Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1174

Archive 1170

←

Archive 1172

Archive 1173

Archive 1174

Archive 1175

Archive 1176

→

Archive 1180

"The" in truncated link and period after 2nd

In the article Ennis Hayes why would "the" be included in this particular instance of truncated link and a period following 2nd?2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 16:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

The wikisource says "[[Argentina national football team|the Argentine national team]]" when it ought to be "the [[Argentina national football team|Argentine national team]]". To which period are you referrring? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

There is only one 2nd. I find it by doing a search.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 17:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I removed the period. Cullen328 (talk) 17:17, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Why should 'the' be removed from the piped link? GiantSnowman 18:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I believe it is called style as very few truncated links in football national teams have the "the" include in it. It could be said that by default as it is not the usual style it has become the style of WP. The only example universally that i see of truncated links including "the" in it is for the Netherlands. In many other truncated football related links "the" forms part of the sentence outside the truncation such as |the Summer Olympics]]?2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 19:28, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

What should I add to my user page/user talk page?

I’ve just recently noticed that I haven’t added anything “fun” to my user and talk pages, and to be fair I honestly think they appear boring compared to other users. I don’t know a whole lot of knowledge for “hypertext mark up” on Wikipedia pages. Any suggestions + WP:articles that explain the CSS/HTML? Wolfquack (talk) 19:13, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Wolfquack, welcome to the Teahouse. This may give you some tips and ideas: Wikipedia:User page design center. It's inactive, but there's still plenty to explore. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Left align sidebar

Hey I want to left align some contents in a Template:Sidebar but not all. I found these "heading{{{n}}}class" parameters in the documentation. But I've got no idea how to find out what values these can take. Talpedia (talk) 14:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Talpedia, welcome to the Teahouse. You might get more answers if you asked at Module talk:Sidebar (or whichever talk page belongs to the template/module whose documentation you were looking at). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Cite error

Hi,

After submitting the Draft Draft:Dylan O'Donnell for review, two references (10 and 11) show now a Cite error.

How can I fix the problem?

Any help is accepted. Thanks. LIUC.Camilla03 (talk) 10:12, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

In the error messages, the word "help" is in blue, indicating that it is a wikilink, in this case to Help:Cite errors/Cite error references no text. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:16, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

At those locations you inserted ref numbers 1 and 6 with a backslash, indicating you are reusing a reference created elsewhere, but it appears that nowhere in the text have you created refs with 1 and 6 in the name. David notMD (talk) 13:55, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I believe that the reference definitions existed previously, but were removed in some of the edits to the draft. The OP probably needs to look (with WikiBlame) for the removal of the definitions, and add them back in the place where the ref is reused. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:32, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@David Biddulph, David notMD: Indeed. I can't fix it right now as I am on mobile and copy/paste in recent chrome mobile versions is an absolute pain, but this old revision seems to contain the definitions of both named references (not sure if they are reliable though). Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 16:09, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

The "Cite error" in red has nothing to do with reliability, but do check that before fixing the ref problem. David notMD (talk) 20:31, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Question

There is a user who is repeatedly replacing information on an article. They keep saying they want to write an article, but they won't let me direct them to the Article Wizard. What should I do? Professor Penguino (talk) 23:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I've warned the user using Template:Uw-hijacking which gives him a few useful links. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Professor Penguino (talk) 20:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

"Goalscorer" / "Goalscorers"

Could someone direct me to where the style of these two words is accepted by WP. Some articles have the two words separated yet a couple article titles have it combined?2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 17:32, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. If this has been discussed (and there is no guarantee that it has been discussed) I would look on WP:WikiProject Football/Matches; or failing that ask at the Project talk page WT:WikiProject Football. ColinFine (talk) 17:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

As far as i can tell it has not been discussed.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 18:38, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Not listed at Glossary of association football terms. GiantSnowman 18:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

And it should not need clarification because it is not included in the glossary, or is it best to make it a free for all adding to potential confusion? Is it not the point of grammar to follow some rule. And why would such a term that is very straightforward need a glossary definition? It is not special jargon?2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 19:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

If anybody is confused by this, simply use the term "scorer" and all will be well. An example of this would be -"Maradona was the scorer, but he cheated by handling the ball" !!! Roxy the dog 19:27, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Or just use the single word goal? "Maradona made the most goals in the league." Unless the thought was phrased: "Maradona was the highest goal scorer in the league." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 19:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

What is this "potential confusion"? I don't see why anybody should be confused, just because in one place they see "goalscorer" and anothr place "goal scorer". ColinFine (talk) 21:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Not everyone reading and editing WP iss a native English use person or have the same level of understanding of what is either correct or acceptable. I can understand that the point is lost with some as they may not encounter the situation or understand under which circumstances one or more forms of a word could possibly be acceptable. Remember that there is not a test one need take before they use WP for consultation.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 21:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Recover my sandbox data

I don't know the exact rules of Wikipedia,For which I tried to use by studying on Wikipedia.So that I don't get any wikipedia rules regulation wrong.So I have been practicing on wikipedia's sandbox since 5 days ago.I thought I would publish the article after writing it properly.But today I open and see that my sandbox has no data, it seems that it has been deleted by you.So I request you to return my Wikipedia sandbox to me.I will use my Wikipedia profile by following your rules and regulations. RashidulHoque (talk) 20:48, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

The notice on your user talk page at User talk:RashidulHoque#Speedy deletion nomination of User:RashidulHoque/sandbox explains the reason for deletion of your user sandbox page, & tells you to contact the administrator who deleted it if you want it undeleting. - David Biddulph (talk) 00:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia Article not appearing via Google Search

Hi, I made a wiki article about a week ago but it doesn't appear at all via Google Search. Any idea on why this is the case and when it may be able to appear. Jattlife121 (talk) 22:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Jattlife121 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It needs to be marked by a new pages patroller as reviewed, or when 90 days have passed. 331dot (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

It says reviewed but still doesn't appear. It is the Jagraj Singh article. Jattlife121 (talk) 22:46, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Oops, I looked at a different one. It takes time for Google to index pages, even if the criteria on our end permit it. 331dot (talk) 22:48, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Will keep on the lookout. Jattlife121 (talk) 22:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jattlife121 and 331dot: The noindex rules are complicated and sometimes change. I'm not sure of all the details myself. The only reliable way to see whether an article disallows indexing is to look for <meta name="robots" content="noindex in the HTML. That's what search engines do and Jagraj Singh currently says it. I think it's because it's both new and nominated for deletion. This combination overrules the review per Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing#Indexing of articles ("mainspace"). There are also different types of review but this article has the right type. Even our own software cannot be trusted. "Page information" in the left pane says "Indexing by robots Allowed" but that's false (reported in 2017 at phab:T157747, still no fix). PrimeHunter (talk) 00:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Just to add on, it has been patrolled by New Page Patrol(standard for an AfD by NPP as the community will decide notability), so if the article remains after the AfD discussion, it will be indexed by search engines, though we do not have any control over their timetable. Slywriter (talk) 01:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Edit "F"

What does it mean on this article, Hunter Biden laptop controversy that one cannot even make a basic copy edit or other edit, it just says "F" in the upper right hand corner? Is that "Full" protection? Only admins can edit the page? TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 01:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Moops. That article appears to have been WP:GOLD protected due to persistent disruptive editing. The protection is scheduled to expire sometime in a day or so, but you may use the article's talk page to make edit requests until then. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Understood. I think I'd heard about such a protection, but never actually seen it before. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 01:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Can someone please upload this picture to Wikipedia?

Can someone please upload https://digital.sou.edu/digital/collection/p16085coll7/id/334/ to Wikipedia? It's non-free, but its license should allow use without having to rely on fair use. I'm going to use it in Draft:Silver Fire (1987 Oregon wildfire). 184.21.204.5 (talk) 01:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:NFCC#9 says that non-free images can only be used in article namespace. Can't be used in drafts. - David Biddulph (talk) 01:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP 184.21.204.5. As David Biddulph points out, non-free content can only be used in articles. So, if you feel the photo's non-free use can be justified per Wikipedia's non-free content use policy, you should wait until the draft becomes an article and then upload the file as explained here. If you or anyone else tries to do so now, the file would end up being removed from the draft by a WP:BOT and then most likely end up deleted per speedy deletion criterion F5. Finally, just for refrence, fair use and non-free content use aren't the same thing when it comes to Wikipedia. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is much more restrictive as explained here and here; so, you need to image to meet relevant Wikipedia policy for it to be considered OK to use. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Deprecated source on the RS list... method to "un"-deprecate?

Is it possible, or has it ever occurred, where a source that on the RS list (is that what it is called, 'RS list'?) was previously deprecated became un-deprecated? I would love to see many more sources treated as at least the yellow color, I think no sources should truly be red or gray in my view, but even so, has it ever happened where a source was once deprecated and now is considered to be better? Management changes, editorial shifts that made it considered more reliable or trustworthy etc.? — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 01:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Moops. I know that there have been several unsuccessful attempts to "un-deprecate" the Daily Mail. I am unaware of any successful efforts about any deprecated sources. Any such effort would need to take place at Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, and you would need to furnish convincing evidence that "the leopard has changed its spots". Cullen328 (talk) 02:04, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Is that to assume that any past discussions were exhaustive and definitive? And that the editors involved are all the same now, or that socks were not involved? I see some sources deprecated nearly a decade ago, and it just makes me think that it is interesting that these deprecations do not automatically have some kind of "sunset provision" for the deprecation. It would seem to me to be prudent to have a clause or provision of that type so that new consensus would need to be had every 5 years on each source from the date of deprecation or something. :) — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:08, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Moops: This type of thing would probably be better off furhter discussed at WP:RSN or even perhaps WT:RS/P than here at the Teahouse. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Makes sense. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 02:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Unable to figure out reliable sources

My article Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards was declined for not containing required reliable sources. But, my article already had required references at Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards#Awards by Year that's why, I couldn't figure out the actual reason. May I know what was the actual reason for which it was declined.? Perfectodefecto (talk) 16:43, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Is this about Draft:ESPNcricinfo Awards?Special:Diff/1127743368 is the version declined. Which has one source and wass the award itself be cited. So there is no independent sourcing to establish notability. The current version may pass as it does have additional references, though I have not reviewed them.Slywriter (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Your article draft is mainly about who has won the Awards, which is clearly important BUT not as important for Wikipedia's purposes as first showing that the Award itself is notable. Your could highlight those sources that are WP:INDEPENDENT of the rewarding body and themselves reliable by using the {{AfC comment}} template at the top of your draft to highlight the (say) WP:THREE sources that best illustrate this. Making the reviewer's work as easy as possible is the best way to go. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:45, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto The decline notice actually says "This draft's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article (emphasis added). The blue text in the original notice, which I repeated here, discusses Wikipedia's concept of notability, which Slywriter and Mike Turnbull also discussed in their comments. Any of the similarly formatted blue words or phrases are clickable links, with lots more information. David10244 (talk) 05:33, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Censorship

Why did you CENSOR Robert Malone and his truth revealing information. You scrubbed his book. Because of that, I will NOT contribute and I do NOT trust you and I will not visit anymore. CENSORSHIP is NOT constitutional, helpful and is very damaging. ( Reference the amount of harm being discovered with regard to the shoved on us shots). Maybe you don’t want our constitution. Then go find a better country. 67.214.28.210 (talk) 14:50, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. I'm not sure who your comments are supposed to be addressed to and I don't know who Robert Malone is, but please remember that most Wikipedia editors don't live in the US and telling us to "find a better country" doesn't make much sense. Cordless Larry (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I expect that the original thread starter meant Robert W. Malone. I assume it because it's now a hot topic in social networks. I don't understand however what the editor calls "censorship" because the article about the person exists and reflects the person's opinion. Philip Torchinsky (talk) 15:35, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Cordless Larry "Find a better country": quick, everybody shift one country to the west... David10244 (talk) 05:36, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Since I have no idea which Robert Malone or WP-article you are talking about, I have no idea. And per your statement you will not read this, but Merry Christmas anyway! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:07, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

I think he's talking about Robert W. Malone, because he's the only one who's dead. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:31, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

@QuickQuokka, "In December 2022, Malone was reinstated on Twitter". Are we talking about the same guy? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Whoops, sorry, I got confused. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Robert W. Malone has had some edit-warring, and there are extensive discussions at Talk (including archives), so not clear where you see or suspect censorship. Any article pertaining to COVID and vaccination is hotly debated. Again, not censorship. David notMD (talk) 16:05, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't follow any country's constitution, and it is not required to. But presumably the OP won't see this either. David10244 (talk) 09:40, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Creating a new article

Hi All, I tried to create a new article about an Indian composer I admire. He composed close to 5000 songs. But he does not have wikipedia page. I created Draft:Sai Madhukar and asked for review. Feedback is all the sources I quoted are not reliable. I can only quote the sources where something is written about this person. He published hundreds of songs in YouTube, but youtube is not reliable source. Same thing with Spotify which is not reliable as well. Honestly, I am not sure how else I can proceed with this article. Any advice is helpful. Thanks. Waimea92 (talk) 06:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Waimea92: Being prolific doesn't necessarily equate to being notable. Exactly which criteria in WP:MUSICBIO or WP:COMPOSER does Sai Madhukar meet?

