 12:59, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

You should not intentionally be adding unsourced material in wikipedia. Polyamorph (talk) 13:40, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

My question would be, if you don't have a source to hand, how do you know that the information you are adding is verifiable, WannurSyafiqah74? Cordless Larry (talk) 13:57, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Polyamorph @Cordless Larry Oh, so users do need to comply. Got it. I really don't know how to word this, but I used to just mostly revert vandalism on TV show articles and add what I know.

If it's fine for a new decision, I think I'll try to find citations (and not just rely on little things, like using citation needed templates, or foreign Wikipedia pages for international voice casts).

I won't remove anything on sight that I think is unsourced, unless necessary, if that's fine. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 14:02, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

It's not a new policy, but I recommend reading WP:VERIFY to understand better, WannurSyafiqah74. Cordless Larry (talk) 14:19, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I will. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 14:20, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I read it. The page was really useful! If you want to link anything else to help, please do. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 14:26, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

I added a message on your talk page which contains some more useful links. Polyamorph (talk) 14:46, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 @David notMD FYI: see my reply above this message. I realized what I said may come off as bad practice when editing. If anything else you'd recommend other than Google would be fine (because for some reason, you can't exclude Google Books results, which can be painful for speciifc searches), that'd be way more appreciated. Thank you. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 14:04, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

P.S. yes, I know searching on Google would be very quick, but I assumed that finding anything reliable would take a long time. I know this came across as admitting "lol I'm a lazy editor, is that okay?" But honestly, I'll try to be cautious next time. I'm mostly gonna keep a lookout on TV show articles, since anonymous contributors like to add stuff they make up there (for whatever reason). WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 06:43, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, I came here because I assumed I'd get advice on how to be a better, more polished editor. Sorry for the rambling, I suppose, but hey! Just wanted to get stuff out there. WannurSyafiqah74 (talk) 06:48, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @WannurSyafiqah74, thanks for seeking feedback! I don't think adding some prose then fleshing out the supporting citations afterward is the most heinous thing you can do in Wikipedia. But, as you noticed, people like to add stuff they make up there (for whatever reason). If you don't want to be seen as one of those people, think about how your edit would look to someone patrolling Recent Changes. Would they hit Undo, or think "meh" and move on? (Disclaimer: I haven't reviewed your contribution history, I'm just speaking generally.) Note that I paraphrased and said "people": we are all potentially under scrutiny, although IPs often get more, it's not as straightforward as us-vs-them. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 04:28, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

ATL Money Transfer Declined

Please check why this is decline as references are there already! Atlmoney (talk) 14:51, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

But, to paraphrase both editors who declined it, they're not very good references. Read the decline form: This submission's references do not ... show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject.. In short, you need better references from better publications. See WP:RS for an explanation of what Wikipedia means by a reliable source. - X201 (talk) 14:59, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

To add to the above reply, these are not even references - they are all copies of same press release issued by the company. Nthep (talk) 15:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

OP blocked for promotional editing. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:30, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

I have requested for an admin to yeet this promotional draft out of existence with some good ol' {{g11}}. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 03:34, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Delete page Louise Wareham Leonard

This page -- see history with profanity ie. "c -- word" has been hacked. Please delete LouiseWLeonard (talk) 01:38, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Louise Wareham Leonard

I see nothing in the article like this. This article won't be deleted, but the edit you're referring to, which by the way, was two years ago and reverted (By you!), can be deleted. I've requested Oversight of the edit, which allows it to be removed from the history. casualdejekyll 01:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

They want the article to be deleted as they are the subject of the article. (see this previous post, three minutes before)

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:40, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@LouiseWLeonard, If notability is shown by the sources, we don't delete articles just because the subject asks. The article belongs to Wikipedia. You can ask for changes to ths article; see Wikipedia:ER. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:34, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

coi disclosure on user page

May I please have direction on how to put the COI template on my user page (at the top). thank you

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AJgm_mgt&action=edit Jgm mgt (talk) 15:44, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Jgm mgt. Please see Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest#howtodisclose. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:51, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

thx. I have looked - I am not clear about "putting the template at the top of the page". thx Jgm mgt (talk) 16:27, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jgm mgt, you just need to click the link you posted above, place the code for the templates in the editing box and click Publish. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:46, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm trying. Not following your comment re code. I need to fill in this template and Im confused. have read article

{{Connected contributor (paid)|User1=Username of the paid editor|U1-employer=Name of person/organization that is paying for the edits|U1-client= Name of client|U1-otherlinks=Insert diff to disclosure on your User page.}}

name of employer is same entity as who is paying

is this correct?

{{Jgm_mgt (paid) Jgm_mgt=Ballroom Music=Dan Wilson}} Jgm mgt (talk) 17:28, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

No, that's the template you use on talk pages of articles you're making paid contributions to, for the one to use on your userpage, you want Template:Paid.

Additionally, you're stripping parts from the template that it needs to function: the part between {{ and the first | is the template's name, and it should stay in because otherwise the software doesn't know what template you're trying to call. Then you've got the parameters (that stuff that looks like |text=, with 'text' replaced by the relevant parameter, like |user= or |employer=). Those need to stay too, because otherwise the template doesn't know what to do with the information you're filling in. All you need to change is the text in italics, after the = and before the next |.

Going by the information given here, the text you post on your userpage should look something like

{{Paid|employer=Ballroom Music|client=Dan Wilson}} AddWittyNameHere 17:47, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. For the template for talk pages of articles I edit, this is the formatting I used. it appears on the article page's talk section and the link to my user page talk page works but should I modify. thanks so much

{{Jgm_mgt(paid)=Ballroom Music=https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Jgm_mgt&direction=next&oldid=1106831697{{}} Jgm mgt (talk) 21:37, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

revising my question. my most recent update to user page, with my COI disclosure is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jgm_mgt. However, this does not work when I insert it into the template as follows so that the disclosure appears on the talk page of the article. thanks again and again. :)

{{Jgm_mgt(paid)=Ballroom Music=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jgm_mgt}} 69.116.140.209 (talk) 22:07, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

You're still replacing parts of the template that it needs to function. You should only replace the parts that appear in italics in your post further up this section. Cordless Larry (talk) 22:12, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much Larry - I did what you said and it appears I did it correctly. source and visual follow. however I;ve been advised that the notice on the talk page for article needs to include the word (paid) My user page notes (Paid) could you advise where I insert (paid) below for the talk page notice. thanks

{{Connected contributor|User1=Jgm_mgt|U1-declared=yes|U1-otherlinks=ps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jgm_mgt}} Jgm mgt (talk) 23:05, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jgm mgt, for that you need to use {{Connected contributor (paid)}}. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 23:14, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Username @Jgm mgt sounds like a company. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

I need help adding to name and disambiguation pages

Hi, can anyone help me add entries to name and disambiguation pages? I have my hands full with editing and could use any help that I can get. I would be very thankful as well. Davidgoodheart (talk) 05:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Davidgoodheart: This seems like a strange request, because it would almost take you as much time to explain to somebody what you want them to help you with as to just do it yourself. But if you can provide more information, maybe we can help you. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:40, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Davidgoodheart Which specific articles do you need help with? Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:05, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

What is summary

summary 41.115.99.84 (talk) 10:10, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

summer 41.115.99.84 (talk) 10:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

If you click “view history” near the top of the screen, you see a list of changes made to the article. Many changes, hopefully all of them, have a note with them saying what change was made so you can glance down the list and see how the article developed. That note is the “summary” that you supply when you make an edit.—Northernhenge (talk) 10:37, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:EDITSUMMARY? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Life style choices

1.1.What is teenage pregnancy? 1.2.Discuss one consequences of teenage pregnancy: •The parents •The individual /teenager •The school •The economy

1.3.1.Explain how each of the following concepts could encourage teenagers to end up being parents before the right time: •Peer pressure •Social grants •Culture

1.3.2. Critically discuss five religious principles that may impact positively on the issues of teenage pregnancy.

1.3.3 Mention two reasons why Young girls are attracted into unsafe relationships with" blessers"(older rich man)?

1.3.4 Discuss two negative impact of this kind of relationship?

1.3.5 Recommend five ways how the society can address teenage pregnancy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 41.115.127.5 (talk) 09:45, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. This page is for asking questions about using Wikipedia. You might try the Reference Desk. 331dot (talk) 09:48, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Though do not that Wikipedia editors cannot help with your homework. Kpddg ^(talk) 11:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Question about rules

If I get blocked for edit warring does that mean the next time I edit war I’ll be blocked indefinitely? Is there another place on Wikipedia to ask questions about the rules or a index of all the rules regarding editing on Wikipedia? Bobisland (talk) 09:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Bobisland The best place to start is Policies and guidelines. You don't need to know every single rule to participate here, I'm an admin and I don't know every single rule. You need only be willing to hear others when you are told you have not followed a rule. There is nothing wrong with you asking about rules here, you may also ask at the more general Help Desk. My suggestion to you is to be less concerned with following every rule and more concerned with contributing to the encyclopedia. Most rules are common sense things that you are (or could be) already doing.

If you continue to edit war after a block for edit warring, yes, the next block may be longer, though not necessarily indefinite. A block is proportional to the need to prevent disruption to Wikipedia. If you edit war after blocks, this means shorter ones have not prevented the disruption. 331dot (talk) 09:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

331dot will a long period of time elapsing from my first edit war block reduce the chance that the next block I receive for it will be indefinite or is it all subjective to the admin giving me one? Bobisland (talk) 11:03, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobisland: I'd say that it's subjective to an administrator assessing your actions – if the only edits you have are edit wars, and if that's all you seem to be here to do, then even with a long period of time between edits, you may simply be blocked. The best thing you can do is avoid edit warring – follow WP:BRD, ask to discuss content with other editors on a Talk page before adding it back into an article, and remember that we're all (mostly) just attempting to improve Wikipedia. If someone's being genuinely antagonistic, that's frustrating, but sinking to their level doesn't fix much of anything – it'll just end up with both parties blocked. You can always ask for help on a topic from other editors, either here on the Teahouse or on our various other forums (though forum shopping is to be avoided).--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 11:25, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Bobisland. I'm concerned about the phrase the next time I edit war. Since you know about edit warring (and, I presume, about BRD), why would you ever, ever, ever, edit war yourself? Perhaps it's my suspicious mind, but that suggests to me that you are going spend time and effort (yours and other peoples') pushing the boundaries of what's allowable, as though editing Wikipedia were a game you had to work out how to win. If you are thinking of it in that way please let go of it. Wikipedia is a huge and magnificent project that we are all working together to create - there are no losers. It needs rules, procedures, and sometimes sanctions to keep us on track and to deal with people who are ill-inclined (vandals), or who don't understand the goals and purposes of Wikipedia, or are so passionate about something that they can't see other people's point of view. But I would urge you, rather than worrying about "what would happen if I ..." you thought instead about "what can I do to make it better?". Nobody will penalise you for making mistakes, or for not understanding how something works, as long as you are ready to learn when corrected. ColinFine (talk) 12:56, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Template creation

Hello. How can I create a template Soccerking.greg127 (talk) 14:06, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Read the template manual on MediaWiki. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 14:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

For your courtesy here is a box to make a new template.