See also Wikipedia:Golden rule. We need reliable sources that are independent of him, not associated with him, and those sources need to cover him in some depth, not giving trivial mentions. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Anachronist for the details. I will keep this in mind. Waimea92 (talk) 15:42, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I've been asked to clarify why the draft was deleted. The deletion had nothing to do with the reliability of sources or the noteworthiness of the subject.

The draft was deleted because the bulk of the text was a direct copy of one of the sources (https://nettv4u.com/celebrity/tamil/music-director/sai-madhukar). You can't just paste material like that, it's a violation of copyright. That material was present from the first revision, and its removal wouldn't have left much of an article behind. — Cyrius|✎ 12:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Cyrius for the clarification. I spent a good amount of time researching and creating the page. Is there a way to recover the content of the deleted page so that I can create a better version? Waimea92 (talk) 15:44, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Waimea92 - try Category:Wikipedia administrators willing to provide copies of deleted articles, but do note that the copyvio deletion likely affects whether an admin will recover it. (You must not copy text directly from sources. That's plagiarism and copyright infringement.) casualdejekyll 15:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Got it, Thanks for your response. Waimea92 (talk) 06:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Someone Undid the Work I did Because They are Biased

I recently inserted links to some of the pages on Wiki and someone with an obvious slant, bias or whatever did not like what we posted. Everything I linked was in context and from a credible news website. I follow Florida Politics and always follow several state-centric news sites—Florida politics, florida daily, the floridian, the capitolist. This person below stuck his opinion where it didnt belong and undid the work that I have done for an apparent biased reason. How do I get my work to be linked again, and is there a way to prevent this from happening again?

See below:

Hello, I'm Squared.Circle.Boxing. I wanted to let you know that one or more of your recent contributions have been undone because they appeared to be promotional. Advertising and using Wikipedia as a "soapbox" are against Wikipedia policy and not permitted; Wikipedia articles should be written objectively, using independent sources, and from a neutral perspective. Take a look at the welcome page to learn more about Wikipedia. Thank you. — ².O.^Boxing 13:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

If (big IF) you're not trying to promote the writers of the articles or the publication itself, the links you added are still absolutely pointless. The content is already adequately cited. I also noticed you use we in your edit summaries. How many people use your account? – ².O.^Boxing 13:44, 16 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, your "big if" has been realized. I follow Florida Politics, particularly DC-related officials, and read a couple of Florida-centric news websites —Florida Daily, Florida Politics, The Floridian, and The Capitolist. So what you are saying is that I cannot link to any of these websites because YOU feel I am promoting them? Tell me again how I benefit from this?

I am the only one adding to the pages. The links I have added are not pointless, they give complete context. As far as using "we," I edit and contribute with my 2 and 4-year-olds who sit next to me on the couch. So, "we" did some contributing. Just curious. It appears you may have an agenda. Your "soapbox" comment speaks to a hidden or biased agenda. Micheller1202 (talk) 03:56, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Micheller1202 (talk • contribs) 04:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Micheller1202, you may want to slow down. Don't accuse other editors of bias or agendas without evidence. There is nothing particularly harsh about the comment left on your talk page. Pretty standard for someone only posting one source across multiple pages, which looks like spam to other editors.

Additionally that one source seems to fail at being a reliable source and looks to be a glorified partisan blog. :Also, stop using "we" as it will cause you trouble every time. Slywriter (talk) 05:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Understood. The source in question is very reliable and credible news source in Florida. I wouldn't follow them if they weren't. There are other sites that i will be using that are more and less credible than the one i started with. As far as using "we" I got that. Micheller1202 (talk) 05:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Micheller1202, it may be read by a lot of people you know. It may be read by many resident of Florida. That is very different from being a reliable source on Wikipedia. You said you read The Capitolist, you may want to also read their wikipedia article. This source gives off a similar vibe. Slywriter (talk) 05:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Interesting. I didn't know about the Capitolist. Thanks for pointing it out. Micheller1202 (talk) 05:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@ Someone undid your work because they are biased? How, exactly, did you determine that? David10244 (talk) 06:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Micheller1202, you simply cannot use glorified blogs promoting fringe concepts like nonexistent nuclear microreactors. You cannot refer to yourself as "we" just because your toddlers are nearby. Wikipedia accounts are for one person and one person only and there is no toddler exception. Most importantly, you cannot accuse another of having an obvious slant, bias without presenting rock solid evidence, which you have failed to do. The other editor has made over 32,000 edits and you have made 27 edits. Admittedly, edit count does not always equal competence, but you should ask yourself whether or not you really know what you are doing, and whether or not it is wise of you to be so aggressive. Cullen328 (talk) 06:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

And I've just reverted more of this editor's work (as have a couple others). As I said in my initial message...even if not for promotion, your edits are still utterly pointless. You're adding citations to content that is already cited. Folks can scream AGF at me if they like, but I do find it funny how the user shares a name with somebody who writes for the website that this editor loves citing. Might explain the "we" part a bit better. – ².O.^Boxing 10:51, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Presenting inscription with long lines

I'm trying to present the text of a Linear B inscription (User:UndercoverClassicist/PY Ta 641). The inscription is over four (long) lines - epigraphic conventions mean that it's important that each line is clearly presented as it is (i.e., you can't just break onto a new line arbitrarily like you can in prose), and ideally that such features as the relative spacing between characters are preserved. For example, the first line doesn't 'start' until the far right of the tablet, and it's conventional to display these characters physically above the ones in the line below that they sit over.

The source for the inscription (https://damos.hf.uio.no/just/4972) seems to just scale the font down - I don't think that's an option here?

What's the best way to handle this - ideally preserving those requirements, but at a minimum just a) making sure that the original lines are clear to the reader and b) not looking hideous?

Thanks in advance! UndercoverClassicist (talk) 09:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

• This is a weasel answer: do you really need to quote the transliterated text? I'm guessing that the number of Wikipedia readers who can read linear B is rather small, and this is ultimately an encyclopaedia for general users. Unless the actual linear B text is of critical concern to the reader, it might be better to summarise what's important about this particular clay tablet, and direct the reader to the original source if they want to look at the text? The main job is to explain why this tablet is a notable part of Cretan archaeology. Remember, we're a tertiary source, not a secondary. It's our job to say that a text has been important in the deciphering of an ancient language, not to describe in detail how the deciphering was done (in my personal opinion!). Elemimele (talk) 10:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  I see your point - I think it is important, or at least beneficial. The reason the tablet was significant to the decipherment is that it contains the Linear B (=Greek, =English) words for things like 'tripod', followed by pictures of the selfsame tripod - and so proved almost beyond doubt that Linear B was indeed Greek. Most English speakers will be able to see that from a transcription, especially as LB is conventionally transcribed in Latin characters (so e.g. 'tripod' comes out as 'ti-ri-po-de') - it's not essential for them to be able to see how the argument worked for themselves, but it would be nice. The inscription is also rather short (four lines).

  My point of comparison was this article (IM 67118) which translates a 25-line inscription - that translation does add significantly to the article, and I think the same would be true here. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

EDIT: see also Dialogue between a Man and His God, which transliterates and translates a rather long Akkadian inscription - though here I'm less convinced that the whole thing is of massive value. UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@UndercoverClassicist You are already using an image thumbnail to show the tablet, which any reader who is interested in the detail will click on to view at full scale. Why don't you edit that picture to include the text as well? Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

That might work! UndercoverClassicist (talk) 11:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@UndercoverClassicist:, yes, it makes sense the way you describe it, to show the relevance of the tablet to general readers. Good luck! Elemimele (talk) 13:22, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Article review

Is there a difference between new page review, new page patrol and AFC review? In which of them is Page Curation used? How to become any of them & what are the requirements? The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 14:16, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@the bestagon:

new page patrol and new page review are the same thing, see wikipedia:new page review. these reviewers are responsible for making sure that new articles are up to our wikipedia standards. this is the process that uses page curation. to become a new page reviewer, you must make a successful request at wikipedia:requests for permissions/New page reviewer.

afc review is an entirely sepearate process, see wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation. these reviewers check drafts that have been submitted and either accept them into mainspace or decline them and leave them as a draft. to become a reviewer, you must make a successful request at wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. lettherebedarklight晚安 14:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight: Thank you very much! The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 14:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Sargam Koushal

I am very confused with this article because some reliable source says that she was born in 17 September and some other reliable source says she was born in 20 September.

Sources which says she was born in 17 September - Jagran Josh, Moneycontrol, Greater Kashmir (Press Release), Hindustan Times and FHM (India).

Sources which says she was born in 20 September - The Chenab Times (Press Release).

And as of The Chenab Times, "As per different media reports, her birthdate was different, while confirming her birthday to The Chenab Times, Sargam Koushal said that she was born on 20th September 1990 to GS Koushal and Meena Koushal in Jammu. She is married to Aditya Manohar Sharma who is an Indian Navy officer."

So which date is correct and which is wrong. ​​​​​​​𝐋𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐕𝐨𝐥𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐨𝐫𝐭𝟕𝟐𝟖🧙‍♂️^{Let's Talk !} 08:57, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Stop at "born in September, YYYY" perhaps? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:06, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I guess go with 20 as that is what she says in The Chenab Times. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 14:55, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

References

• Fortunately it's not our job to decide which is correct. If multiple sources disagree, then assuming we can't neatly divide them into reliable sources saying X and unreliable ones saying Y, we have to say that sources disagree, and her birth date might be any one of the alternatives. Elemimele (talk) 10:31, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

• LordVoldemort728, I've had the same problem with the article Teikō Shiotani. A pile of what look like reliable sources confidently give one date; another pile of the same confidently give a date that differs by two days. I have never come across any source that notes that there has been any disagreement, let alone any source that attempts to refute the claim that it was this or that date. I've dealt with this matter briefly in the article; and, mostly in order to avoid confusion among future editors, I've dealt with it at much greater length in the article's talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 12:50, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

  Slightly off topic: I recently learned from Tom Scott that one can simply, given enough money, hire a researcher to answer weird hyperspecific questions themselves. Obviously not RS for Wikipedia's sake, but sometimes I run into conundrums like this that make me think... maybe I should. Just to find out. casualdejekyll 13:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Why double ": :" at Noura Mohamed Saleh?

Why are there double ": :" at Noura Mohamed Saleh?2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 14:37, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

If you mean in the references section, I suspect that is because that's how the references are titled. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 14:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Refs 10 & 11, at the bottom, :: is in the name of the site. Whether that is a typo or intentional is moot, as the refs work either way (ref 9 for one :) David notMD (talk) 14:59, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

how do i add something to the main page because in events that happend today

it should be added to events that happend today DMPenguin (talk) 15:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@DMPenguin: Hello DM! If you are meaning to ask this to be added to the "In the news" section then you should follow the instructions at WP:ITN/C. However most people here cannot add it directly since the template for "in the news" is protected so that only admins can edit it, hence why you have to propose it first. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:09, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @dmpenguin: the event must have an article, and then you may nominate it for consideration at wikipedia:in the news/Candidates. lettherebedarklight晚安 15:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Rollback in twinkle

I've recently (well, not so recently) installed Twinkle. I don't have rollback rights, but sometimes the options [rollback] [vandalism] appear to me in page histories or when looking at the contributions of a user. I'm confused. The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 14:19, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@the bestagon: clicking on those options revert the edit those options are attached to. the "rollback" option will prompt for a summary, and the "vandalism" option will not, as that option is for reverting vandalism. both will open the reverted editor's talk page and prompt for a warning for the editor. lettherebedarklight晚安 15:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Also the "rollback" option isn't truly rollback, it's simply just undoing multiple edits (slower than rollback but similar in function, I think, I'm not entirely sure how it works). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Archived Draft

Why would my draft for Ray Byars be archived? I was advised by Theroadislong to add more source information and have been working dilligently to meet his request. I have also read up on using the proper punctuation for quotation marks; however, I do not understand what I am doing wrong. I have only written one article a few months ago and because I am older than dirt, I have not retained all the information that I learned in Wikipedia. Can someone please help me! Cjmodica (talk) 01:57, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Cjmodica. There is no process for archiving drafts, and Draft:Ray Byars still exists. Teahouse conversations about drafts (or any other subject) do get archived when the discussion peters out. This is entirely normal. Cullen328 (talk) 02:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I got an email telling me that it was archived so I really don't understand that, but I am thankful that the draft for Ray Byars is still a possibility for Wikipedia. Cjmodica (talk) 03:27, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Cjmodica Yes, "it" was archived; "it", in this case, was just the discussion about the draft, as Cullen mentions. David10244 (talk) 06:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying "it". Cjmodica (talk) 16:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Help with Mongolian Wikipedia

Hello, fellow Wikipedians, I have recently found a Mongolian Wikipedia article about MongoDB, but although I am not Mongolian, and don't understand the Mongolian language, it is clear to me that this is not an encyclopedic article, but rather a copied tutorial from somewhere else. I think this page should be deleted, but I don't know the process of doing that in the Mongolian Wikipedia. WP:Help for non-Mongolian speakers is clearly inactive, and WP:Хурал is protected. Can a Mongolian please help me? QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 15:18, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi QuickQuokka. I don't know Mongolian but mn:WP:Хурал has a link saying "International discussion – For discussions and posts in other languages. Mostly English." PrimeHunter (talk) 18:54, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: At the time of writing that I was just so exhausted, so my brain was a bit off. I did add a discussion for that there, and I also made a Smiley face template just for my comment. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 17:01, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Articles

Can you please find me conspiracy theory articles? AJTHEB01 (talk) 17:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

What about Category:Conspiracy theories? ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 17:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

i think i found a someone that vandalized

what do i do the reson i think that is cas they dont have a talk page and were avtising something DMPenguin (talk) 17:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

DMPenguin, you can create their talk page, posting a notice such as {{uw-vand1}} on the page. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

DMPenguin, you appear to have mistakenly created an article by posting a warning message at ThomsSimpson. User talk pages always start with User talk:. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:55, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh my bad i am very sorry i hope you will forgive me is this like a waring am i going to get a punishment DMPenguin (talk) 17:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

No, mistakes like this aren't a reason for punishment. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:00, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

thanks a lot for the fast answer DMPenguin (talk) 18:02, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Copyright

How do I know if an image or some text is copyrighted? The Bestagon (previously Quantum XYZ) (chat) 14:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

All creative works are copyrighted, by international agreement, unless either they fall into the public domain or their copyright is explicitly disclaimed. For more information please see Wikipedia:Copyrights. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:28, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

It's actually pretty easy. Pretty much any image you can find is copyrighted unless otherwise stated. Usually you can find if it's "otherwise stated" by going to the website the image comes from (if it's commons then it will usually have a source if it comes from online). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:17, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, The Bestagon. Content that was first published over 95 years ago is in the public domain and free of copyright. The first Winnie-the-Pooh (book) and Hemingway's The Sun Also Rises were published in 1926 and are now copyright free. Everything first published in 1927 becomes copyright free on January 1, 2023. Anything on Wikimedia Commons is free to use. Cullen328 (talk) 18:34, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Do I need to know how to code (HTML, etc.) to edit forums?

I am just wondering if I need any coding experience to edit forums or make my own. (I plan on making a forum about something that I haven't seen here yet). I know VERY, VERY basic HTML. 5nr3 drum (talk) 17:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 5nr3 drum. You will need to explain what you mean by "forums". This is a project to build an encyclopedia. Please read WP:NOTAFORUM. Also see WP:CHEATSHEET for an introduction to the coding we use. Cullen328 (talk) 18:17, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:TUTORIAL may also be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:55, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Or are you by any chance referring to starting a new Wikipedia:WikiProject? See that page for instructions. Shantavira|^{feed me} 20:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Removing templates

Hello fellow Wikipedians. I came across this page page with a template saying the article relies too heavily on primary sources and should cite secondary and tertiary sources.Al Jazeera Investigates I added new secondary and tertiary sources. Should I now remove the template, or is a senior editor/admin supposed to do that? Thank you. Andrew. Andrew Tevis (talk) 00:32, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Andrew Tevis. If you believe you've addressed the issues raised by those maintenance templates, you may remove them as explained in Help:Maintenance template removal. If someone, however, subsequently disagrees with your assessment and re-adds all or some of the templates and gives a reason for doing so, you should then try to sort things out by starting a discussion on the article's corresponding talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:50, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Question Regarding Proposal For Deletion

Hello - I recently created and have been working on an article about Richard Gigger, Jr., a legendary band director in Los Angeles, originally from Illinois. Although the article was accepted, I saw that a proposal for deletion on the basis of non-notability now appears on the page. From my understanding of the notability standard, the most important consideration is that "it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." My bibliography for Mr. Gigger lists nearly fifty articles from national and regional newspapers over nearly as many years. I have not cited all of them in the article itself but could certainly add a bibliography section to the article to demonstrate compliance with the standard. I'm confused about how this process works and what I should do to prevent deletion. Any guidance would be greatly appreciated. Iguana0000 (talk) 20:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

You seem to misunderstand what "significant coverage means". IT does not refer to being mentioned in many sources, it refers to being covered in detail in a few sources. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:00, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

In that case I definitely do not understand. The majority of the articles I am referring to are articles ABOUT the subject, not articles where a minor reference to him is made. In a plurality of cases the subject's name appears in the title of the article. Can you clarify your comment in light of this? I am still confused. Iguana0000 (talk) 21:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I have asked the person who PRODed your article for further explanation as well as the person who accepted it from AFC. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bkissin and Kershatz: Pinging PRODer and AFC accepter (since those who accept it via AFC think it has a >50% chance of surviving AFD/PROD). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

While I was originally tempted to decline this article for the same reasons Kershatz mentioned (high school band directors are rarely considered notable, and the Conflict of Interest here made me concerned that the article could be written in a neutral point of view), there are enough in-depth secondary sources about the subject to meet the general notability guideline, hence the reason I accepted. I think the original author did a good job at finding sources to bolster the notability claim. Bkissin (talk) 16:06, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I disagree. I have no doubt that Mr Gigger was a wonderful person and educator, and clearly he was locally renowned , but that’s just it. The coverage is mostly local and some of the article is original research. I don’t think “the record for the most victories in the Los Angeles Unified School District Annual Band and Drill Team Championships” is a notable thing, and the article looks like a tribute page. Kershatz (talk) 20:10, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Iguana0000: Offline sources are allowed but it's best if you can link the source to a site which doesn't violate copyright (links to copyright violations are disallowed). For example, I googled your first reference "Popular Retired San Fernando High School Band Director Dies" and found https://sanfernandosun.com/2016/11/16/popular-retired-san-fernando-high-school-band-director-dies/. It can be linked in the citation with |url=https://sanfernandosun.com/2016/11/16/popular-retired-san-fernando-high-school-band-director-dies/. Advantages include that it's easier to check that the source supports the article claims, easier to find additional material (both for interested readers and editors looking to expand the article), and in this case easier to estimate notability. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! Can you clarify what you mean by "it's best if you can link the source to a site which doesn't violate copyright (links to copyright violations are disallowed)." What is meant by a source that violates copyright? Iguana0000 (talk) 22:25, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Iguana0000, if someone has a personal website or blog and uploads scans of contemporary newspaper articles, that is a copyright violation, and links to such web pages are not permitted. Cullen328 (talk) 23:03, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

OK thanks is there some suggestion that this was done in this wikipedia article? Iguana0000 (talk) 23:04, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

I think that was generalized advice to avoid doing something that new editors do from time to time when trying to support offline sources. Cullen328 (talk) 23:19, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

@Iguana0000: Yes, it was general advice for possible future links. Most works are copyrighted, meaning that others aren't allowed to publish copies of the work without permission, or they have to satisfy certain license conditions to publish it, or only publish a tiny excerpt of the work. Some websites violate copyright, meaning that they publish copyrighted works illegally. Wikipedia does not allow links to such illegal copies. See Wikipedia:Copyrights#Linking to copyrighted works. The official website of the original publisher like https://sanfernandosun.com/2016/11/16/popular-retired-san-fernando-high-school-band-director-dies/ can be assumed to not violate copyright so it's fine to link them. In theory they could have copied the article illegally from somewhere without saying it but Western commercial companies don't want to be sued so they rarely do that. Some non-Western countries don't enforce copyright much in practice, and many private websites don't know or care about copyrights. By the way, Wikipedia itself is strict about not violating copyright in our own articles and images. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:23, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

OK I added |url= tags to all of the (more recent) articles for which there is online access. LA Times is a little tricky I guess as it gives you X number of free articles per Y so if someone wanted to access all the citations they'd hit a paywall at X+1. Is there anything else I should be doing for the articles for which no online version exists? Iguana0000 (talk) 23:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Iguana0000, for offline newspaper articles, you want to include the article title, author(s) if known, name of the newspaper (wikilinked), date of publication, page number and city if it is not part of the name of the newspaper. Cullen328 (talk) 23:59, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

OK thanks have made additional edits along the lines suggested here. Still confused though regarding Proposal for Deletion. If the subject of this article has not "received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject" then ... I'm not sure who has. The proposal for deletion notice says "You may remove this message if you improve the article or otherwise object to deletion for any reason" but I'm not clear on what is actually meant by that. Iguana0000 (talk) 05:20, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Iguana0000 I believe you can ignore the paywall. Sources need to be accessible, not necessarily free. A source that requires a trip to a specific library to view, for example, is allowed (as long as it is properly cited). David10244 (talk) 05:52, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

OK, I read the comments by @Bkissin and @Kershatz above and remain confused. As I understand the notability standard, "A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject." AND does not "violate what Wikipedia is not". I believe those two conditions have been met. If they have not I am curious as to why.

There is a section in "what Wikipedia is not" that states "Memorials. Subjects of encyclopedia articles must satisfy Wikipedia's notability requirements. Wikipedia is not the place to memorialize deceased friends, relatives, acquaintances, or others who do not meet such requirements." This seems a bit circular but again does not appear to apply as the topic has received significant coverage etc. etc. I am happy to prepare a full bibliography and perhaps I should; there are many more articles about the subject than I have included in the article thus far.

If in fact the actual standard in use is subjective judgements by individuals that's fine but then it really should be more clearly stated. For instance, saying I don’t think “the record for the most victories in the Los Angeles Unified School District Annual Band and Drill Team Championships” is a notable thing seems inconsistent with the notability standard as written. I imagine that the word 'notability' itself is a bit of a misnomer and the source of some confusion; it would be clearer to call the standard 'extensively documented' or something of the sort as that lends itself less to subjective judgements. In any case I would appreciate any clarification of and reconciliation between the policies as written and the discussion above. Iguana0000 (talk) 00:55, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

draft:Papa Khan (DJ)

Why does the draft often get rejected by the way i already gave sources that everyone opens a lot Amaikkjo12 (talk) 00:40, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Amaikkjo12, "Early life": No references provided. "Career": Empty. (No career?) "Personal life": Empty. (No personal life?) I clicked on one of the references that are given, and there read "This EP is pretty much about what happened to me in my personal life, mostly about breakups and stuff," he said, per a press release shared with EDM.com. "Falling into a hole (love) and craving more from it even though it hurts. Only to make me feel even lonelier." Plenty of junk music websites simply recycle PR material: I suppose one should be grateful for the candour of this website in admitting that it does so. -- Hoary (talk) 01:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Amaikkjo12, your draft relies heavily on glowing reviews on edm.com. That website states A portion of our content is sponsored by advertisers and we cover music released by the record labels with which we partner. In other words, it is a "pay to play" scheme, not independent, and reviews like that are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 01:16, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

What to do when a source is archived but needs to be archived again?

What to do when a source is archived but needs to be archived again? Humulator (talk) 15:23, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

It would help if you could provide the article and the source, as people on here can often work wonders when they're given the full facts, but they're abysmal at mind reading. - X201 (talk) 15:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Specifically Toronto Pearson International Airport#Public transit, the sources(look at 145 for specific) are outdated, but they are already archived. There's no triple archive option as far as im aware. Humulator (talk) 15:45, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

A website can be archived an unlimited number of times, but only one of those archived versions (often referred to as "captures" or "snapshots") can be the target of a link from a reference at any given time. When you click on the archive link in the citation, you'll see near the top-left corner of the page a line saying that that particular page has been captured 352 times by that archiving service. If you click that line, you'll be shown a calendar allowing you to select a capture from a different date. Find one that has the updated information, and edit the citation in the article to put the relevant data from the new version into the |archive-url= and |archive-date= fields.

If there is no archive capture that is sufficiently up-to-date, you can force a new one to be taken at this page. XAM2175 ^(T) 02:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Does anyone love Geological science and believe in the need to share more WOMEN's discoveries?