A diehard editor (talk | edits) 14:21, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Redirects and disambiguation

Hi I've created a page about the actor Ash Hunter and at the moment the draft says it's redirected to the footballer Ashley Hunter. After seeing this I wanted to change the title to Ash Hunter (actor) but doesn't seem to allow this. Someone called Robert McClenon has since posted the following:

Comment: There is currently a redirect from the title of this draft. If this draft is accepted, the redirect should be deleted, because the hatnote at the top of this page will take its place.

You may ask about redirects and hatnotes at the Teahouse. Robert McClenon (talk) 04:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Comment: This draft has a title that either has been disambiguated, or will need disambiguation to be accepted.

If this draft is accepted, a disambiguation page will need to be created. (Review of the existing article or articles with the principal name indicates that a disambiguation page should be crated in place of the use of hatnotes alone.) The disambiguation page should be Ashley Hunter (disambiguation). Robert McClenon (talk) 04:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't completely understand what I'm supposed to do... Can anyone help? Link to the draft below. Thanks

Draft:Ash Hunter MonicaVallmans (talk) 11:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@MonicaVallmans You don't need to do anything. These notes are for the reviewer who accepts the draft (assuming they do). They will sort out the relevant issues. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:05, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh great, thanks Mike MonicaVallmans (talk) 15:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

German Methodist Episcopal Church

You don’t have an article on this semi-denomination. Founded as a missionary effort to reach the new German immigrants in 1836 within the structure of the ME church, in 1865 it became separate but still in the ME church with its own conferences, seminaries. By 1920 it had 10 conferences. By 1939, only one was left. It was a major religious body. It needs either a major section in the ME article or its own article. The main problem is that there is only one book on it, published in 1939 by the Methodist publishing arm. I am not the person to write it. Wis2fan (talk) 03:48, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

If not you, then who, Wis2fan? Go ahead and try. Do you really think that among the relatively small group of Teahouse hosts, you are likely to find a fluent German speaking host who is interested in German church history from about 100 to 200 years ago? Cullen328 (talk) 03:56, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wis2fan: you can request that an article be written; see WP:REQUEST, but suggestions tend to languish there for a very long time indeed. The main problem I see is lack of sourcing; one book is not much to go on. I personally believe that encyclopaedias should collate and summarise multiple sources, which is quite different to providing précis of individual works. I'd suggest starting a discussion about it on the talk page of the ME article, and see whether people there think it would better be accommodated as a section in that article? Elemimele (talk) 07:08, 23 August 2022 (UTC)

Ach, mein lieber Cullen328, you zhust neffer know. Vee Veekipedia edditters ken be a ferry strenzhe group, mit eefen strenzher neetch interrests. Heppy edditing! Mathglot (talk) 08:37, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

Und vhy is it, mein lieber Mathglot, zat my winzig-klein little artikels on klitzig-klein castles and razher unknown people zat haff liffed in Germany und Austria linger in ze queue at AfC fuer qvite so laaaang?? Vun vould zink, zat novun vos interested... Elemimele (talk) 15:40, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wis2fan:, the article German Methodist Episcopal Church was created in 2013, and is still there. You are welcome to improve it, if you find any missing information. Please read Wikipedia's policy on WP:Verifiability, and the use of citations to reliable sources. Good luck! Mathglot (talk) 08:24, 24 August 2022 (UTC)

German Methodist Episcopal Church is about the Iowa building and, to a lesser extent, its congregation. At the main Methodist Episcopal Church, I only see In the late 1840s, separate Conferences were formed for German-speaking members of the Methodist Episcopal Church who were not members of the Evangelical Association or the United Brethren in Christ (later merged to form the Evangelical United Brethren (EUB)). Among these was the St. Louis German Conference, which in 1925 was assimilated into the surrounding English-speaking conferences, including the Illinois Conference. @Wis2fan, you could start by adding a (source-supported) line to Methodist Episcopal Church#Divisions and mergers or a couple of sentences to Methodist Episcopal Church#History. Did the various German-speaking conferences have a shared governance structure, or were they more loosely associated? ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 03:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Refrencing

Hello, I'm having trouble understanding WP:RS and WP:UNDUE, I've started using the Talk:Armenian genocide and I am finding it difficult to express myself effectively, can someone give me some guidence with improving my refs in this specific case it being the terminology section of the talk page. Hank the Sniper (talk) 13:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. From my understanding, you added possible government-affiliated sources to an article. Those kinds of sources are usually not considered reliable because they may be using propaganda, as well as the fact that they are not peer-reviewed, as said by some on the talk page. This is especially important for featured articles such as that. Have a good day!

Asparagusus (interaction) 14:10, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Well In this specific case they are used as an example of a term being used and I did not expect such hostility for it since they were used as such in Turkish wiki article for the same subject. They are not to be taken as sources but as quotes. And thanks for your reply, I too wish you a wonderful day! Hank the Sniper (talk) 14:18, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

The Turkish Wikipedia has different guidelines on reliable sources.

You're welcome! It's what we do at the Teahouse :).

Asparagusus (interaction) 17:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Help uploading non-free use images

Hello Teahouse, I have uploaded two images to the Squishmallows article and an animated gif

The second image was nominated for deletion for failing Commons:TOYS. I now understand why I can't release my images under a free license (even though I took the photos and own the stuffed toys I do not own the copyright on the toys), so I also nominated my first image for deletion for the same reason.

Once deleted, is there any way to reupload these images under a non-free use rationale on Wikipedia and how do I do that? I just want to provide my photos to help illustrate the article and provide information that only text will not be able to provide, but I want to do it respecting the constraints of the copyright. Thank you very much for your assistance. QuercusJuglans (talk) 17:01, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, QuercusJuglans, and welcome to the Teahouse. In order to upload them non-free you need to be sure that their use meets every one of the non-free content criteria. In uploading non-free material you will be asked to justify the use, and you will need to have considered all those criteria. ColinFine (talk) 17:36, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the help. Do you know how I can indicate that my derivative work (the photograph) is free but that the copyright of the toys is non-free and fair use? Is there any existing template or example from another article that I can use? QuercusJuglans (talk) 17:57, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, QuercusJuglans. Take a look at File:MattelBarbieno1br.jpg for an example. Cullen328 (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all very much! I will try to upload it under the proper license now.QuercusJuglans (talk) 18:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Bridget Rice - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bridget_Rice

@Cullen328. Bridget Henaghan-Rice's birth and marriage certs confirm her place of birth as Louisburgh, Co Mayo. Her husband's name is recorded as Edward rather than Eamon on the marriage cert. Eamon is the Irish form of Edward but could not be used as Ireland was still under British rule in 1914.

No 463 on - https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/birth_returns/births_1885/02644/1974953.pdf No 9 on - https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1914/09865/5583126.pdf https://www.encyclopedia.com/women/dictionaries-thesauruses-pictures-and-press-releases/rice-bridget-mary-1885-1967

Fr Johnny Henaghan was her brother - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Heneghan. ∼∼∼∼ BuffyO'B (talk) 10:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, BuffyO'B. You should make a formal edit request at Talk:Bridget Rice. I am not sure of the relevance of John Heneghan to this discussion. Neither biography mentions a sibling. If you can furnish a reliable source that states that they were brother and sister, then it could be mentioned in both articles. Cullen328 (talk) 17:05, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll have a go at requesting an edit.Regarding Fr Johnny Henaghan and Bridget Rice being siblings, Fr Johnny's posthumous Medal of Freedom was accepted on his behalf by his sister Bridget Rice TD in 1948. Fr Johnny's birth record is No 240 - https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/birth_returns/births_1881/02802/2028303.pdf ∼∼∼∼ BuffyO'B (talk) 18:23, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

BuffyO'B, you did not make a formal edit request. You just posted links there. You need to use the template. That will bring attention of other editors to this low visibility article. Cullen328 (talk) 20:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for trying to help me. I followed the link but it is frustrating me beyond belief trying to find the template and life is too short and getting shorter.∼∼∼∼ BuffyO'B (talk) 21:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Would my draft pass for notability?

I need some assistance, since this was my first draft that I submitted. Would my draft, Six Flags Hurricane Harbor Chicago, pass for notability?

Thank you! from yours truly, Harobouri ^{T • C} 18:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Clarification - I read WP:GNG but to be honest I couldn't tell if the sources I had used would pass notability guidelines. from yours truly, Harobouri ^{T • C} 21:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Harobouri, you've submitted it; wait and see what the reviewer says about it. (In the meantime, I'll just say that "Mega Wedgie" and "Dive Bomber" seem curiously similar to each other.) -- Hoary (talk) 21:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! from yours truly, Harobouri ^{T • C} 21:18, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Harobouri I think this is one of those notability edge cases outlined in WP:NOPAGE - The topic might be notable, but it would be more helpful to readers and editors to cover the topic on the same page as Six Flags Great America. casualdejekyll 23:08, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Are there any wiki users that offer their revert vandalism tools for users who don’t have it?