I did not know that it would be so hard to share info on a woman I happen to know who has made discoveries that are invaluable to the science of geology. She is a planetary geologist. It turns out that because I know her, I can't post on her. WOW... Articles can include 1st person notes on historical figures from war heroes and other scientists, but NOW, if you know someone who has done something amazing, a 1st person awareness or connection is useless. Hmmm... odd to me. Does anyone want to help?! Thank you. Cee 76.67.183.58 (talk) 23:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Well for starters, who are you talking about? Herostratus (talk) 00:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Actually, you CAN create a draft of an article about someone you know as long as you declare your connection. See WP:COI. David notMD (talk) 04:28, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Note that any draft must be based on information found in multiple published independent reliable sources for verifiability (not "1st person awareness or connection"). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:06, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft: BlackManWhiteBaby

Articles declined because "they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject"

Still a little confused. These are well known publications. They interview the subject and the interviewer discusses the impact that the subjects' work has in the community. Not sure how to correct. Thanks! Twintwinkle (talk) 15:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@HitroMilanese: COuld you explain to this user why you declined their draft? (not meaning to be rude) ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

A sufficient reason for declining the draft is that it fails to establish its subject as notable. It cites five sources: the first three are based on what the subject has said, the other two don't mention the subject. So the draft fails to cite any reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of the subject. Maproom (talk) 18:13, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

FOR THE CURIOUS: Draft:BlackManWhiteBaby is about a person who has taken that name for art career. David notMD (talk) 21:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

The subject is not meeting WP:GNG and WP:NARTIST. I left a message there. If you believe that this topic is meeting either of the guidelines then demonstrate it. Maproom has explained quite clearly. Thanks. Hitro talk 06:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

How do I reactivate an inactive project?

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Universal Basic Income#This projecy must be reactivated... Janosabel (talk) 20:40, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Janosabel, welcome to the Teahouse. There is guidance at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Revival. The most important part is finding other editors to help revive the project - the first step gives suggestions of where to look. If you can't find other people to help, the project will most likely fall inactive again. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:48, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Janosabel, you asked on the project talk page, "Why did the community of advocates abandon it?". Members of the project aren't necessarily advocates of UBI, if that's how you're thinking WikiProjects work. As explained at Wikipedia:WikiProject, WikiProjects bring together editors to improve encyclopedic coverage of a topic area, which is different from advocating for the topic itself. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Larry, for pointing out the distinction between editors of a project and advocates.

By the way, I find your Wikipedia name funny. Any "story" behind the choice? Janosabel (talk) 21:14, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, there is a story but it's not very interesting. See the answer to question 4 at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Cordless Larry#Questions for the candidate, Janosabel. Cordless Larry (talk) 08:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Do list articles require citations?

Hi all! I'm pretty new to this so this may be a stupid question, but I was wondering if list articles require citations, and if so, for what kinds of information? I wasn't sure if citations are required on the list article itself, given that the other articles linked within the list may have their own citations. Do the items in a list require a citation to prove that they belong in the list (eg. if I wanted to include a species in a list article about organisms from a given region, do I need to add a citation proving that species is present in the region to justify it being added to the list)?

My question was prompted by this article, which links extensively to other well referenced articles but has no citations of its own, though several items in the list have no wikipedia articles of their own nor any citation to prove they exist. Moving beyond the items on the list, the sentence "The FC Andorra not play in Andorran leagues, but played in the Spanish leagues" [sic] strikes me as requiring some kind of citation - am I correct in thinking this? Would this be an appropriate time to use the more citations required message box and/or mark the article as a stub?

I apologise if I'm not making much sense, my written language skills can be a little wonky sometimes, but hopefully you can understand what I'm talking about :) I'm just not quite sure what is warranted in these kinds of situations and don't want to go around marking articles as stubs or needing further citation if it's not needed. Ethmostigmus (talk) 10:40, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ethmostigmus Welcome to the Teahouse. The general advice on stand-alone lists is at WP:STAND. Specifically, where there are red-linked entries (so no associated article), citations are required: see WP:CSC, which is part of that page. Of course, not all list articles are perfectly inline with the guidelines! Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Clearing the cache of Commons image

Hi, it seems that Wikipedia caches the image of Wikimedia Commons on their own systems. However, sometimes this only partially updates, such as the resolution increase of an image. I know that you can purge the cache of Wikipedia articles by using action=purge as an URL parameter, which is also possible on Commons, but not for cached images of Commons on Wikipedia. How can I do this? PhotographyEdits (talk) 10:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@PhotographyEdits I'm not sure if I've understood your issue correctly but I know that there can be problems related to your own browser not showing an updated image when you view articles, even after the image has changed on Commons. This can be fixed as explained at WP:BYC. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Ah, well, that fixed it! My problem was that the picture at Berlin Wall was still had the low amount of pixels but was upscaled in a CSS sense. PhotographyEdits (talk) 11:38, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, your recent version is a great improvement and I'm not sure why it was originally uploaded at that low-resolution scale, even becoming a picture-of-the-day at one time! Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Creating new page

I need editing help as too much writing and reading are hard for me to comprehend due to my dyslexia Nesoul (talk) 13:45, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

What exactly do you need help with? Please read the reviwer notice at Draft:Halftime Chat R&B Podcast, and if there is anything there that you do not understand you are welcome to ask a more specific question here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:59, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Nesoul, and welcome to the Teahouse. I echo Shantaviraj in asking what it is you need help with. But I would point out that, as well as lacking proper references, the draft is written in a completely inappropriate style for an encyclopaedia, which is what this is. An article speaks with Wikipedia's voice, not the voice of the subject or people connected with the subject. An article should summarize what people wholly unconnected with the subject have published about it: that's all.

I also observe that your user name Nesoul, is close to the name of the proprietor, Nnamdi E.S. Okoye; which leads me to ask: are you Okoye? If you are, you should declare this fact on your user page (see WP:COI), and bear in mind that this makes the already difficult task of writing an article much more difficult, because you are likely to find it hard to write with a sufficiently neutral point of view for Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 20:44, 17 December 2022 (UTC)

@Nesoul Did you take that picture of yourself? It's listed as "own work". David10244 (talk) 07:20, 18 December 2022 (UTC)

Try to best to spell and we can always correct the mistakes and maybe tell you in the edit summary. You can try to use a screen reader. @User:ColinFine Who is Nnamdi E.S. Okoye? This may be a coincidence here.Cwater1 (talk) 23:57, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Cwater1, Nnamdi E.S.Okoye is named in Draft:Halftime Chat R&B Podcast as its proprietor, and is the subject of File:Halftime Chat with Nnamdi Okoye.jpg, probably a selfie, uploaded by Nesoul. ColinFine (talk) 10:50, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Probably a selfie? He must have used a timer then. David10244 (talk) 14:20, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Article

HI,

Ive contributed an article, responded to requests to add better citation and references and now its just sitting indefinitely in draft, pls can you help?

The Article is A-J Towse

Thanks RugbyL123 (talk) 14:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

At the top of your draft it says: "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,593 pending submissions waiting for review.". - David Biddulph (talk) 14:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@RugbyL123  Done! GoingBatty (talk) 14:49, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi

I have a history of vandalism can I be good for once 51.39.9.180 (talk) 12:12, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

You mean, after you vandalized a user talk page twice today? I think you're the only person you can answer the question of whether you are able to be good for once. But you may have difficulty persuading other people that you can. ColinFine (talk) 12:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Earlier today, were you also vandalizing the same user's talk page as IP 176.45.1.99? And as IP 2001:16A2:DE1A:7E00:B936:5410:A961:4E35? Consider registering an account and being here to improve the encyclopedia. David notMD (talk) 13:44, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Why are you guys so mean 😭 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:16a2:de1a:7e00:5593:1673:9b4f:57c0 (talk) 15:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Vandal now blocked. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

B3 1715+425

Hello! I’d like to public an article on the Black Hole B3 1715+425. How does this look? User:Astronomical472/B3 1715+425.

Also, how do you turn sources in text into the exponent-sized numbers seen in most Wikipedia articles? Astronomical472 (talk) 15:19, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

For your second question, see Help:Referencing for beginners. ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 15:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

1. Lowercase your wikilinks that are not proper nouns. In the source editor, you can at least do this by adding a pipe (|) and then the text you want to appear. On the visual editor, you can simply change the text like any other.

2. I will probably do this myself, but change the references to the normal ones used.

3. It might just be me but I feel like the article could be structured better by basing it off other black hole articles (e.g. Sagittarius A*, Ton 618)

✶Mitch199811✶ 15:37, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

2. Do you mean you’ll edit the sources to be listed correctly?

3. I don’t believe Sagittarius A can properly be used in the article because it’s not the same type of black hole. Astronomical472 (talk) 15:44, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

2. I have already changed the citations. I noticed that you are using source editor, so next time do <ref></ref> to do citations.

3. I wikilinked those two articles as those were the first black holes that came to mind. (Rest is a bit of a rant) What I was trying to say was that you should look through and see how they are formatted. Generally, when I write articles, I go around other articles to see if I missed anything or if I did something weird. Two articles I did this with was Bee Branch Creek (Iowa) and Manuma, reading through creek and bird articles respectively. The Bee Branch article is a pretty odd-ball creek as it was daylighted, but even then I found it useful to read other river articles.

✶Mitch199811✶ 15:52, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

For next time you want to do this, I would go to WP:Peer review or the wikiproject's page (in this case wp:astronomy). ✶Mitch199811✶ 16:00, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Can it be published to Wikipedia yet under the Black Hole’s name, or should I wait? Astronomical472 (talk) 16:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I am going to put in an AfC template, and when you click a button on it the article is submitted. After that someone will come by and make sure that it is ready for the mainspace. Currently, there is a 4 month backlog so it might take a bit. ✶Mitch199811✶ 16:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much! Just to make it clear: it hasn’t been submitted for review yet? Astronomical472 (talk) 16:25, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

No, the box would be yellow and say review pending. ✶Mitch199811✶ 16:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! Astronomical472 (talk) 16:48, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Need a new topic to write about

Hi,

I have already contributed some articles till now(currently, these articles are awaiting for review), I'm enjoying it. But, I'm looking for more subjects to cover them up. Then, How can I find these.? and where should I find these.? Thanks. 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 13:50, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Thanks for wanting to add more subject-matter. There are literally thousands of ideas liinked at WP:RA. My advice would be to read WP:BACKWARD first and judge which ones to take on based on your interests and the available sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull Thank You so much for suggesting these... I will try to cover them. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Perfectodefecto (talk • contribs) 14:09, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I would amend the forward method that WP:BACKWARD suggests slightly, Mike Turnbull. From what I've seen, most drafts and new articles fail on two grounds: Either they fail to assert notability, or fail to have adequate sources. While the forward method described *should* take care of the adequate sources portion, it is expecting that the notability assertion will happen automatically. So I would add to the suggestion: Read the notability policy that applies to the article you select from WP:RA. Find an assertion of notability in the appropriate sources. Start writing the draft with the assertion of notability, then continue as per BACKWARD's suggestion. UtherSRG (talk) 17:03, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Perfecto and welcome to the Teahouse. The other thing to say is that we have thousands and thousands of existing articles which are seriously deficient, and would benefit from some TLC. ColinFine (talk) 15:57, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

UtherSRG Now, I got it. Thank You so much for these suggestions.

Draft:Orchestrate96

This draft always gets denied but, I'm trying to figure out what this artist does not have. Does Wikipedia need more sources on the artist? or Billboard charting records? The comments made about the draft are somewhat generic and I need a personalized comments if possible. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Orchestrate96 TheFirstLyricGeek (talk) 23:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@TheFirstLyricGeek - Welcome to the Teahouse! Which criteria of WP:MUSICBIO does this artist meet? GoingBatty (talk) 05:09, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The first criteria about articles. Thank you so much by the way. TheFirstLyricGeek (talk) 05:37, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@TheFirstLyricGeek I looked at the first few sources in your draft. They were all based on interviews with the rapper, which is no use for demonstrating he is notable, since they are not WP:INDEPENDENT of him. The reviewers are not looking for what he has managed to pump out as PR but what people not connected with him have said, unprompted. Re-structure the draft so the best independent sources are highlighted by being the first citations and it may succeed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:39, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I will do that and see how things go. Very much appreciated. I like this job. Trial and Error. TheFirstLyricGeek (talk) 17:10, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Moved a page - what do I do next?

so, I just moved the article Løren to its current name but when I did, there was a message saying I have to clear some redirects etc. What are these and how do I do it? Also, I don't want it as a redirect, so how do I make it a main article? Thank you in advance - fenia🖤^tellmehi 17:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Fisforfenia, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you go to Løren (musician), and pick "What links here" from the sidebar, it will give you a link of articles and other pages that contain links to that article. It shows you that nearly all of them, unsurprisingly, link via Loren (musician). Since that redirect will remain, it is not essential to correct those links, but it is neater if you do so.

One by one, you go to the articles that link via the redirect, and edit each to make the link point directly to the new name, rather than via the redirect. I don't know if there is a tool or a bot that can help. ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hiya fenia! Welcome to The Teahouse. Each article has on it sideboard a link for "What links here". In this case, that would be Special:WhatLinksHere/Løren_(musician). Hitting that, you can see all the incoming links to the article. Each of those articles should be changed to point to the new article title. - UtherSRG (talk) 17:22, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Notability question

Is Roger Spotts or Roger Hamilton Spotts notable by wikipedia standards?

wikipedia mentions

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=roger+hamilton+spotts&title=Special%3ASearch&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?search=roger+spotts&title=Special:Search&profile=advanced&fulltext=1&ns0=1

https://www.imdb.com/name/nm0819508/

https://www.nytimes.com/1992/05/14/movies/review-film-a-black-cast-in-a-present-day-earnest.html

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1994-09-03-me-34147-story.html

https://www.latimes.com/archives/la-xpm-1986-07-25-ca-209-story.html

Several pages of book mentions

https://www.google.com/search?

q=roger+hamilton+spotts&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ALiCzsZmemI9Tp1_f8lkHimPHp353h68tg%3A1671487624214&ei=iOCgY5TeDMnRkPIP1uaWsA8&ved=0ahUKEwiUwtnQ2Ib8AhXJKEQIHVazBfYQ4dUDCAo&uact=5&oq=roger+hamilton+spotts&gs_lcp=Cg1nd3Mtd2l6LWJvb2tzEANQpgdY-xtggiJoAHAAeACAAZ8BiAH1BpIBAzkuMZgBAKABAcABAQ&sclient=gws-wiz-books

https://www.google.com/search?q=roger+hamilton+spotts&tbm=bks&sxsrf=ALiCzsbG7XHytoAt7Q6Y5EzEc-TUSMI5aA:1671487648637&ei=oOCgY43EJtPPkPIPg_C5yAI&start=10&sa=N&ved=2ahUKEwiNlKzc2Ib8AhXTJ0QIHQN4DikQ8tMDegQIDxAE&biw=1628&bih=812&dpr=2.2

Random

https://amistad-finding-aids.tulane.edu/repositories/2/resources/871

https://jazzzone.net/about-the-jazzzone

https://jamesbond007.se/eng/event/jazz_hyllning_till_james_bond_latarna

https://jamesbondradio.com/event-report-gloria-hendrys-jazz-tribute-to-the-songs-of-james-bond-by-matthew-chernov/

https://ourweekly.com/news/2009/04/23/jazzed-by-the-music/ Universalsunset (talk) 22:36, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Universalsunset. All I can find are passing mentions. Significant coverage is required. Cullen328 (talk) 00:05, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Can you explain why significant coverage is not required for some pages?

How are archived articles displayed? I found articles on newspaper.com

Roger Spotts has a museum display, a chapter in a book, and as you see many mentions in books and articles.

Papa John Creach, an associate of Mr Spotts he has IMDB, ALLMUSIC.COM, an obituary, and other smaller mentions. Universalsunset (talk) 05:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Universalsunset Different people do not have different sourcing requirements. Many of the English Wikipedia's 6.5 million articles were written when standards were looser, and may have never been reviewed. Please see other stuff exists which should help. David10244 (talk) 05:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Universalsunset, if a source merely has a single datum about a subject but is reliable, then the source can be cited for that datum. But a congeries of such sources doesn't add up to notability. (Please read and digest WP:PERSON.) Thank you for pointing out that the article Papa John Creach cites IMDb. It shouldn't do so. -- Hoary (talk) 06:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Universalsunset, mentions (or more-than-mentions) in Wikipedia are worthless for this purpose. So is an IMDb entry. The NYT piece will be behind a paywall for me, so I'm not going to look. The LA Times pieces, la-xpm-1994-09-03-me-34147-story.html and la-xpm-1986-07-25-ca-209-story.html, barely mention your man. I'm not going to click on any of the other links unless you nominate the best among them (life's too short); but I have to say that they don't look promising. Yet Tulane stores primary materials about Spotts, so surely he's significant. Perhaps his significance will be apparent from newspaper and magazine articles that aren't yet accessible via the web and perhaps never will be. -- Hoary (talk) 00:12, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I am an NYT subscriber and that is a passing mention. Cullen328 (talk) 01:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

^{Hi, I'll keep looking for articles. I'm curious, Papa John Creach, one of Roger Spotts' associates has a wiki page with very little coverage. Is there a reason that different people have different requirements?}

^{Roger is also mentioned in many books.}

Books

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Ray_Charles/5ECSAgAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts&pg=PT596&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/There_And_Back/lqHHgmB5l5AC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts+roy+porter&pg=PA168&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Carolina_Beach_Music_Encyclopedia/nE1nDwAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts&pg=PA69&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Take_Me_to_a_Circus_Tent/3G5PPWXZNAIC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts&pg=PA374&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Profiles_in_Jazz/_nFFT1YrZhkC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts&pg=PA171&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Got_a_Revolution/TKyYNB0pGIoC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts&pg=PA253&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/DelightfuLee/ERf2iMC6qMEC?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts&pg=PA56&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Gloria/O7BMEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&dq=roger+spotts&pg=PT4&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Down_Beat/2KsJAQAAMAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=roger+spotts&dq=roger+spotts&printsec=frontcover

https://www.google.com/books/edition/60_Years_of_Recorded_Jazz_1917_1977_Gord/EyQ5AQAAIAAJ?hl=en&gbpv=1&bsq=roger+spotts&dq=roger+spotts&printsec=frontcover Universalsunset (talk) 02:03, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Universalsunset, you say that Papa John Creach "has a wiki page with very little coverage". I wouldn't say that the sum of --

• "Creach, Papa John". Encyclopedia of Popular Music (4th ed.). Oxford University Press. 2006.

• "Papa John Creach, A Violinist Versed In Pop, Dies at 76". The New York Times. February 23, 1994.

• Ruhlmann, William. "Papa John Creach Artist Biography". AllMusic.

• Washburn, Jim (May 25, 1990). "In Touch, in Tune: Papa John Creach Continues a Career That's Ranged from Armstrong to the Airplane". Los Angeles Times.

-- looks like "very little coverage". However, even if it did, this would not be an argument for adding another article on a subject who can't yet be shown to be notable. Please read and digest WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS (primarily about deletion debates, but relevant here too).

You ask: "Is there a reason that different people have different requirements?" They do not. If you're claiming that standards seem to have been applied haphazardly (if at all), I'd agree. Again, please read and digest WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS. -- Hoary (talk) 06:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Papa John Creach is indisputably notable. In a couple of minutes, I was able to find many books that devote significant coverage to his career. He was also the subject of a 1987 documentary film: "Papa John Creach: Setting the Record Straight". He was an icon of both jazz and rock music. Cullen328 (talk) 17:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Naked black hole

Henlo! I’m new here and tried to get rid of a redirect from Naked black hole -> Naked singularity, plus add some content. After writing an entire (short) article on a Naked black hole, my article was automatically reverted and I got an automated message from LilianaUwU saying it was reverted because it (pretty much) wasn’t useful. I worked on the article for a while, how can I get this back? Astronomical472 (talk) 03:18, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Fixed it, I just reverted the reversion! Still might be a programming glitch though. Astronomical472 (talk) 03:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@astronomical472 (cc @lilianauwu):

you may retrieve it from here. however, this article would not be suitable for wikipedia as it was incorrectly formatted and had only one reference. you need at least two or three independent, reliable sources that cover these black holes significantly. make sure to read help:your first article for further advice. lettherebedarklight晚安 03:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

2 independent sources and it’s acceptable? Astronomical472 (talk) 03:28, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, @Astronomical472, the article is mostly unsourced. I've put your work at User:Astronomical472/Naked black hole so you can work on it. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 03:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

this is not a programming glitch, this is an intentional revert. i have reverted your edits again,as your article is not up to wikipedia standards. lettherebedarklight晚安 03:28, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Astronomical472. In theory, an astrophysics topic could be notable and eligible for a Wikipedia article with just two sources, if for example there was an entire book published about the topic by a major academic press, and a detailed article published about the topic in a prestigious physics journal. This thought experiment leads to the obvious question: Why would such a book and such a journal article be ignored by other notable academics? The whole scenario is highly implausible. Cullen328 (talk) 05:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Are you suggesting I shouldn’t make the article? Slightly confused. Astronomical472 (talk) 14:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Astronomical472, I've had a look at your sandbox, and it's unclear to me whether the intended subject is the concept of "naked black hole", or a particular such black hole named "VB3 1715+425". Maproom (talk) 08:43, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Are you suggesting I should make an article for the specific naked black hole? Astronomical472 (talk) 14:40, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Astronomical472, Not to put words in Maproom's mouth, but I believe the question is which one you intend, rather than suggesting anything. David10244 (talk) 17:50, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Ah, I see. Well for now I scrapped the naked black hole project and created this. Draft:B3 1715+425 Astronomical472 (talk) 17:58, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I want to write an article about a mountain, but, I have some doubts

Hi,

I want to write an article about a Mountain, which is located in our locality. I have enough sources, will it be accepted? Thanks.. 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 17:53, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Have you read Wikipedia:Notability (geographic features)? If you believe that you have sufficient references to prove the subject's notability, you should produce a draft and submit it for AFC review. - David Biddulph (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

How to fix a number in an infobox?

For No. 1 (BoA song) it says it is a 0000 single in the short description, and from year 00000001 in the singles chronology section in the infobox. (The single is from 2002, as is the song.) I've tried going into source mode too, but I can't seem to find where the issue is. Any ideas? Atsumoo (talk) 19:07, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Atsumoo, welcome to the Teahouse. I believe I've fixed the problem in this edit. The infobox documentation says, For multiple entries, format the items as a normal bulleted list; don't use other list templates or <br/>. The plainlist template seemed to be the issue. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:43, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you :) Atsumoo (talk) 20:45, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I am unsure why my sources are unreliable.

Hey everyone. My draft was recently rejected due to unreliable sources. I cited NPR and Pitchfork, both of which I would consider well-known and reliable publications. In the documentation I wasn't able to find anything that would disqualify them. Could I get some help understanding what I need to change to get my article approved? Thanks! Littlebrownbeetle (talk) 19:50, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Littlebrownbeetle. The reviewer did not say that the sources are unreliable but rather that they are not adequate. Both are album announcements relying heavily on quotations by the performer. The coverage is neither significant nor independent. Cullen328 (talk) 19:57, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the clarification. Littlebrownbeetle (talk) 21:04, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Primary source misuse

Hello editors, In article Baidya there is a information regarding their origin from a primary source Brahma Vaivarta Purana that,

In contrast, the Brahma Vaivarta Purana (Bv. P.) —notable for a very late Bengali recension (c. 14/15th c.)— treats the Baidyas as separate to Ambasthas but notes both to be Satsudras

Is this not Wikipedia:primary? This line has no scholarly interpretation, only a copy paste from primary source Brahma Vaivarta Purana. Is it following the wiki rules? Thanks. Sigmaron (talk) 06:05, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sigmaron The link your supplied was to the guidance that Wikipedia must not include original research, by which we mean something that only the editor adding the material knows, or thinks they know, and cannot be verified from published sources. The BvP is a published source, so it can be verified and it is not original research to use material cited to it. While Wikipedia does prefer WP:SECONDARY sources, we also use primary ones as well and it is not forbidden to do so. Indeed, when explaining the history of some thinking, an article may cite the primary source and then move on to cite the secondary ones that have discussed it, thereby showing that it had a notable impact. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull thanks for your comment. BvP is an old scripture. The writer has mentioned BvP but has not commented on the justification of BvP calling baidya as shudra. I mean no interpretation of this is provided. The writer has just mentioned that BvB mentioned Baidya as shudra. So the main source is BvP. Is BvP a scholarary source or peer reviewed. So is it reliable? Sigmaron (talk) 18:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sigmaron, my interpretation is that Wikipedia is not saying "X is so because the BvP says so". Rather, Wikipedia is saying that "the BvD says X is so", leaving the reader to decide what reliance they place on the BvD. Moreover, the article is contrasting this with another old source (Bṛhaddharma Puraṇa) that says something different, and does not assert which (if either) is "correct." Similar considerations apply to most ancient texts. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.194.245.235 (talk) 21:05, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

An exact article already exists in different language, can I write an article about it in English

Hi,

I found that Baita Huli article already exists on Wikipedia, which is written in Cebuano language.