I’ve found a lot of vandalism but don’t have the tools to easily revert them all, are there users or groups that offer their revert vandalism tools to people who recommend wiki pages to check for vandalism? Bobisland (talk) 12:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobisland: they aren't given to people, you can use them right away. there is a list of tools to revert vandalism. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 12:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight are there any tools that I can use on my phone or the Wikipedia app? Bobisland (talk) 12:48, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@lettherebedarklight Pinging on behalf of Bobisland as they did not ping properly Jolly1253 (talk) 13:25, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bobisland I found two tools/scripts on the page that can be used on mobile: User:P.T.Đ/TwinkleMobile and m:User:FR30799386/undo. I have not tried them myself, so I'm not sure how good are they for editing on mobile. Jolly1253 (talk) 13:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm told pretty much anyting WP works on a phone if you use desktop view. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

The most useful tools are difficult to give, because one of them is located between each editor's ears, and the other is simply a second tab in your web-browser. Wikipedia isn't killed by the stupid edits, the school-kid pranks and the people in Luton who have a few too many drinks on a Saturday night and bet on how long they can make Wikipedia say that their favourite footballer has three testicles. They're obvious to any reader. It's killed by the people who, knowingly or through incompetence, make little changes, move someone's date of birth by a few months, make a mountain a few feet shorter or taller, write that Jo Brown did something that was done by Jo Browne. These edits often escape the anti-vandalism tools, and they're much harder to deal with. You'll never become a Heroic Guardian of Wikipedia, wielding a shining Huggle-sword of Righteous Rollbacking if you look at recent diffs and then open a separate browser tab to see if you can find any evidence that Jo Browne was 5'5" and not 5'4". If nothing else, it's too slow, requiring diligent, time-consuming fact-checking. But every time you check a little fact, you'll be making our encyclopaedia more reliable... Elemimele (talk) 15:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele - It's because of this we have things like Special:AbuseFilter/712 and Special:AbuseFilter/391 which are pieces of technical magic that sometimes manage to stop it. Sometimes. casualdejekyll 23:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Creating a Page on the Unrailed! Game

I don't know if it has enough notability to create an article on OnethirtyfourR (talk) 04:10, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@OnethirtyfourR: it seems to be available on multiple game platforms, but I’m having a little trouble finding independent reviews. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 08:45, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@OnethirtyfourR - You should check out WikiProject Video games - this is a page where editors come together to improve game-related articles. casualdejekyll 23:39, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Update Houston, Texas, USA page

Hi! I am requesting a land acknowledgement for Houston, Texas, USA. Here are some resources that may be useful for creating one. A guide to Indigenous land acknowledgment - Native Governance Center, < nativegov.org/news/a-guide-to-indigenous-land-acknowledgment/ >. And this map, < native-land.ca >. To dive deep into the histories of the displaced Indigenous people of these settler colonial territories. Houston, Texas would not be what it is today without Indigenous people, and I hope we can honor that. 73.32.26.13 (talk) 00:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Houston includes a paragraph about the native peoples who lived there before settlement by people of European origin. Certainly, this section can be improved. The best place to discuss it is Talk:Houston. Cullen328 (talk) 01:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Unclear publication date

What do I put in the source date field for a reference when the exact day is unclear? I'm particularly curious for this Mother Jones source that I cited for Blood and Politics and this Bookforum source that I cited for Draft:Bring the War Home. In both cases, these were originally print publications and were digitally republished. As far as I can tell, both are magazine issues that include two months. For instance, the May/June issue and the April/May issue. I don't even know what month to use. Should I use the cite web template or the cite magazine template? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, TipsyElephant. Magazine publication dares are notoriously inaccurate. It is commonplace to see a magazine with a May publication date on sale in April. Do not worry at all about that. Just use the first listed month for six times a year magazines. So, the Mother Jones date should be May 2009. Cullen328 (talk) 01:55, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Biographical Content Disputes

I wrote a biography several years ago about a living person. A couple of months ago, an editor completely revised this biography. The two of us clearly have a different view of the facts about the person and the content. I am an admirer. The editor is a critic and appears to be a supporter of a rival. I want to reverse the edits because most of this content is based on the individual's interviews and my observations. However, I want to avoid a petty snit. How do these things get handled? DBlakeRoss (talk) 00:04, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

If the article is based mostly on the subject's interviews and your 'observations', rather than on substantial published pieces (which your observations are not), independent of the subject (which interviews are not), that have appeared in well-edited reliable sources, then it should not be an article on Wikipedia.

Articles should also have a Neutral point of view which requires using a proportional balance of such Reliable sources, not show a bias towards either admiration or negative criticism.

Please give a link to the article in question. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 00:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Nahid Angha Jolly1253 (talk) 00:38, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, DBlakeRoss. The neutral point of view is a core content policy and is not negotiable. Your version was much more like a hagiography than a neutrally written encyclopedia article. Including your observations in an encyclopedia article is a violation of no original research, another core content policy. Cullen328 (talk) 01:12, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Hagiography

Today I learned about a new word, a "hagiography". It's a biography of a religious person like a saint or ecclesiastical leader. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 14:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

That was its original meaning, but in this context it means "a biography which idealizes or idolizes its subject". CodeTalker (talk) 16:29, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Makes sense. Now I know there isn't some cult out there who worships Nahid Angha or whatever. A diehard editor (talk | edits) 03:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

My edits reverted despite providing official reports as sources

My edits on Asian Pacific Mathematics Olympiad have been brutally reverted on completely wrong accusation of no reliable sources, even though that i added the reports and regulations from the very organizer itself of the 2002 and 2003 APMO, the Canadian Mathematical Society as the sources. The 2001 APMO was organized by Colombia and I couldn't find any sources for it, but the 2002 APMO report is clear enough what the problem was. I spent lot of time to find these hard-to-find official reports and regulations for sources scattered on the internet. Being a 2000, 2001 and 2002 APMO participant myself I know very well what happened and why my awards were gone in 2001 and 2002. If official reports were not reliable, what is reliable? --Stomatapoll (talk) 09:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Stomatapoll Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is primarily interested in what independent reliable sources say about a topic, not what it says about itself (such as through official reports). 331dot (talk) 09:50, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

It was a report of a security issue, actual incidents that happened twice, the leakage of problems, that led to cancellation of the two APMOs, in the dawn of the internet age. Outside the very small math olympiad circle there was no mention of the incident, and even within the circle i only heard it from words of mouth of the trainers of math olympiad about the incidents and the measures to be taken in the future by the organizer. The other sources that I found being math societies of other countries reporting on the APMO results of their students which said pretty much the same thing about the cancellation, only much more brief than the official one, and two suspicious posts on sci.math of the USENET in March 2001 which leaked the APMO problems, but I cannot cite them and say that these are the posts that led to 2001 APMO cancellation unless someone could confirm it, but no reports ever said what the incidents were precisely. The APMO was a very loose cooperation between math societies in different countries and information about early APMOs was very sporadic. The current APMO website was built more than a decade later after the incidents and has hardly any information about the APMO before 2010s. I spent mcuh time and effort to paste together all that I can find on the incidents that were only known to the participants and organziers of different countries involved in the APMO in these two years. Stomatapoll (talk) 10:33, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Stomatapoll We cannot accept documents in private hands(inaccessible to the public) or information that is not published(i.e. word of mouth), both because it must be possible for the public to verify the information. If something is not found in a publicly available reliable source, preferably an independent one, it cannot be on Wikipedia. There may be other places for such information, but not here. 331dot (talk) 12:44, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

All the sources I cited are accessible on the internet. They are the official account publicly available on the CMS website. I used only publicly available sources for the account of the incidents I wrote. I did not use or write anything in the article that could only be referenced by "private communication" as on some research papers. I don't understand why it is so hard for you to understand what I am trying to say, that is I am writing solely based on public and in fact official information on the incident. and the APMO has no notabilility outside of the math olympiad circle, so if you insist that i need outside source, you may as well ＤＥＬＥＴＥ the article because this is an impossible and utterly unreasonable requirement for an article of this nature! The APMO itself has no opening or closing ceremony, it is just an exam taken by very few people on an ordinary day, like a school exam but only a much harder one, in fact much smaller than any school exam, that's it. It has never gotten any public attention and never will, no journalist would be interested in it. Have you ever seen a cheating in a school exam get reported independently outside a school? Stomatapoll (talk) 13:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Stomatapoll, the article (Asian Pacific Mathematics Olympiad) may very well warrant deletion, since at the moment it seems to contain no reliable, independent, published sources with significant coverage that demonstrate its notability. I've placed some tags on the article to that effect.

Cheating scandals have occasionally been reported on when prominent people or institutions are involved. This does not seem to be the case here. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 14:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

The math olympiad is a very small subculture of the small subculture of (proof-based advanced) mathematics. There is not a single sentence one can write on the APMO if this paranoid requirement of independent source is to be met, even though there is nothing controversal in the incident but only facts. It is not that there is a lawsuit or public controversy or anything like that when independent sources may be justified. The SAME can be said for ALL other math olympiads except the IMO. This is not the NBA, not the World Cup, not the Olympic Games. No one cares about the math olympiads outside the math olympiad circle. They are only the intermediate stages for selecting the IMO participants, and even the IMO gets very little public attention anyway. No information you can get about them are not from the official source. DELETE all theses math olympiads articles because they cannot possibly reach the noble golden wiki standard. Stomatapoll (talk) 14:39, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Use of official reports to support basic facts is fine, Stomatapoll, but the sources you used don't appear to fully support what you added to the article. For instance, you added In the 2001 APMO, some students had leaked problems online before some other countries started the contest. The results thus had to be nullified. In the 2002 APMO, the contest period was shortened to three days, and students were warned not to discuss on the internet until the problems had been published on the official website., sourcing this to this page, which (unless I've missed something) doesn't mention a nullification in 2001. The requirement for independent sources is a different matter; some of these are needed to demonstrate notability, but not everything in the article has to be based on them. There should be reliable sources of some type for everything, however. Cordless Larry (talk)

It is in the 2001 CMS report cited at the end of the paragraph, "The 2001 Asian Pacific Mathematics Olympiad (APMO) was written in March by 39 Canadian students, selected either because they had participated in the Mathematical Olympiads Correspondence Program or because they had placed well in the 2000 Canadian Open Mathematics Challenge. Unfortunately the results of the 2001 APMO were nullified as some of the problems were posted on an internet site before other countries had written the paper." --Stomatapoll (talk) 15:05, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

In that case, Stomatapoll, you should cite that source where you say that the 2001 results were nullified. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Stomatapoll, if they can't possibly meet our standards, deletion is indeed appropriate. See WP:PROD and WP:AfD for possible ways to proceed from here. 97.113.27.216 (talk) 15:11, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Stomatopoll, and welcome to the Teahouse. It sounds as if you are trying to use Wikipedia for something which it is not fitted for, viz. RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS. ColinFine (talk) 12:58, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

The incident is not some hidden affair, it is uncontested, uncontroversial, the information is publicly available. It is just an incident only known to a few of the old math olympiad participants, the accounts of which were in obscure places in old CMS reports and newsletters. The result of it was changes of the regulations and time schedule of the APMO from the one-week period of the pre-internet age to the current one within 24 hours. Somehow in the many years after the creation of the APMO article, no editor seemed to know the incident, so I had to do the research myself to correct the misleading information in the article which suggested that the time schedule had always been the same since the beginning of the APMO. --Stomatapoll (talk) 19:50, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Stomatapoll You say "it is uncontested, uncontroversial, the information is publicly available". But, is it notable? Does anyone outside of this small subculture really have any interest in this? That hasn't been demonstrated, in my opinion. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Due to the international nature of APMO, I have searched through many CMS newsletters, google books for any old day APMO regulations, read through Singapour Mathematics Society reports, Taiwan Math Society articles on APMO, versions of Korean Math Society (organizer for 2005 to 2007 APMO) old APMO website on the internet archive, searched for Australian, Japanese math societies old APMO webpages, and browsed through pages of Spanish search results looking for any trace of Columbia math society reports on the APMO 2001 which was totally unfruitful. And this Mr.weedle without asking me anything, erased all my work. Wikipedia has no respect of its user's contribution. --Stomatapoll (talk) 19:36, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Your work is all there in the article history and can be restored with sufficient sourcing, Stomatapoll. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:02, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Page Deleted Due To Copyright Isuue, Please Help.