I'm native to this place and, I have sufficient independent sources to create an article on Baita Huli mountain. Now, what should I do? is it ok to write in English or should I use its translated version? Thanks. 𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 22:17, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

You should write it in your own words but you can use the material and sources from the translated version. --Bduke (talk) 22:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

You can also translate the article directly as long as you follow Help:Translation ■ ∃ Madeline ⇔ ∃ Part of me ; 22:36, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Perfectodefecto, I fed the Cebuano-language article into Google Translate, and was unable to infer from what I read that the hill -- "mountain" seems an exaggeration -- has any significance beyond the topographical. As for the topographical, the hill's peak is 274m above sea level; the area to its NW is hilly: the highest point [whose name we're not told] is 492m and is 2.9 km to the north. And that's about it. I see no hint of notability in that. What am I missing (or what has Google Translate mistranslated)? -- Hoary (talk) 23:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

improving the articles

Gentlemen,

some days ago I was adding some info in an article, receiving welcome and thanks for the action.

Then the modification was visible for few days and now it is canceled . . .

OK, the truth is not in my pocket, yet even some years ago it was possible to notice some errors int the translations or incompleteness of some information.

but the procedure to contribute was difficult and apparently contradictory.

. It seems that the information that some monofloral honeys are bitter is not relevant . . .

. some monofloral honey kinds are typically local, may be too small to be in an Encyclopedia

Would it not, be more polite a personal conversation with a responsible person to let him doing his modifications?

Better than spending time to make some modifications which after are deleted? maybe rejected?

Some years ago there was a clear inconsistency on the articles about aluminum, which were written with a mistake and also contradicting themselves, according to the language, you were reading the same article.

After not being able to correct the clear mistake, it was wiser to give up and never to read the different articles again.

Respectfully, thank you for your time 194.144.233.14 (talk) 10:43, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

IP editor: please specify the article you are talking about. Your edit history shows no relevant alterations. I suspect that the reason your edit was reverted was that it did not supply a source for the information you added (see verify for the policy) but I can't comment further without the context. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

My guess is that this is about an addition and subsequent revert at Monofloral honey. The issue appeard to be a claim that a specific honey had medicinal value. If not, specify article. When reverted, the proper response is to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article, 'pinging' the editor who reverted your (unreferenced) addition. David notMD (talk) 13:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@Icelandic IP 194.144.233.14: Welcome and please note that Gentlewomen may be reading your posts. As for the impersonal tone of the feedback you received. many such messages are initiated by a human yet delivered by a machine, via a template. Wikipedia is very strict with the sourcing for any medical claims. See here Quisqualis (talk) 23:38, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Article about Settlement(Village)

Hi,

I have submitted this Article, which is about on a Village. May I know, does it contain enough references.? second question, Can I add blacklisted links as references? or it is totally prohibited? Please help.. Thank You. Perfectodefecto (talk) 21:07, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto - Welcome to the Teahouse! You cannot add blacklisted links as references - see Wikipedia:Spam blacklist. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:15, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto: Having enough references is not the point. Having the right references that prove an assertion of notability is what you need. I strongly encourage you to read up on notability before starting to write an article. Use the notability policy to formulate an assertion of notability, then find those good sources that can prove that notability. UtherSRG (talk) 00:30, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

User Name Change

I am having trouble logging into my account. I changed my user name to nick name and now I cannot login. HELP please! 192.161.248.78 (talk) 20:44, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

You can try to reset your password at Special:PasswordReset. Otherwise, you can create a new account and state that you previously edited under a different username. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:24, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Mission accomplished! CharlemagneJane (talk) 00:57, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@IP editor: it's possible that you have created your new account name with a misspelling and are using the intended spelling to log in (or vice versa). Look at your old name's contributions page. When you see the recent edit you made to request a name change, check out what exactly you did there. The answer may help you to log in under a new name.-- Quisqualis (talk) 23:11, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@IP editor: is your new name CharlemagneJane?--Quisqualis (talk) 23:26, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, thank you. The problem has been resolved. CharlemagneJane (talk) 00:56, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

How to upload a photo

How do I upload a photo on Wikipedia? Also, would I be able to delete my own photo later on if desired? 2600:6C50:487F:FAF6:D530:1261:B9CD:EFB6 (talk) 01:10, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I think you might want to see the Wikipedia:Images, especially first two sections (Policies and Tutorials). --CiaPan (talk) 01:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

If you freely license an image, and you do it correctly, your decision is irrevocable. Cullen328 (talk) 01:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Mobile problem

I'm using the mobile version of Wikipedia on Chrome on Android and I don't know what happened but now everytime I visit an article all of the content layers are automatically open and it wasn't like this before. I noticed it only happens when I'm logged into my Wikipedia account. Hgh1985 (talk) 02:33, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hgh1985 go to the setting and turn off Expand all sections by tapping on its toggle key.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Perfectodefecto (talk • contribs) 05:30, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Content being rejected

The content of my article got rejected. I don't know in which way is the content sounding promotional. Laksh bhadech (talk) 05:31, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Laksh bhadech, User:Laksh bhadech/sandbox wasn't just rejected; it was deleted. It was about a company named Overclockers UK. It sounded promotional to me in that it uncritically reproduced what the company has said about itself, and had only the sparsest citation of independent, reliable sources. -- Hoary (talk) 06:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

How to resolve conflict of interest?

:( My submission just got held up because of "conflict of interest". Kindly help me resolve.

Baijayant Jay Panda MedhaSingh1397 (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

hi @MedhaSingh1397 and welcome to Wikipedia! conflict of interest basically means you are affiliate with the subject, in this case Baijayant Jay Panda. firstly, please read the guidelines Conflict of interest and Paid editing (if you are being paid by them) - these policy pages guide how you can navigate through these kinds of situations. you may also want to add a disclosure of CoI somewhere in your user page or Talk:Baijayant Jay Panda to make it easier for people to know you're connected to the subject.

please note that just because you are connected to Panda doesn't mean you own the article or otherwise have more powers over the page than a typical, unconnected editor. due to your connection, you would have to propose changes using an Edit request to the talk page first, in this case being Talk:Baijayant Jay Panda. you can write up what you'd like to change there and wait for a more experienced editor to add these changes to the page itself or help you refine your edit to make it better and/or fit the wiki's policies. in addition, you would have to cite reliable sources for the points you make in your writing such as news articles, ideally ones coming from people unaffiliated with Panda. even if you know some information that has not yet been published in news sources (or anywhere), you may not add them to Wikipedia as that would count as original research and cannot be easily verified by anyone else.

happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:07, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@MedhaSingh1397: In addition to the advice above, it is a better practice to make multiple edits (or edit requests) rather than one gigantic edit. This edit could and should have been splitted, so that other editors might more easily correct or revert the parts they disagree with, rather than the whole edit. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Bare references

Is there any way to avoid bare references? Because there are many articles with such links. I've been trying to fix them, but everyday the list is expanding. Maybe there can be more serious steps to avoid bare links when they are inserted. In addition, the editors who tag the pages with bare urls should also fix them instead of just putting the templates and should employ those templates which will make the task easier. Egeymi (talk) 09:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Egeymi There are tools like Wikipedia:reFill which will often improve things quickly, but sometimes do a rather half-assed job. Use it if you run into an article with many bare url:s, at least things will look a little better. If you come across editors who add bare url:s a lot, you can tell them about WP:BAREURLS in a friendly way, it's quite possible they don't know about it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Need advise regarding the licenses

I have a screenshot that I uploaded online and would like the experts to see and advise, which one is the best use when you want a photo to be categorized as a free-to-use image? See the link below. Thank you.

https://imgur.com/a/OZX4DZPBmjc98 (talk) 10:41, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bmjc98 Your screenshot includes mostly outdated licenses. A good starting place for information of how to license photos you personally took is given at Commons:Commons:Licensing. The standard current default that the upload Wizard will suggest is CC BY SA 4.0, but other alternatives may be chosen, as explained at the page I linked. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Hard to mention you since I'm only using a phone, but thank you.Bmjc98 (talk) 11:23, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Chinese Honorifics article was taken down

This article Chinese honorifics had the best and most complete information gathered and organized until less than three hours ago. Many people used this as reference or to study, the content was perfectly correct. Almost everything was erased on 21 December 2022, at 16:56 (UTC). There's something that can be done to recover the previous content? 179.127.106.32 (talk) 22:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. The content was removed as a result of a talk page discussion. Here is a link so you can read it yourself: Talk:Chinese honorifics#Sources missing. If you want to see the content restored, I would recommend making a new post in that discussion, offering to help find sources for the information. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:43, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

The requirement that Wikipedia content be referenced to reliable published sources is a core content policy and is non-negotiable. Please read Verifiability. Since that content has been challenged as unreferenced, it is the obligation of anyone who wants to add it back to properly reference it. Perhaps it could be posted on some other website in the interim. Cullen328 (talk) 01:41, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

FYI - The removal and restoration and removal and restoration and removal of about 95% of the article has been going on since March 2021. Most of that content had been added by User:Wikilucki in 2019, editor no longer active since 2020. David notMD (talk) 13:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

IMDB WPA credits

I recently had my first article rejected for citing IMDB, but the IMDB citing guidlines indicate that it is a valid source for writing credits (though there are no WGA badges on the IMDB cite anymore). But then I've noticed that crediting tables are simply unsourced? So I suppose I am a bit confused - the guidelines say you can use IMDB for writing credits, but my article was rejected for that, and I have observed that many crediting tables are unsourced. Anyone have any thoughts? Should I just use Template:Cite_AV_media? If that is the case, maybe the IMDB sourcing should be moved to wholly unacceptable? MEQCallaghan (talk) 12:23, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS is not a valid argument here. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 12:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sungodtemple: The OP was not complaining that other articles exist while theirs was declined... they are asking for advice on how to proceed. UtherSRG (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

...and that the guidelines don't seem to be in alignment with current actions. UtherSRG (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, it's hard to keep up sometimes since I'm new to this - should I be typing out replies or just linking to pages without providing any context? MEQCallaghan (talk) 13:04, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @MEQCallaghan:! Yes, this is definitely conflicting messaging. I suggest asking the declining reviewer politely about the discrepancy between the guidelines their actions, and offer the suggestions you proffered here. You can also post a query on Wikipedia talk:Citing IMDb to see if they have any advice, too. UtherSRG (talk) 13:08, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Cheers @UtherSRG, I will do that! MEQCallaghan (talk) 13:11, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@MEQCallaghan: I think your focus with this draft should be finding and adding more reliable sources, rather than the edge case of whether IMDb is passable as a source here. Whether reliable or not, it won't contribute towards notability. The Hollywood Reporter is a good source and I haven't properly assessed the others, but I know with a couple more of that calibre I would be confident as a reviewer to accept the draft whether IMDb was cited or not.

Since we have a backlog of several thousand drafts and only a couple of dozen reviewers who haven't burnt out, reviewers have very little time to give nuanced feedback, but here the reviewer has provided a general reason for the decline with a separate comment that IMDb is not generally reliable. If a rationale confuses you, you can ask the reviewer directly.

As an additional note, Wikipedia:Citing IMDb is an essay, not a guideline (which would carry more weight). Essays vary in status among the community from uncontroversial and widely accepted all the way down to the viewpoint of just one volunteer. This one is somewhere in the middle. — Bilorv (talk) 13:12, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree. I often give the following advice: First, read the appropriate notability policy, which in this case is WP:FILMMAKER. Understand the criteria and see if you can find one that is supported by appropriate sources. Then, ensure that the draft asserts that notability. All the rest will follow from here. UtherSRG (talk) 13:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, even better... this is the quote from WP:IMDB: WP:Citing IMDb describes two exceptions, both of which do not require citations because the film itself is implied to be the primary source... so you are fine the leave the IMDB citations off and probably use the {{cite AV media}} instead like you suggested. UtherSRG (talk) 13:14, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@UtherSRG: for credits, as the essay says, the primary source is taken implicitly as the reference and is rarely cited explicitly. You do not need to use {{cite AV media}} in this case. — Bilorv (talk) 13:15, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

How do I add my own flagicon template?

I am currently trying to make the wikipedia article on the Kennemer Opstand look better, and I just added an infobox. However, I would like to add some flagicons, but seeing as this is quite a niche subject, they do not exist. Can I add my own? How do I do this? Any other tips on the article are greatly appreciated, thanks in advance! GeneralCraft65 (talk) 08:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi GeneralCraft65! First, note that MOS:INFOBOXFLAG indicates that flag icons are not normally used in infoboxes, but military/political conflicts are an exception, so some flagicons might be welcome here.