Hello, I submitted a draft of my upcoming Film Page on wikipedia, but it got deleted due to "copyright content" issue, I need help, as what specifically was flagged under copyright infringement, and how can I make it right.(I own all the copyrights related to my page, just need help in how to prove it to the wikipedia).

Vishal jejurkar (talk) 11:48, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vishal jejurkar: if you're the copyright holder, see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 11:53, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vishal jejurkar, you should not directly copy material from other websites on Wikipedia, this is a copyright violation. The content should be a verifiable summary of what reliable sources say. Also, your draft Draft:Peepal Tree was not deleted, but declined. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

But even if you sort out the copyright, it is unlikely that much of the material from you will be relevant. 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.

At the moment only one of the three sources in the draft - the LA Times review - is of any value at all, as the other two have no significant coverage of it. You need to cite some more substantial, reliable, independent sources about the film if the draft is going to establish that the film meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

Also, you should make clear on your user page and the draft's talk page that you have a conflict of interest in writing this draft. ColinFine (talk) 13:10, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vishal jejurkar Yes, please read the info about donating copyrighted materials. Among other things, the license that you need to release the material under will "allow anyone—not just Wikipedia—to share, distribute, transmit, and adapt your work, provided that you are attributed as the author.". And, "Wikipedia does not accept material that claims "this can be used in Wikipedia, but not anywhere else". 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:52, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikidata isn't updating a software version

I used Wikidata to add a newer software version, but the Wikipedia article that references Wikidata hasn't updated.

• Wikipedia: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kubernetes
• Wikidata: https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q22661306

The relevant field in Wikidata is the software version identifier. I've added a newer version 1.25, but the Wikipedia article still shows 1.24.4 as the Stable Release.

Question: Why isn't the Wikipedia article updating with the latest data from Wikidata?

EDIT: I solved it on my own. It turns out that I had to set the "rank" field of the new version to "preferred." I also had to set the "rank" of the previous release to "normal." This rank thing appears to be some concept that's unique to Wikidata.

Pcgeek86 (talk) 07:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

I want to change article

When I am changing any article someone make change again Shree ram divoties (talk) 09:03, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Shree ram divoties and welcome to the Teahouse. Your edits to Raghupati Raghava Raja Ram were reverted - twice - by Materialscientist because you did not cite any sources, and indeed removed citations that were there. Repeating a reverted edit without discussion is edit warring, and is regarded as disruptive, so you should discuss the matter with Materialscientst (and any other editors who are interestd) on the article's talk page before you do anything else.

But, I would urge you first to read the discussions already on Talk:Raghupati Raghava Raja Ram. ColinFine (talk) 10:17, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Why do we need to cite sources?

I've always been not sure about why you have to cite a source for everything on a page, I mean, this is an encyclopaedia, why do we have to cite sources, and why do they have to be reliable? MinecraftFan23 (talk) 03:37, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

@MinecraftFan23: See Wikipedia:Verifiability RudolfRed (talk) 03:45, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay now I know, thanks for the help! MinecraftFan23 (talk) 03:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. This question seems like bait, but I'll take the hook. Wikipedia needs to cite sources or else the project probably would've failed a while ago. With no sources, you don't know what's vandalism or a hoax. If anybody could add potentially unreliable information to Wikipedia, it just wouldn't work.Asparagusus (interaction) 03:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

MinecraftFan23 Yours was actually a two-part question. Sources support verification. Sources that have the potential for not being reliable include blogs, vlogs, interviews, press releases, the subject's own website, newspapers known to publish false information, etc. David notMD (talk) 04:59, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

See WP:RSP for a list of frequently discussed sources. Oh and add wikis to the list by David notMD. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:16, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

That includes that Wikipedia articles cannot be used as references in Wikipedia articles (because anyone can edit Wikipedia articles). David notMD (talk) 12:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Report

i have been having this constant problem something about error detected but i dont see anything wrong with it although i ve gotten captcha correct FajarAesthetic (talk) 11:30, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I am afraid you have to be more specific with what error message you are encountering when saving (?) edits. "error detected" is too generic to track down the source of the problem, maybe try copying the error message here when you encounter it next (You can edit this section by using the edit link in the section header, or the [Reply] link behind my post if its there) Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:58, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Help in writing article

Hi All, good day to you. I have joined wikipedia just today. I will appreciate if someone can help me in writing article and self biography on wikipedia.

Thanks a lot Asghar Kamal Butt Libra239 (talk) 18:18, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Libra239. Please read WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. You are advised in the strongest possible terms not to try to write an autobiography. The vast majority of the time, such efforts fail, and the effort turns out to be a frustrating waste of time for the writer and for those who have to review and delete the content. Cullen328 (talk) 18:25, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

I see that User:Libra239 has already been deleted. That was a curriculum vitae or résumé and was entirely inappropriate for this encyclopedia. Your user page is to tell your fellow editors about your contributions and goals as a Wikipedia editor, not to promote your career. Cullen328 (talk) 18:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Libra239, and welcome to the Teahouse. Telling the world about something - especially about yourself or your own activities - is fundamentally not what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is only interested in subjects that the world has already been told about. See WP:NOTPROMO. ColinFine (talk) 19:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Text size too big every time a page loads on Safari on iPad

Someone may have asked this already so my first question is how do I search here for previous topics, but my main question is how to stop the text size reverting to too-big every time a page loads on Safari on iPad. I reset it using cmd-0 but then when I load another page, or refresh the current one, it gets bigger again. It’s only about 1.25x enlarged but it’s enough to push things off the right-hand edge of the screen. It may be that the actual text size is changing or, more likely, the main part of the web page is coming up zoomed. Should I be editing some css? Northernhenge (talk) 10:32, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Northernhenge. You may have better luck asking about this problem at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). That is monitored by editors with technical expertise. Cullen328 (talk) 17:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328: Northernhenge (talk) 20:43, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

It's already well-known. See for example these on-wiki reports:

• Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Desktop version on mobile being too wide occasionally
• Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 199#Search box and default zoom messed up while using desktop on mobile

and the technical ticket phab:T311795. DMacks (talk) 20:27, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Issue with sources for footnotes

I recently submitted a Wikipedia article about an entertainment lawyer I have worked with which included several supporting footnotes that refer to sources like Google, IMDB, and Wikipedia to provide evidence of various film projects and events that she has been involved with and the entry was rejected because these sources are not considered reliable, independent sources. In most cases, these materials are the only existing evidence that she has received credits in films she's worked with and of events at which she has spoken. Each footnote is meant to support a statement of fact in the article and if I remove all of them, these facts will be unsupported, which I imagine is another reason for rejecting an entry. Do you have any suggestions of how to resolve this issue? I have included a copy of the article, with notes, for your reference.

Buster10 (talk) 16:56, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

No need to post a copy of the draft here. Just provide a link: Draft:Laverne_Berry RudolfRed (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

@Buster10: Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia operates on its own definition of notability. You'd have to show how Berry satisfies it with reliable sources, one of the criteria is that it isn't user-generated. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Buster10, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is that if you cannot find substantial, independent, reliable sources about your colleage, then she does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and no article about her is possible. Please see WP:AMOUNT.

Incidentally, if you have worked with Berry, you ought to consider whether you have a conflict of interest in working on an article about her. That doesn't forbid you from doing so, but you need to be aware of Wikiepedia's position on COI. ColinFine (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Laverne Berry (edit conflict) I have removed the draft copy from here, it is not nessesary to duplicate it. IMDB, Facebook, Google Sites and Wikipedia (including other-language versions) are not considered a reliable source here. Note that normally no source is nessesary to prove that Laverne Berry produced a particular film, unless she was credited under an anonymous pseudonym. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:17, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

All of the refs are URLs rather than complete format; some of the refs are an in-name-only mention of Berry, meaning that those can establish a fact as verified, but do not constitute published content ABOUT her. David notMD (talk) 21:04, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Requests to edit semi-protected page

I posted on the talk page for the Capital Punishment article twice, not realizing that I needed to use the "request edit to protected page" format the first time I posted: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Capital_punishment#Remove_number_of_people_killed_by_Henry_VIII I would like to make the edit myself, but I'm still learning how to use Wikipedia. Will my edit request go through? Is there a way to delete the duplicate request?

Second question: is the "request edit to semi-protected page" option good if I can find some actual sources to discuss capital punishment in medieval Europe, since the page is sorely lacking in proper scholarly discussion of the topic? Chucklehammer (talk) 21:29, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Chucklehammer, and welcome to the Teahouse. Although I've just deleted your first attempt at an edit request for you, you could just as easily have done it yourself. You could have done that in one of two ways. Having made an edit you regret making, one can go to the 'View History' tab and look for the row at the top which will show your recent edit and simply click 'undo'. OR, you could have gone to the thread you started, click 'Edit source' which is next to it and then deleted (blanked) the content of just that one post. Leaving an 'Edit Summary' which explains why you're deleting it is always helpful.