You can upload images to Wikimedia Commons for use in Wikipedia, but they have to be freely licensed—easiest if it's your own work and you're happy to freely license it. For flags specifically, they're often public domain (so freely licensed) as they're not complex enough to be copyrighted e.g. File:Flag of Turkey.svg.

If you can make an image of the flag and upload it, I think you could just embed it in the infobox at the right pixel size as you would add any other image to an article (see Help:Pictures).

You might get more expert help if you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Flag Template or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Heraldry and vexillology. — Bilorv (talk) 13:29, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Adding the major intersection (exit list) sections on article

How do you add the major intersection (exit list) section to a page? 2601:244:4081:500:2533:DB97:798B:6ADE (talk) 00:26, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello. I have been a Wikipedia editor for over 13 years and I have never heard of "major intersection" or "exit list" before. Please clarify. Cullen328 (talk) 01:29, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Possibly a reference to articles such as Interstate_93#Exit_list. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

You may want to read MOS:RJL. If you have trouble with the seemingly rather complicated guidelines there, the folks at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Highways are probably best positioned to provide you with useful assistance. Deor (talk) 13:07, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I've recently discovered them; one wouldn't unless one looks at those particular articles. I see two types. To take an arbitrary example, see the article on U.S. Route 50. You'll see that there's a outline-type list (indented as it gets more specific). But now, follow a link from that article to US Route 50 in some state--again, an arbitrary example, U.S. Route 50 in Missouri, and there's a rather more elaborate table. The handful I've seen do seem to follow a standard pattern. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikisource List Format

I do transcribing for Wikipedia's sister project Wikisource, and right now I'm working on transcribing CIA intelligence surveys of selected countries from the early 1970s.

Right now, the portal is set up sorting the surveys by topic (ex. Armed Forces, Government and Politics, Science, Economy, etc.) but I'm not sure whether it would look better that way or displaying it by country (ex. Spain's surveys, then Sweden's surveys, and so on.)

What is the general consensus on this? Should I sort by topic or country? Which would be easier to read and be more visually appealing?

Please feel free to take a look: https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Portal:Central_Intelligence_Agency JoeSolo22 (talk) 20:54, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, JoeSolo. Most people here have little experience of WikiSource. I see you have already asked at s:WS:Scriptorium: I doubt if you will get any useful answers here. ColinFine (talk) 23:25, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, I was unaware that existed until after I posted here. My bad, have a good day!

JoeSolo22 (talk) 15:22, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I have a concern about an article.

Hey Wikipedians, I have a concern about the screenshots of Mallard and Watercolor screenshots on Windows XP visual styles as it features Windows Whistler which is back then, a confidential OS project. Is it fine to be left there or not? Paowee (talk) 06:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Paowee, I looked at File:Windows-XP-build-2419-Watercolor.png, which I think is one of the files you're asking about. I read there that the copyright holder (Microsoft) expressly permitted its hosting by Wikimedia. Do you suspect that the permission notice is bogus? -- Hoary (talk) 06:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

No, it looks valid to me, but I'm just asking if it's bogus to others just to double-check if it's using a bogus permission or not. I was also gonna update the screenshot as the image was taken from BetaWiki. Paowee (talk) 06:40, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not a copyright person, but looking at the Microsoft permissions box, this jumps out: you may not use screenshots of Microsoft product boot-up screens, opening screens, "splash screens", or screens from beta release products. Since several of the screen-shots in that article are specifically stated as belonging to beta-release versions, or "leaked source code" (which implies lack of authorisation by Microsoft) the copyright ice does look somewhat thin. Given Wikipedia's generally rather strict interpretation of copyright rules, I'm surprised there isn't a bit more explanation of why these are okay. Elemimele (talk) 09:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah, I find it the same situation for the Windows Neptune screenshot. Although it's a MS beta software but also leaked, the copyright ice kinda looks somewhat thin for that too. Paowee (talk) 15:34, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

It seems to me that the permission notice in File:Windows-XP-build-2419-Watercolor.png is an irrelevant distraction, because the page claims that the image is being used according to Wikipedia's non-free content criteria, which does not require consent of any kind from the copyright holder. --ColinFine (talk) 09:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

But that file does not have a WP:NFUR for use on Windows XP visual styles. The NFUR on the file is for use on a different article. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:10, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Is OEIS considered as a reliable source?

The page WP:RS says that websites whose content is largely user-generated is unacceptable and is not considered as reliable sources. But OEIS is an atypical example: Although its content is user-generated, there is a peer review process and experienced editors accept or reject items; OEIS is an academic website and most of the users have sufficient experience. However, I am still uncertain about this. Thanks! IntegerSequences (talk | contribs) 09:46, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@IntegerSequences, not my area at all, but if you check for example the refs at 2, OEIS seems to be rather liked. Try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

If the peer reviews perform fact checking and other editorial control(i.e. it's not a rubber stamp), it would probably be okay. 331dot (talk) 10:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I also need to check the citation format of OEIS. IntegerSequences (talk | contribs) 10:41, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@IntegerSequences: OEIS is indeed an atypical example, particularly because of how respected it is in the mathematical community, as well as the fact that mathematical information is much less likely to be controversial or unreliable than other fields. Wikipedia:Notability (numbers), a guideline, actually names OEIS in a few places as indicative of whether something is notable. We link to it quite often in the prose of articles, like at Perfect number. I believe it is a reliable source, though am not 100% confident. — Bilorv (talk) 13:20, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Wow, you EL-use it like the Bible is sometimes used in religious articles. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Job

quetta Pakistan 103.35.211.88 (talk) 14:30, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you have a question about Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 14:42, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@103.35.211.88, Welcome to Teahouse! However, Teahouse is a place for asking question related to editing Wikipedia, if you want to find a job, maybe is not what Teahouse for. Why not try Wikipedia:Reference desk Lemonaka (talk) 16:30, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Are you allowed to make joke articles?

Just asking, Because editing an article on Wikipedia can be a little bore sometimes. 2600:1700:4092:2D50:199B:6DE2:64AF:94A (talk) 22:10, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

• In short, No. We are trying to create a serious encyclopedia. --Bduke (talk) 22:14, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

@2600:1700:4092:2D50:199B:6DE2:64AF:94A: No. But if you have a user account you can put limited joke articles in your userspace. Wikipedia also has WP:HUMORous essays. See also WP:-D. Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) ^{please always ping!} 22:15, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

No. And do not "put limited joke articles in your userspace". Editing articles in Wikipedia can indeed sometimes be a little boring. Before it becomes boring, simply do something unrelated to Wikipedia, perhaps even do something unrelated to the internet. -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

You might find Encyclopedia Dramatica or Uncyclopedia more accommodating, or at least more amusing. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:40, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@2600:1700:4092:2D50:199B:6DE2:64AF:94A welcome to teahouse. However, Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia, creating jokes may not appropriate. Lemonaka (talk) 16:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Dealing with declined draft

I recently prepared some text in Sandbox and wished to save it. In no way did I wish it to become published to the public. I pressed Publish hoping to find a method to save. Quite rightly the text has bee assessed as unsuitable. How can it be deleted so that I can continue to use my Sandbox. Many Thanks Stevepem (talk) 15:13, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@stevepem: simply delete the text. lettherebedarklight晚安 15:26, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello Stevepem and welcome to the Teahouse. As you will now realise, anything saved in Wikipedia is "published" in the sense that it can be found if people know where to look. That's why the button is called "Publish changes" rather than "Save changes". If you don't want the current contents of your sandbox any more, then just go back and edit again: you could even "blank" it (see WP:Blanking): the page is yours to use to edit as you wish when testing out new material for use later in articles. I suggest you also read WP:YFA for general advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

psst, @michael d. turnbull, wikipedia:blanking is a disambiguation page lettherebedarklight晚安 15:40, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Lettherebedarklight Yes, I was nagged about that as I was editing in source mode. I deliberately used that page as it has links to lots of useful guidance. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Mike - this is one seriously complicated environment ! Stevepem (talk) 17:28, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Many thanks for your comment Stevepem (talk) 15:41, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Hi, Stevepem. In this context "Publish" means "Save", because in theory anything saved on Wikipedia is visible to anyone else who knows where to look for it, so in that sense it's "published." What you pressed (as far as I can tell) was not "Publish" but "Submit", which indeed offers up a Draft for review.

The Reviewer (KylieTastic) did not "Reject" your draft, meaning "this subject has no potential to become an acceptable article at this time", they "Declined" it, which roughly means "this draft is not good enough yet, but can probably be improved enough to be acceptable." They also used a pre-prepared template to indicate some of the deficiencies. (Pre-prepared because there's too great a volume of such submissions, and too few reviewers, to give each submission a long, individually hand-crafted response.)

Of course, you can go into your sandbox's Edit tab and delete whatever you like (it's your sandbox). But why not follow up all the helpful blue links KylieTastic left you, study the advice there, and then try to improve your draft accordingly? Yes, this may take a lot more effort over many months, perhaps by websearching, visiting other museums and libraries when you get the chance, looking for relevant second-hand books; but there's no deadline – work at your own pace. (Drafts left entirely inactive for 6 months may be deleted, but otherwise there's no pressure.)

Oh, and you can have as many sandboxes as you like (within reason) so you don't need to delete this content to work on something else. Just create User:Stevepem/sandbox2 or whatever.

Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.194.245.235 (talk) 15:56, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

And even if it is deleted because of 6 months of inactivity, it can easily be restored via WP:REFUND. UtherSRG (talk) 16:06, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Spam link on article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire

Hi,

No idea how to go about suggesting an edit, but maybe someone can give me a hand? This article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire has a spam link in citation #65 that brings me to an Indonesian gambling site. Where can I report it? Geeksoncommand (talk) 18:28, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I've added an archive url which works. Thanks for letting us know, - David Biddulph (talk) 18:39, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Duplicate Sources

If a source is used in two or more spots in an article, how do you list them? Do you list them separately or is there a way to link them? CharlemagneJane (talk) 01:09, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, CharlemagneJane. Yes, the technique is called "named references". Any complete reference can be given a name, and it can be re-used anywhere else in that article without having to duplicate all of the bibliographic details. Please read WP:NAMEDREFS for the details. You need to be very precise with the syntax. A single erroneous character can mess things up. Cullen328 (talk) 01:25, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you; I will try my best to understand and fix it. CharlemagneJane (talk) 01:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I took your advise and tried to understand the examples given in "named references", but it is Greek to me. Sorry for my inexperience! Would it be possible for you to provide an example for me in elementary terms that would be easier for me to understand on my level of experience? CharlemagneJane (talk) 16:52, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@CharlemagneJane You may find the example given in the WP:CHEATSHEET in the part on citations a useful worked example. I find it much easier to use the source editor for the reuse of citations and the example shows the type of code needed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:58, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you; I will try that. CharlemagneJane (talk) 17:01, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Could you fix the footnotes for 4 and 6 in the Ray Byars Draft to match so that I can use that as an example? I am a hands on person and really need to see first hand how to do it in my own draft. That would be very helpful to me if you can do that for me so that I an see what was changed. I keep getting an error that multiple info was used. CharlemagneJane (talk) 17:43, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@CharlemagneJane I've made an edit that combined what appeared to me to be a single reference. I wasn't able to check that they were actually referring to the same newspaper article since I don't have an account at the website. You should check carefully, especially the correct title to use. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:41, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I will study it. Thanks for your help. CharlemagneJane (talk) 18:49, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I hope that I understand it. Question: The first time citing an article, use the entire reference template and give it a name, such as Same, then when secondly using the same reference, use the same name with this template as Same <ref name=Same/> and no need to cite the entire reference? CharlemagneJane (talk) 19:07, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Pretty much. The first time you use the reference, do something akin to <ref name="Foo">Lorem ipsum</ref> then follow up with <ref name="Foo" />. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:12, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome

Greetings everyone. RedLucccy (talk) 19:52, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @RedLucccy, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question for us about using or editing Wikipedia? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:55, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikifactum

Is Wikifactum a reliable or notable source? For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Armet_Armored_Vehicles&diff=prev&oldid=1102352072 RemotelyInterested (talk) 20:02, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I doubt so. It is not cited anywhere else on Wikipedia. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:08, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

About page archive version due to warning issues doesn't inspire confidence. Seems to be part of a larger social justice movement and accepts user submissions without any clarity of whether there is an editorial process. Slywriter (talk) 20:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Tried accessing that page and ended up with a warning about an invalid security certificate. Probably nothing, but it doesn't instill much faith in me. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:05, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Tenryuu, I probably should have mentioned that. Looks like a bad clock on their end. Anyway archive.org was kind enough to save a copy, so anyone who wishes can review there. Slywriter (talk) 21:18, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Edit a page.