Yes, use the 'edit request' process if you wish. But in just a couple more edits you will be 'auto-confirmed' (account over 4 days old and has made 10 edits at least). You can then edit semi-protected articles directly. You may then BEBOLD and edit the page directly if you wish. Does that make sense? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:46, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, thank you for your help! I didn't realize how quickly it would take me to reach 10 edits. Chucklehammer (talk) 22:14, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Chiclehammer, and welcome to the Teahouse.It seems to me that a change like that, that involves questioning the reliability of a source, was best discussed on the talk page first anyway, whether you can technically edit the article directly or not. Making an edit request will put it on a list that may get more notice; but the problem is that the people who look at that list are general editors who choose to process edit requests, rather than people with particular knowledge or interest in this topic, so making it into an edit request may not achieve anything. (My guess is that the people who look at requests will be inclined to look at it, and say, Erk, I don't know anything about that, and leave it for somebody else. I may be wrong though).

What might be more effective than making it an edit request in this context is to bring it to the attention of an appropriate WikiProject: maybe WP:WikiProject History or WP:WikiProject England. Alternatively, you might ask at the reliable sources noticeboard. ColinFine (talk) 21:47, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I ended up getting auto-confirmed (a quicker process than I thought it would be) and making the edit myself. I also have started joining a bunch of WikiProjects based on your suggestion, so thank you for that! Chucklehammer (talk) 22:16, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Heinz Tomato Ketchup and Wikilinkswikilinks to cities and countries

I removed several links to cities and countries. I also removed hyperlinks to common words like french fries hamburgers, hot dogs, sugar, mayonnaise, jalapeno, balsamic vinegar, mustard, BBQ sauce, relish, clothing, mugs, cosmetics, cookbook, department store, jigsaw puzzle, and ferment. I also removed winks to commonly known social media sites Twitter and Instagram. The edits were undone with no explanation. Absolutely Certainly (talk) 21:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely Certainly Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Have you asked the editors who reverted your edits for an explanation? You can see who did it in the relevant article Edit History. If you have a Wikipedia policy to support your edits, be prepared to cite it. 331dot (talk) 21:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Absolutely Certainly your edits on Heinz Tomato Ketchup look fine to me, in that you removed a lot of WP:OVERLINK links. I would ask @Top5a to explain why they reverted your edits, either on the article talk page or on the user's talk page. CodeTalker (talk) 22:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello - in an article based on a food condiment, links to other food condiments and basic ingredients/components therein appeared appropriate; therefore, their blanket removal appeared overzealous. While citation edits and cleanup are indeed helpful (thank you for those), reducing internal links that may be helpful to readers does not appear to be constructive. Top5a (talk) 22:53, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Should probably add that, after checking the user's talk page, this is not the first time that there have been notices or warnings (even blocks) regarding the user's behavior. Top5a (talk) 23:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hm, checked the citation edits, and the user simply removed a reference to a book source without stating why, then added dead link references to pages without checking archives such as IA, nor simply searching for an adequate source replacement. Reference mangling isn't exactly something that should be encouraged, is it? @331dot @CodeTalker Top5a (talk) 23:21, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Keyword... Common. Which means a reader would easily find them,if inclined hence no need for the excessive links. Slywriter (talk) 23:39, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Absolutely Certainly, I understand what you are trying to do, but WP:OVERLINK says, try to be conscious of your own demographic biases – what is well known in your age group, line of work, or country may be less known in others. There are many English speaking communities where words like jalapeno are not commonly used, and vinegar in general, especially Balsamic vinegar, is rare in India in particular, except in Portuguese influenced Goa. Cullen328 (talk) 00:05, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

With all due respect, by your definition there should not be any wikilinks, correct? My rationale is that the user was making edits for the sake of making edits (as you can also see from their reference mangling). They were removing wikilinks to condiments and basic food items/ingredients/components within an article *about* a basic food item/ingredient/component. Top5a (talk) 00:40, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

To further clarify, @Slywriter, if an article is about advanced particle physics, then we would not expect a wikilink to the word "atom." But, in an article about ketchup, it is reasonable that other basic components such as "high fructose corn syrup" would be wikilinked, in addition to common food items on which the ketchup is used, such as "chips" and "hamburgers." Also recall that someone from a culture in which ketchup is not a familiar food item may also be unaware of, for example, these chips or hamburgers. Furthermore, one should remember that this judgement call was not made by an editor adding information to the article, but rather by an editor removing wikilinks merely for the sake of altering an article. I do not believe such "non-edits" are encouraged, but please correct me if I am mistaken. Top5a (talk) 00:48, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

"Non-edits" are edits, they are not discouraged. Here they increased readability by reducing sea of blue. While there may be some judgement calls, the article suffers from an excess of wikilinks. Maybe High Fructose needed a link but did sugar a word before it need one? There was more good than bad in their edit, so blanket reversal was not ideal. Slywriter (talk) 01:00, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

The more I look, the stranger it gets. South Korea and South Africa were countries in 1907. It should be uncontroversial to remove these factual errors. Absolutely Certainly (talk) 22:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

With all due respect, by your definition more words should be linked because 'someone from a culture may also be unaware' of the terms 'market share', 'exporting', 'slogan', 'touts', 'mainstay', etc. I noticed that since your reversion, someone removed links to many familiar countries. Once I read those edits, I noticed that the original sentence states that: In 1907, Heinz started exporting their product to South Korea. South Korea in 1907? My first inclination was just to remove the list of countries. I relented and just removed the links. I also added the reasons why the links were removed and contrary to your assertion I added information for clarity. I changed 'chips' to 'potato chips', since the link led to potato chips. In the UK chips are a variation of french fries. I wanted our UK followers to understand that there are ketchup flavored crisps (the term used over there for potato chips). Absolutely Certainly (talk) 21:16, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

> With all due respect, by your definition more words should be linked because 'someone from a culture may also be unaware' of the terms 'market share', 'exporting', 'slogan', 'touts', 'mainstay', etc.

Good attempt at acting snarky, yet, if you had spent that energy attempting to read what I typed, you would have understood how words such as 'market share', 'exporting', 'slogan', 'touts', 'mainstay' are not basic food/condiment-related/relevant, i.e. irrelevant to the majority of the list you complained about here in your post, and which comprised the lion's share of your initial reverted edit. As for the removal of wikilinks to countries, I did not mention any issue with removing those. I am not sure what you are driving at by making useless edits, then furthermore wasting the time of other editors with pointless discussions. Judging by your behavior here and on your Talk page, if you merely wish to argue with other editors, I would like to point out that there other websites which may serve you better than Wikipedia. Top5a (talk) 21:32, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Do we agree to remove South Korea? 1907? Absolutely Certainly (talk) 21:49, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

According to Wikipedia, the term South Africa was first used to describe a country 1910. Time to remove that also. Do we agree? Absolutely Certainly (talk) 22:00, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

With all due respect is snarky. Since forever. Instead of arguing the merits, you appeal to the ad homonym. Are we here to make a good wiki? With verifiable facts? Absolutely Certainly (talk) 22:53, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Afar Triangle Democratic Republic

Afar Triangle Democratic Republic is New government of Horn Africa Wollo Media (talk) 20:30, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wollo Media: Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tenryuu It looks like OP was asked, but not required, to change their account name. When do we ask, and when do we ask-and-block? I'm just curious. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:17, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Odd that this "Democratic Republic" (as opposed to the Afar Triangle itself) seems to have no internet existence other than on a couple of maps (one very crude) uploaded to Wikipedia. The Afar Region does have course have a Regional government under the Federal Democratic Republic of Ethiopia. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 22:26, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

I thought this post sounded familiar.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Atmospheric pressure, Gravity and Sea level

Does a Sand timer's Hourglass time spend differ with altitude or sea level. (Sorry for bad English) 115.186.169.15 (talk) 00:09, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Not with pressure. Since the 18th Century sandglass timers have been sealed, so atmospheric pressure is irrelevant. Meters (talk) 00:16, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, hourglass timers are affected by height. Gravity decreases with height so the timer will slow down with height. At the limit, with no gravity, the timer does not run at all. Meters (talk) 00:26, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Gravity of Earth#Altitude says: "All other things being equal, an increase in altitude from sea level to 9,000 metres (30,000 ft) causes a weight decrease of about 0.29%." I don't know how much this affects a typical hourglass or how accurate it is to begin with. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Can you add porn?

explicit 41.113.230.137 (talk) 05:03, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps you should tell us what it is you want to add, what the sources are for the material, and which article you want to add it to! --Bduke (talk) 05:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia has encyclopedia articles about notable porn actors and porn films. That does not mean that the content of those articles is explicitly pornographic. In recent years, most editors interested in content about pornography have gotten much stricter about what is notable and encyclopedic in this topic area, and many porn related articles have been deleted. This is part of a general trend of not accepting poorly referenced articles created by enthusiastic fans, and it also includes articles about obscure footballers, cricket players and "villages" with no significant coverage in reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 05:44, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Help with an issue of removed information-loop (Crayon Shin-chan)

Hello Teahouse, I would like to request some assistance. I'm new to Wikipedia, but I edited on other wiki's before. I made an account to revert an edit which was made to List of Crayon Shin-chan episodes, because there are resources there that I use from time to time and those were suddenly removed.

I tried reverting it back, but that wasn't an option because Wikipedia kept blocking this, likely because it was removed, reverted, and removed again. So I went over to the talking page to chat with the user who removed this information. Long story short there are five English dubs, all different (cast, episode/season numbers, etc.), two of them where used as basis for the European dubs, all vastly different then the Japanese original, so the list of original episodes isn't useful.

We basically agreed that the best option was to create separate pages for these dubs. I put 1-2 hours in of my own time to created this via an old revision, because I cannot request a separation of the pages anymore, since the information is removed and I cannot revert it.

And all four of the pages where declined because "This list is not necessary. Notable dub broadcast dates can be added to the List of Crayon Shin-chan episodes". Which I cannot do because I cannot revert the edit.

Does someone want to help me with it? CinnamonYT (talk) 16:51, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

CinnamonYT, welcome to the Teahouse. You have provided your rationale for wanting to reinstate material removed from a list article as: "there are resources there that I use from time to time and those were suddenly removed." In point of fact, that reasoning is not why we revert removals. The utility of an article is rated as how it serves the body of human knowledge in the context of the encyclopedia being concise and broadly useful, rather than exhaustive and trivia-packed.

Are you aware that virtually every older version of an article exists in Wikipedia and can be found by checking the article's history page to find old revisions? If you need an information resource as you describe, pull up your preferred historical version of the article, and bookmark it. Does this solve your problem?--Quisqualis (talk) 18:06, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, but the information of these dubs are vastly different, you cannot get the same information by the lists that where kept, so it's a valuable addition to the site. I don't understand why it's so difficult to get information which was always there to get reinstated. CinnamonYT (talk) 18:27, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, CinnamonYT, and welcome to the Teahouse. The reason why "it's so difficult" is that other editors don't agree with you that it is appropriate (I havce no knowledge or interest in the subject, so I have no opinion myself). This is normal for how Wikipedia articles are delevoped: see WP:BRD. ColinFine (talk) 20:16, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

@CinnamonYT "... there are resources there that I use from time to time and those were suddenly removed". As mentioned in different words in these replies, Wikiepdia is not a place to store information that you need to use from time to time. See Not a web host (click here). 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Notability

Dear Host,

I want to ask how I can understand if my subject a person "Paras Jahanzaib" previously known as Paras Khursheed hosting a program "NewsBeat" in a leading national TV "SAMAA TV" from 2004 is notable or not?

Asim.ali15 (talk) 07:46, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Asim.ali15 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. A person is notable if they receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about them. Please see the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person. Primary sources like official biographies and interviews with her do not establish notability. What types of sources do you have? 331dot (talk) 07:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

https://www.samaa.tv/news/2536998

https://www.samaaenglish.tv/videos/newsbeat/

https://www.insaf.pk/news/prime-minister-imran-khans-interview-paras-jahanzaib-samaa-tv

https://thepakistantoday.com/sheikh-rasheed-gets-furious-with-anchor-paras-jahanzaib/

https://www.khaleejtimes.com/article/we-will-teach-you-a-lesson-pakistani-anchor-threatens-narendra-modi-in-hilarious-video Asim.ali15 (talk) 08:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Asim.ali15 These things document things Paras Jahanzaib was involved with, but are not independent, signficant coverage of her. That may be tough to find, as journalists do not often write about other journalists. In my search of her name I didn't see any good sources, so I would say that she does not merit an article at this time. 331dot (talk) 08:30, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Error in infobox

Can somebody fix infobox of this article Meera Jasmine. 2409:4073:408:6381:0:0:76F:10A5 (talk) 10:33, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done - the previous editor had added nowiki mark up to the instructions in the infobox, which broke the formatting - Arjayay (talk) 10:43, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

When will my draft article be made?

I have written an article which is currently draft, but if I want to submit it for approval, then how to do it, it is not showing the option of submit. Universe sky07 (talk) 11:51, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@Universe sky07: you have already submitted it, do be patient. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 12:09, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

It was declined within 15 minutes (courtesy link: Draft:Devendra Yadav). That's pretty quick turn-around. Please see the links posted to your talkpage for an explanation of why, which includes links to the key wikipedia content policies and guidelines for more information. DMacks (talk) 13:03, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft for approval: Travelpayouts https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Travelpayouts

Hi everyone! I just want to hear your advice. I have my draft about Travelpayouts which was declined for 2 times because of

1. It is reading more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia;

2. This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significantcoverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of organizations and companies).

I built the article on the principle of similar articles on this topic and of course took all the information from independent sources.

What can I do to get my article accepted? Maybe you can show mw where does it look like an advertisement? Perhaps I should look for more information about the company, although I have seen articles that are less comprehensive.

Thank you for instance! Zagogulko (talk) 11:24, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@Zagogulko I ran the citation bot to turn the bare URL references into something more like proper citations. It became clear that you should have used named references as many citations currently listed separately are to the same source. See WP:NAMED. Most of these look like information based on press releases, so are not WP:INDEPENDENT of Travelpayouts. The central point for showing the notability of a company is that it should have been discussed in reliable independent sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Further to the feedback on the draft page, I would add there is a lot of irrelevant name-dropping of big travel companies, and a lot of talk about its business model, without actually explaining anywhere what the business actually does at a practical level. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:36, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

• Zagogulko, if you see similar articles that have bad sources or no sources, please tell us which they are so we can nominate them for deletion, but that is not an argument for adding your own to mainspace.

Examples of places where the draft look[s] like an advertisement:

1. content creator is a vague (but vaguely positive) term
2. The company works closely with... unlike my company, which works loosely, or maybe slacks off loosely, with its customers?
3. Travelpayouts is the largest affiliate marketing network focused on (X) - and I am the best expert in the world at the exact job that I am doing. You would need independent sources (so, not the CEO of Travel Payouts on a Forbes blog) to establish that this is a relevant description.
4. The company uses (...) a pay per action reward system. When I go buy groceries, I don’t "use a pay per item reward system". "Pay per action" might be justified in some contexts (not here: you should clarify from the outset whether it’s per click, per booking, etc.); "reward system" is probably never justified in a Wikipedia article. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:50, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Languages

If I created an account for the English Wikipedia, like the one I'm using now, can I use it all across the entire Wikipedia system, meaning to edit articles in other languages? Hgh1985 (talk) 10:40, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hgh1985 - In a word, yes - User accounts are now global by default see m:Help:Unified login - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 10:48, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Hgh1985, but although the log-in is universal, not much else is. This means that if you log in to the English Wikipedia you won't see notifications sent to you in the French, for example, and if you create a user-page in the English Wikipedia it won't be visible to those who are reading the French Wikipedia; you'll have to write a new user-page, if you want one, for each Wikipedia that you edit. Your talk-pages are of course individual to each Wikipedia too. Elemimele (talk) 15:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

The notifications and thanks do appear to be unified for me (all the languages' wikis, commons, etc.). I assume that's because in my user preferences "Notifications" pane, I have "Cross-wiki notifications: Show notifications from other wikis" checked. You can create a central userpage on meta, which will display on all other wikis that do not have a one created locally on that specific wiki. See WP:Global user pages for details. DMacks (talk) 16:01, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft article notification? And group project/task.

HI, I did ask for a number of draft articles about women in electronic literature to be restored. How will I know when these are restored? Will I be notified directly when these are restored?

I am trying to get a group of interested volunteers, so this would be a group project.  I have asked Women Writers if they would help sponsor us as a task. Would I get notified of a response there as well? 

Thanks. I am not trying to be impatient--I totally get that every volunteer is overwhelmed. I just want to figure out how I would be notified so that people know I am/we are working on this?

thank you! LoveElectronicLiterature (talk) 16:40, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, LoveElectronicLiterature. I would expect that the admins would notify you on your user talk page.

As for your group: I would expect people to reply to yourpost at WT:WikiProject Women writers. They may or may not ping you when they do so, so it's worth checking there. ColinFine (talk) 17:14, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

My Article Should Not Have Been Deleted

I fail to see why my article was flagged as advertising when all I was doing was documenting a business and current and past projects. If Tesla and other big business can do it, why can't I? Squidwaffle (talk) 13:28, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Tesla and other big businesses don't do it. Someone unconnected with those big businesses writes about the big businesses--citing reliable sources that are themselves unconnected with those big businesses. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:36, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Walking back my earlier comment. I was assuming a situation a little different from what it in fact was. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Squidwaffle, and welcome to the Teahouse. Not being an admin, I can't see the deleted article. But what this usually means is that you have made the (natural) error of writing the article either from your own knowledge, or from Walley's point of view. One of the things that makes editing with a COI so hard is that it is hard to see when we're doing this.

But Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. Having found the independent sources, you then need to forget anything you know about the company and write solely from what those sources say. You may then be able to add some uncontroversial factual data (like dates and places) from non-independent sources; but no more than that. ColinFine (talk) 14:35, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Squidwaffle. Your article was deleted before I could read it so I can only give general suggestions. Have you read Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners? Those links may help you understand how to write a good encyclopedia article. Best wishes on future Wikipedia projects. Karenthewriter (talk) 14:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Squidwaffle. I am an administrator and so I could read your deleted article about Walley's Heating & Air. Your draft had only a single reference and amazingly, that reference did not even mention Walley's Heating & Air. Tesla, Inc., on the other hand, has 593 references so the difference is stark. Your draft consisted of unverified business information and appears to be largely original research based on your personal experience. This type of content is clearly contrary to policy. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Wikipedia is not a business directory of every company. It is an encyclopedia with articles about notable companies, as Wikipedia defines that term. Cullen328 (talk) 17:49, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Donations

Hello, in Israel we are getting a request to donate. That is a great idea! I donated. However, I keep getting interruptions asking me to donate! It’s a bit unfair and very annoying because I already donated. Wouldn’t it make sense not to keep asking for donations after one has already donated? 93.172.107.43 (talk) 09:17, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. The Foundation is responsible for the donation process, including donation requests. We have no way of knowing that the person sitting at your computer/holding your device at any given moment has donated. If you create an account, you can turn off the donation requests. 331dot (talk) 09:21, 26 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, you might very well have a dynamic IP (like me and very many others). The IP your device had when you made the donation might not be the one (see above) it has now, and the one it has now might be reallocated to someone else's device tomorrow, so even if the IPs of donors were tracked by the Wikimedia Foundation it would not help. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 19:01, 27 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you have your browser set to clear cookies? IIRC, there is meant to be one saved by the donation page which suppresses the banners. ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 18:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Removal of page redirection

I'm trying to edit a page that is currently being redirected from an other page with a similar name (with an accent on a letter). I can't quite succeed to remove that redirection. Is there anyone able to help me ?

Page in question: Ōkubi (japanese folklore) Okubi (no accent on the O) Upcoming video game -- This is the page I'm trying to edit. Skeltonjohn (talk) 19:00, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Here is a direct link to edit the redirect. If you're planning to expand it into a full article, make sure you know the topic is notable and that you're using reliable sources, and consider first creating a draft and later pushing it to the mainspace. --small jars tc 19:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Skeltonjohn, and welcome to the Teahouse. While it is possible to edit a redirection page into an article, I would not recommend that an inexperienced editor try it. If you are satisfied that the game meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - unlikely for an "upcoming" game, but possible - and you feel ready to enter the challenging and often frustrating fray of creating a Wikipedia article before spending time learning how Wikipedia works, then I advise you to study Your first article and then use the articles for creation process to create a draft. When you get the article in suitable state you can submit it for review, and when a reviewer eventually accepts it as an article, they will sort out the redirect.

On the other hand, if you cannot find the multiple substantial independent reliable sources that are a non-negotiable requirement, you should not spend any more time on such an article at present. In any case, as I implied above, I would strongly advise you not to attempt to create any article until you have a few months' experience improving existing articles, so that you have learnt how Wikipedia works and what its requirements are. ColinFine (talk) 19:19, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia article is not neutral

There is a wikipedia article that is about a politicized issue. There are two opposing sides: for example one side says a certain animal exists as a distinct species - call it the Distincter group and another side asserts that it is the same species as another animal- call it the NoSpecies group. The article is about the Distincter group, but the lead off sentence is written as a negative- e.g. "The Distincter group persists in the mistaken notion that Animal A is a distinct species". The second sentence in the article presenters the Distincters argument as a falsity - "The Distincters believe or assert that what they stand for is that the animal is a distinct species". This is not neutral because it presents up front and with false implications that the Distincters are wrong. The false implications are that yes, there are citations for the NoSpecies position, but those citations simply present the side that the Distincters are wrong- not actual facts about why they are wrong. Sorry for the long question but I want to ask how to make an edit to such an article. I read that there are edit wars in Wikipedia and this is discourage. This particular topic would be subject to an edit war from the NoSpecies group. I think it is important to present neutral information but the very topic between the sides is presented as a fait accompli in the first sentence, as if the Distincters are proven wrong. The whole article is then slanted against them. How would Wikipedia editors ask us to bring this up? I don't want to provide a link because I would like a neutral answer by the way. I fear, and I use that word with purpose, that presenting the actual page would prejudice the answer. Ruth Berge 16:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Rberge0108 (talk • contribs)

Hi Rberge0108. Wikipedia:Neutral point of view#Giving "equal validity" can create a false balance and Wikipedia:Fringe theories may be relevant. It's hard to say more without knowing the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:51, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rberge0108, and welcome to the Teahouse. You are unlikely to get a "neutral answer" that is much use to you: questions that are general and do not identify the particular case are usually a waste of everybody's time. By not telling us which article, you are in effect saying "My view of how this article should be is the right one". It might be that if we looked at it, we would all agree with you; but since you haven't told us, we don't know.

A note on edit warring: it takes two to edit-war. The first thing to do is to engage with discussion with them, according to BRD. If you are unable to reach a consensus with them, then dispute resolution tells you how to proceed. If they persist in editing against consensus, or are otherwise disruptive, then an issue can be raised (about behaviour, not content) at WP:ANI. --ColinFine (talk) 17:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Purely for interest: within Biology and other fields, the terms informally used for those who generally favour recognising fewer distinct species or other categories and those who favour recognising more are ""Lumpers" and "Splitters". {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.208.90.29 (talk) 17:11, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Ruth, I recommend checking the article's history and discussion pages. That will give you a picture of prior activity and argument, and you will be able to see if the seemingly non-neutral version is recent or long-standing. Even if relatively inactive, you can post your concerns to the talk page for the record. I would also love to look at the page myself, could you share with us which one it is? [oops, forgot sig, reping Ruth.] ⁓ Pelagic ( messages ) 20:32, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

How to provide context from a citation link

Hello, I would appreciate some help on this. When I am putting a citation, I think it will be good if there is a way the line or context from the citation link can be inserted too. So that will allow other users to directly know what is mentioned in the citation instead of having to put efforts in finding that text in the citation link. Can anyone help me with this? Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 14:46, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@ANLgrad Most citation templates allow for quotes. See for example Template:Cite journal#Quote. There is no need to add long quotes to most citations but I agree that occasionally they can be useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:53, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull very very helpful. Thanks so much. ANLgrad (talk) 16:22, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

For very specific facts, an exact quote can be nice, but sometimes you want to cite an individual page or a range of pages in which case {{rp}} is quite nice, for using the same citation multiple times, but with different pages each time. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:42, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

battle for dream island

why isn't BFDI on Wikipedia, when they won the 2021 cartoon crave awards? Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 19:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Articles are added to Wikipedia on topics which are notable, which means they have recieved significant coverage in multiple independent reliable sources. Please see WP:YFA and WP:GNG for more information. And no, just because something has an Uncyclopedia article doesn't mean it qualifies for Wikipedia. casualdejekyll 19:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Somecoolguy12345. The simple answer is that nobody has volunteered to write such an article. Is this web series truly notable, as Wikipedia defines that term? As for the Cartoon Crave Awards, that is a non-notable group of awards hosted on a Wordpress site that is only two years old. Cullen328 (talk) 19:13, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

oh okay Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 19:15, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Somecoolguy12345, now I see that you an submitted a draft article User:Somecoolguy12345/sandbox but it was unreferenced and poorly written and you said that you were lazy at the end. Please read Your first article and step up your game. Cullen328 (talk)

I do not know if this is the same topic as the deleted revisions of Battle for Dream Island, but if it is, a Deletion review will be nessesary. Considering that the last attempt was deleted and salted for an utter lack of reliable sources on the matter, your first step will probbably to find multiple reliable sources to base an article on. Victor Schmidt (talk) 20:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, it's the same topic as the deleted and salted article, which mentioned the Cartoon Crave Award. Deor (talk) 22:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

i like salt Somecoolguy12345 (talk) 02:33, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Somecoolguy12345 and welcome to the teahouse! as a bfdi fan myself I feel like I have to provide some background here. basically, there has been countless attempts to re/create the article (or some attempts to create one for battle for bfdi, season 4), all of which have been declined for the same reason: no reliable sources. from an older teahouse post, i posted this:

a long while back (maybe 2017 or so, during an attempt by the discord community to create an article), I did a search to help with article creation and if I recall correctly, there was no sources that came close to being reliable. even today it doesn't have reliable sources, the only news article I can find is a Forbes Contributor article on that Fandom Fantasy Food contest where jnj basically pulled their fans to victory, which is not exactly reliable and does not even have significant coverage since it focuses on the contest itself.
I think this is one of, if not the defining example of fame =/= notability. bfdi has a giant fanbase enough to spawn lots of fanfics and shows inspired by it, wins popularity contests, episode 1a has 63m views and the compilation of its first season has 20m, jacknjellify has 1.2m subs, yet it has absolutely no significant coverage in reliable sources and nothing backing its claim to notability unlike other webfics such as Homestar Runner, Don't Hug Me I'm Scared, Hazbin Hotel, and Eddsworld. and I'm not saying this as someone against the creation of a potential BFDI article, as I would've planned to make one once I had enough experience with article creation, but (surprisingly for a 10yo web series) it's still too soon to make one.

I believe that bfdi's status as a show whose large fanbase is primarily from a cult following instead of gaining mainstream attention (where most shows would get sources and lots of it, and which bfdi has not really much of) is why it doesn't (and can't, since it is blacklisted due to the many repeated attempts) have an article yet. I hope this answers your question, and happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:36, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

referencing help

hi I had a draft article declined because of inadequate reliable sources. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bi-Rite_Home_Appliances How might I fix this up for a better chance of approval? Dtayl20 (talk) 02:25, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dtayl20: Welcome to the Teahouse! I looked at the first two references from Appliance Retailer, and they appear to be press releases from Bi-Rite. Wikipedia is looking for independent published sources about the company. Also, six references for one sentence is too many references. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:41, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Removing Twitter source on "History of American Airlines"

On the History of American Airlines page, the section on the 2020s references a Tweet published by the American Airlines Twitter account about potentially lifting their ban on in-flight smoking.

While it seems to pass the WP:SOCIALMEDIA test, a cursory search on Twitter for "we'll pass it" (for phrases like "we'll pass it along" or "we'll pass it to X") on the AmericanAir Twitter account shows that it's a phrase that is frequently used by the account, so it doesn't seem to meet the notability & significance guidelines for sources, especially since it doesn't come from American Airline's newsroom.

What policy/guideline/rule should I refer to when removing the offending section? Echohawkdown (talk) 17:31, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

The section has already been deleted as baloney − a decision I support. Maproom (talk) 18:00, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Echohawkdown. I removed that content because it is nonsense. No original research is a core content policy. The no smoking policy on U.S. airlines became total in 2000 and is a result of federal law enforced by federal agencies. The tweet was a polite but utterly non-committal response to a tweet by a troll. Cullen328 (talk) 18:04, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

See Inflight smoking for further details. Cullen328 (talk) 18:07, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks - I figured it was nonsense as well, which is what prompted the question; I just didn't know which particular guideline/reason I should leave in the edit history for removing it from the article. Echohawkdown (talk) 02:44, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Contacted IP-user engaging in war-edits, no response. Post edited by 3rd user. What next?

Hi, an IP-user was engaging in war-editing. He was contacted by me and others [11], but had no response.

• the page he was warring on has been massively edited.
• he hasn't responded in half a month

Can I resume editing? I'm mostly interested in copy-editing, tiny changes to sources, moving content etc. If not, what should I do? AkisAr-26 (talk) 17:29, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Tagging the article in question, for convenience: Greeks for the Fatherland —Echohawkdown (talk) 17:37, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

@AkisAr-26 Welcome to Teahouse! I tend to agree with your reverts and worth noting the WP:3RR only refers to a 24 hour period, so more than 2 weeks is abundantly past that. That said, giving everyone time to cool off is strategically wise. Happy editing, and in future, if the editor doesn't engage in good faith by either engaging in editing war or reverting without explanation as they have in this case, I'd report them at WP:AIV. Kudos for checking in before editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:40, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the feedback. Kind regards, AkisAr-26 (talk) 04:05, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

How to send a link

Hello. Thank you for answering my question. I want to send the cited article below via email, but I do not know how to properly copy and insert the link (mobile view) in a email message.

ttps://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carolingian_dynasty&oldid=1107241012 Jahquelyn (talk) 23:10, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Jahquelyn and welcome to the teahouse! the link seems to already work which is probably all you need for an email link, although you might wanna add a "h" at the start ("https:// ...") to make sure it works. or, are you trying to get another link copied? 💜  melecie  talk - 00:07, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jahquelyn Welcome to Tea House! You can send the link as is (with the added h in the beginning), however if you want a mobile view of the url (the person recieving your email might be using desktop though), you can always search bottom of view for mobile view or directly prefix m (shorthand for mobile) before the wikipedia.org, for example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carolingian_dynasty&oldid=1107241012 ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 01:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jahquelyn: I suggest you just copy-paste the url https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Carolingian_dynasty&oldid=1107241012 into the mail. Whether it becomes a clickable link for the recipient or they have to copy the url to a browser address bar will depend on the used email software or mail service. If you want to increase the chance it's clickable then send a HTML email with a link if your own email software or mail service allows it. Maybe HTML emails is the default for you. It varies how to make a link and you didn't say which software or service you use. Maybe there is a link icon with a chain. Maybe it happens automatically when you copy-paste the url. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:27, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Explanatory footnotes

I added an Efn to Sam Smith, but I am unable to click on it when viewing the article. Any advise, anyone? GOLDIEM J (talk) 07:15, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@GOLDIEM J, since your efn was the first/only one, you also needed this:[12]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Cheers mate👍😀 GOLDIEM J (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Radio Host notability

Hey, What are the notability criteria for a Radio Personality/Host. I only found the notability of American Radio host. What about other countries? Thanks കോട്ടയംകാരൻ (talk) 07:36, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@കോട്ടയംകാരൻ, WP:BASIC may be as close as you get. Note that your WP:RS doesn't have to be in English, see WP:NOENG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Deleting a Draft

Hi, I wrote a failed draft a few months ago and I am looking for the best way to erase it. I am not the solely contributor to this draft so I am having difficulties to erase it, but it hasnt been edited in over 5 months. Any advice? SDC3021 (talk) 07:57, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@SDC3021, you could just wait, drafts that are un-edited for about 6 months get delete-nominations by a bot. Or you can try Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:09, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Scottish Junior Cup Finals - List of attendances

There is no attendance listed against the 2005 Final Tayport v Lochee United at Tannadice Park Dundee. I was secretary of Tayport FC from 1968 to 2016 and can confirm that the attendance was 6,668. This figure is recorded in Tayport FC's match programme on 4th June 2005 Tayport v Linlithgow Rose. This programme can be accessed in Tayport FC's Programme Archive www.tayportfcarchive.com Thank You - Albert J.Oswald 2A00:23C8:6187:BB01:3DBB:2877:96A2:3003 (talk) 19:41, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

If this is something that you think merits addition to the article Tayport F.C., then please add it there. Specify the published source. Don't just say "in Tayport FC's Programme Archive www.tayportfcarchive.com"; instead, provide the title and URL of the precise page (or PDF file) within this website. If you'd prefer not to do this, then please suggest the addition by writing at the foot of Talk:Tayport F.C. ("Start a discussion"). -- Hoary (talk) 00:23, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Of course, if it's instead for Scottish Junior Cup, then either edit this or make the suggestion at the foot of Talk:Scottish Junior Cup. -- Hoary (talk) 08:32, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Article Wizard

I am trying to use Article Wizard. Why my draft continued to get deleting? Charlottetang2022 (talk) 08:45, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:KuCoin is heading toward Speedy deletion. Hyperlinks within the body of the article are not allowed, and the draft has no references. You can oppose the SD by clicking on the Talk page of the draft, but without references, it has no potential. Beyond my areas of expertise, but I believe that cryptocurrency articles have special requirements. David notMD (talk) 09:56, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

@David notMD: As far as I know, cryptocurrency articles don’t have "special requirements" (i.e. there is no WP:SNG pertaining to them). They are evaluated under the WP:GNG framework.

That being said, my understanding is that specialized sources about that topic are usually not of sufficient quality for GNG (see for instance Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_273#RfC_-_CoinDesk_as_a_source). As a result, only things that hit the mainstream press (i.e. few of them) are considered notable. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:24, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Not so much special requirements as general sanctions. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:51, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

To be fair, when I looked at the draft it had what looked as if they'd been intended as references. It was just that instead of the usual pattern Assertion<ref>Reference</ref> there was the (of course unacceptable) pattern [URL-of-reference Assertion]. I shan't comment on the quality of these would-be references, or on any of the other issues here. -- Hoary (talk) 11:29, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Error in wikipedia article on the Trinity

There is no significant tendency among modern scholars to deny that John 1:1 and John 20:28 identify Jesus with God.

This is not true. An increasing number of credible Bible scholars are now saying that John 1:1 is a mistranslation. I would like the article to reflect that so as not to mislead others. Here is a credible source on the matter: https://www.patheos.com/blogs/kermitzarleyblog/2013/07/your-gospel-of-john-says-the-word-was-god-but-that-translation-is-really-quite-odd/

How can I make an edit to reflect this which will not be deleted? Tedw2 (talk) 17:54, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Tedw2, and welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to get such an edit to stick is by citing a reliable source which says what you are wanting to add. Blogs are almost never regarded as reliable. Furthermore, since it is pretty clear that what you want to add is controversial, you are stongly advised to get consensus by discussing it on the article's talk page before making such an edit. ColinFine (talk) 18:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Tedw2. The author of that blog post is Kermit Zarley, a retired professional golfer with highly idiosyncratic and unorthodox views on religion. He is by no means an academic theologian or a recognized expert in translating Koine Greek. In short, his blog is not a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 18:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

Perhaps you failed to see that Kermit Zarley mentioned Phillip B. Harner who is a recognized expert and who wrote in the Journal of Bible Literature of Journal of Bible literature about John 1:1c being mistranslated. That is not a blog and is a credible source . In addition, the New English Bible translates it propery and was endorsed by · Baptist Union of Great Britain and Ireland

· British and Foreign Bible Society

· Church of England

· Church of Scotland

· Congregational Church in England and Wales

· Council of Churches for Wales

· Irish Council of Churches

· London Yearly Meeting of the Religious Society of Friends

· Methodist Church of Great Britain

· National Bible Society of Scotland

· Presbyterian Church of England

I am content to cite the New English Bible translation as a credible source and the Journal of Bible Literate. But then again, maybe you did see it and don't really care what the truth is. Unorthodox does not necessarily mean incorrect if Orthodoxy is wrong. Tedw2 (talk) 18:34, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Consensus may be unable to achieve since this is a deeply held cherished belief held by many and , unfortunately, is based largely on translator errors. But I think Wikipedia readers have a right to know that the traditional translation may be in error ( based on credible sources) Tedw2 (talk) 18:40, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

You have to provide a reliable source first. Quoting a biblical translation would be using a primary source to discuss itself. I'm not sure that would stick. You need a secondary reliable source, not blogs. --ARoseWolf 18:42, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Tedw2, I analyzed the source you offered and established quite clearly that it is not reliable by Wikipedia standards. As for Phillip B. Harner, he earned a PhD in Old Testament studies from Yale, so he is presumably a far better source than Zarley, and the Journal of Biblical Literature is highly respected in its field. So, it is best to cite Harner and leave Zarley out of the discussion. As for your comment that maybe I don't really care what the truth is, that is an unjustified personal attack. I have spent 14 years working to improve this encyclopedia and help less experienced editors like you. Cullen328 (talk) 18:54, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I will add that whether Cullen cares what the "truth" is or not is irrelevant anyway, though I have been here long enough to trust their judgement when it comes to this encyclopedia. The reason it is irrelevant is because truth and credibility are not a concern of the encyclopedia, verification and reliability are. --ARoseWolf 19:02, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I did not know truth did not matter. And credibility and reliablity seem like the same thing to me. Tedw2 (talk) 19:11, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Unfortunately due to the no original research policy, we can't draw conclusions from the primary material. Are sources used necessarily accurate? No, and clarifying would have to be done at the source, not on here.

It could be useful for the blog post to mention the Journal of Biblical Literature, but in that case just skip the middleman and cite Harner directly. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:21, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

'But then again, maybe"

I said maybe not really an attack on you. If you are neutral and objective that is wonderful, but I noted you did not mention Harner in your first post. Zarley has also written a book on the matter. I don't think you have to have a PHD to be a expert on a subject. Thank you for you input, no offense intended. Tedw2 (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Tedw2, why the heck would I mention Harner when I was evaluating Zarley's reliability? A blog post by an unqualified person does not suddenly become reliable if it mentions Isaac Newton and Albert Einstein. Cullen328 (talk) 19:20, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

I think Zarley has been doing what he is doing for decades. I don't know what standard you use to determine reliability. The people who wrote the original text we are talking about had no PHD's. Tedw2 (talk) 20:22, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Kermet Zarley: In the period between his careers on the PGA Tour and the Champions Tour, he wrote three [books on religion and world affairs. He received an honorary doctorate degree in 2001 from North Park University in Chicago, which has a lecture series named for him. Tedw2 (talk) 20:58, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

And thank you for your feedback. Tedw2 (talk) 01:31, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Tedw2, I neither said nor implied that a PhD is required but it should be obvious to anybody that a peer-reviewed academic journal article written by a guy with a Yale PhD is a far more reliable source than a blog post written by a retired professional golfer. Please read Wikipedia:Reliable sources for the content guideline. Cullen328 (talk) 20:50, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Furthermore, Tedw2, I would point out that reliability depends on context. A blog post by Zarley about how golf clubs changed their shape in the 1970s would probably be reliable, as a self-published source from a subject-matter expert. A blog post by the same person about a theology question involving translation across languages he does not know, less so. Conversely, if Harner had somehow published a discussion of golf clubs in a Journal of Biblical Literature article, it would be a rather dubious source for that topic.

The fact that Zarley published books on "religion and world affairs" is not relevant. Many people publish many books containing many crazy things; any decently famous person can publish the most random gibberish and it will sell decently based on the author’s popularity (and therefore some publisher will still accept it). Books addressed to the general public are usually not reliable sources to overturn scholarly literature.

Now, it may well be that your proposed change is supported by reliable sources. If that is so, cite them (and stop citing random people’s blogs). If you find it hard to read scholarly literature, well, that’s the game. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:18, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

All the feedback is appreciated. I have made the correction citing Harner which is enough for men. Wikipedia users will now know that the most frequently cited verse proving Jesus is God is a mistranslation, and so they should. It should not be in just some obscure scholarly journal. Tedw2 (talk) 12:48, 30 August 2022 (UTC)

Zarley probably considers himself more of an expert on Trinitarian doctrine than an expert on Golf clubs. Tedw2 (talk) 12:49, 30 August 2022 (UTC)