For the page about Engadine, MI (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Engadine,_Michigan), the proper pronunciation is with a long i in the last syllable, like the word dine. How can I get this corrected? I am seeking someone to make the change for me or tell me how I can do it. Thanks! 2601:40A:8480:2AE0:B845:B37E:A165:C715 (talk) 22:50, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

The pronunciation is controlled by the templates Template:IPAc-en and Template:Respell. See their documentation for instructions on how they work. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:53, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Revision for the wikipedia page on CHERUB

I was browsing last night reading about Cherub. The picture on wikipedia is enlightening, Praise The Lord. But the translation is not right. I tried to find the button where to email the editor to change the content but I am unable to find it. So I am just going to write it here. If the editorial team is reading this, please kindly change the content for wikipedia page: "Cherub".

The lion means Royalty. The human means Humanity. The ox means Scholastic mind and hard work. The eagle means Warrior.

God wants us as a human to have these 4 important character for as long as we live because He already saved us through Jesus Christ. We are no longer slaves. We are all Royals through Christ who live in us.

The Gospel of Christianity teaches this (*I think the Jewish version is also the same, because it is taken from The Book of Leviticus). I don't know about Islam. I have not studied about it from Islam context. Maybe one day when I am ready. :)

Merry Christmas. God Bless you. 182.3.45.250 (talk) 23:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. The place to suggest improvements of any article is on the article's talk page, in this case Talk:Cherub, by simply starting a new section. However, unless you can cite a reliable source of some kind which provides your suggested translation, I'm afraid there's little which can be done. Please read WP:RS to learn more about reliable sources as Wikipedia defines them. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 23:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia redirect to a missing Wiktionary entry

The article Bilaya redirects to a non-existent Wiktionary entry. Should it be deleted, and if so, does it need to go to AFD first since it is not an article? Balnibarbarian (talk) 22:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Balnibarbarian: Hello, I have just CSD'd (Criteria for speedy deletion) the page as a redirect with a non-existent target. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 23:28, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

FYI, instead of AFD, CSD (linked above) or PROD (proposed deletion) are alternative for non-controversial article deletions. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 23:30, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, okay! Thank you! Balnibarbarian (talk) 23:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible to subscribe to get a notification if a draft is about to get deleted due to no editing?

There are some drafts I didn't create such as Draft:Amazing Cultivation Simulator and Draft:Shukubo and Draft:Yaacob II ben Uzzi ben Yaacob ben Aaharon which I really want to edit so they don't get deleted, but am unable to get notifications due to not having created them. Is there a way to subscribe to them? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 23:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't believe there is a way to sign up to notification if you didn't create it, but drafts only get deleted after nobody edits them for six months. Provided you edit them, they will not be deleted. If they are deleted, you can use Requests for undeletion to get it back. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:01, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Only the initial creator is notified of a deletion process being started. The only thing you can do is monitor articles or pages you are interested in for changes by watchlisting them. 331dot (talk) 00:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Immanuelle: In addition to what JML said, you can always create your own subpage, such as User:Immanuelle/drafts to watch, and stock it with links to drafts you have an interest in cultivating when you have time. If you see a link go red and you are ready to work on it, you can then head to WP:REFUND as JML suggested to have it restored. However, as a frequent refunder, I ask that you be ready to work on a draft when you request the REFUND. If you aren't ready to work on it, asking for the REFUND just wastes refunders' time and clutters the request board. Thanks for taking an interest in cultivating drafts! - UtherSRG (talk) 00:08, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

How to transfer a picture from Wikimedia to Wikipedia?

How do I transfer Ray Byars' picture from Wikimedia to Wikipedia? CharlemagneJane (talk) 00:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@CharlemagneJane Do you mean from Wikimedia Commons to Wikipedia? You can just use the picture from Commons on Wikipedia, pretty much, as Commons works on all wikis. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contribs)} 00:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

How do I use the picture? Do I upload it again from my computer? I see the picture but not sure how to post it to Ray Byars' draft. CharlemagneJane (talk) 00:20, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

hi @CharlemagneJane! you may use the image button on the top and feed it the filename in commons (including extensions like .png or .jpeg) as well as other details for your image, like its size, caption, and alt text. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 00:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, CharlemagneJane. I assume that you are talking about File:Ray Byars.jpg, but the same procedure applies to any image on Commons. Go to the image page and you should see a menu bar with icons right above the image. Look for the "W" icon that says "Use this file on a wiki". Click that and it will automatically generate two snippets of wikicode. Copy the first snippet of code called "Thumbnail". Leave Commons and return your your draft. Paste the code at the very beginning of your draft using the source editor, and publish your changes. The portrait will appear in the upper right corner. Cullen328 (talk) 01:45, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

CharlemagneJane, you did not follow the instructions I gave you and the image is therefore not displaying properly. Would you like me to fix it for you? Cullen328 (talk) 01:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Please, please do fix it. It's not that I purposely did not follow your instructions, it's just that I have a hard time understanding the Wiki language. Thank you so much. CharlemagneJane (talk) 02:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Questions about drafting articles

Hi,

So I've been lurking on Wikipedia for a while, and I noticed there's some missing articles I would be willing to write. I submitted a draft for one, and I'm wondering: can I submit multiple drafts at a time or should I wait until the first one is approved?

Thanks, Pear1020 (talk) 21:19, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Pear1020: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1174. As far as I'm aware, there's no imposed limit on how many concurrent submitted drafts a user can have. Given that there's a review backlog, I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case for many editors. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:22, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good, thank you! Pear1020 (talk) 21:23, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

This is correct - there is no limit. However, I would start with doing only one at a time and learn from each one to do better each time. UtherSRG (talk) 21:29, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

I did some copyediting and accepted your draft Sinus Tarsi syndrome. Theroadislong (talk) 21:32, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Pear1020 (talk) 21:36, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I'll do my best! Pear1020 (talk) 21:37, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Did some ref fixes. Nice work for first attempt. David notMD (talk) 02:06, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Also ref fixes on your other attempt. David notMD (talk) 02:28, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Ray Byars Picture

I don't know what I am doing wrong. I used the url for Ray Byars' picture from Wikimedia and inserted the url on Ray Byars' draft but the picture does not show. HELP please! CharlemagneJane (talk) 02:11, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Fixing it as we speak! Atsumoo (talk) 02:34, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I've already added the picture. @CharlemagneJane: have a look at the draft to see how to add it in future. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 02:40, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much and I will use your format as my guide to add more pictures. Thanks again. CharlemagneJane (talk) 02:48, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Google News

How am I supposed to find sources for online subjects if Google News doesn't show all of its results? — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 01:47, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Vortex3427. Google News is a great search tool but it is only one of many such tools. If your topic has their own website, they may link to various news coverage. Google Books may show magazine coverage as well as book coverage. Adding additional search terms to a Google search or a search using other search engines may lead to other sources. Sophisticated repeated searching is a skill that every Wikipedia editor needs to develop. Cullen328 (talk) 02:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

What do you mean by "online subjects", Vortex3427? Also, please specify the one subject that is causing you the most trouble right now. -- Hoary (talk) 05:21, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

For example, Google News finds like 76,000 results but only shows up to the first 100 results. This is annoying when researching subjects that are mainly known for their online presence, such as YouTubers and online organizations. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 03:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Unsure if person is notable enough to warrant an article

Hi!

I've been wanting to write an article on Jim Quillen, an Alcatraz inmate incarcerated for kidnapping and robbery, and most known for publishing his autobiography "Alcatraz from Inside: The Hard Years, 1942-1952" after his release from prision.

I just want to make sure that he is notable enough to warrant an article before I spend time and energy actually writing it. I've revised the rules of notability and one that really stood out to me was how primary sources "do not contribute toward proving the notability of a subject." Unfortunately, I was thinking of using his autobiography as a main source.

I'm having a bit of trouble finding sources online but I consider his autobiography a pretty big (and reliable) one. I've found the following links:

https://ancestors.familysearch.org/en/9V5S-57W/james-j.-quillen-1919-1998

https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/7820753/james-john-quillen

https://www.archives.gov/san-francisco/finding-aids/alcatraz-alpha#m

https://www.facebook.com/AlcatrazIslandHistory/posts/james-quillen-586-az-passed-away-on-this-date-in-1998-quillen-had-been-convicted/3303010883069967/

https://www.historicalcrimedetective.com/msm-jim-quillen/

https://qz.com/1168501/new-years-eve-in-prison-an-alcatraz-prisoner-on-the-special-hell-of-the-holiday

https://www.tuvaluentertainment.com/quillen/

He was also discussed in the Alcatraz audio tour one takes when visiting the island, and in the current exhibit "The Big Lockup." I've got a picture of it if necessary. I also plan on using his autobiography as a source.

I'd like someone to help me figure out if Jim Quillen is notable enough or not - thanks in advance! AcrobaticsLynx21 (talk) 05:52, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

"I was thinking of using his autobiography as a main source." Don't. Familysearch.org: no. Findagrave.com: no. Facebook.com: no. Tuvaluentertainment.com This is merely PR material for a movie (or similar), and therefore no. At that point, I stopped looking. What about books (other than his own) and magazine articles of the period? -- Hoary (talk) 06:12, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello AcrobaticsLynx21, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia.

My first advice is that you don't even think of creating a new article before you have spent a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to some of our six million existing articles. (As well as probably saving yourself considerable frustration and misery, you will be adding far more value to Wikipedia than by trying to create an article before you're ready to do so).

One of the things that you will likely come to understand during the learning period I have suggested is that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

When you are ready to try it, please read your first article and WP:NBIO. ColinFine (talk) 09:35, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello AcrobaticsLynx21. The problem with using an autobiography is that the writer may have been biased, and stretched the truth a bit. However, if you find other reliable references you could use Alcatraz From Inside to some extent. You could write "Jim Quillen wrote this about himself: (giving a brief quote)", but then use other references for most of the article. I searched Google Books for Jim Quillen and several books came up about Alcatraz. You could check Google Books, and if you are able to obtain copies of some of those books there might be useful information about him. Perhaps your local library has an inter-library loan program, that allows them to get books from other libraries.

If you know where Quillen was born, or where he lived for many years, you could contact the areas' local historical societies and ask if they have newspaper or magazine articles about him in their archives. Research is hard work and, unfortunately, you may spend hours looking for information and not find enough to write about the subject you're interested in. But you might find several good information sources, which could establish notability. Best wishes on your research efforts. Karenthewriter (talk) 10:11, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

AcrobaticsLynx21, if Quillen's autobiography was widely reviewed, it may be a notable book. The best solution might be to write an article about the book, with a WP:REDIRECT from Jim Quillen to an article about the book. Cullen328 (talk) 03:27, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Revision for page BIBLICAL MAGI

I was reading last night from your page about BIBLICAL MAGI. The decorative glass window from the Church is a bit misleading. I think you should change the picture.

(1) Baby Jesus looks like a 1 year old boy. He is supposed to look like a new born baby.

(2) The Magi came several days after the birth of Jesus Christ. According to the Gospel of St Luke and St Matthew, this is before a week old. So, the baby in the picture actually should not be like what we see on Biblical Magi page.

(3) Although Baby Jesus was born in a manger because there was no room for him at an inn, The Gospel of St Luke and St Matthew confirm that when The Magi came over, they met with Joseph, Mary, and Baby Jesus in a house.

It is no longer at "the barn", but they are all now inside a house.

(*I had told a friend yesterday that if it weren't for God, Mary would've been depressed. There were so many challenges. The winter, Herodes, she was not married but is giving birth, no doctor or midwives, no hospital, no money. Not until The 3 Magi came over and visited them.)

I hope you will change the picture for the page on Biblical Magi so the amateur can get it more clearly.

Merry Christmas. God Bless you. 182.3.45.250 (talk) 23:38, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

IP editor, please see my reply to your question above. You should propose changes on the talk page, and need to cite reliable sources which support the change. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 23:42, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Note that in this particular case the article only claims that this is a "Biblical Magi stained glass window, c. 1896,". It does not claim that the artist's work will match your bible-interpretation. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

BAN VS BLOCK

What's the difference? The Bestagon ⬡ talk ⬡ contribs 07:13, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

The Bestagon Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is that a block is a technical way to prevent disruption to Wikipedia. A ban is a formal prohibition against editing Wikipedia instituted by the community(in most cases). A block can be made to enforce a ban. 331dot (talk) 07:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

So a ban is prohibiting someone from editing, and a block is how you actually prohibit them? The Bestagon ⬡ talk ⬡ contribs 07:20, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

A ban tells somebody not to edit some article, set of articles or whatever. A block prevents them from doing so. See WP:Banning policy and WP:Blocking policy for more. Incidentally, please consider simplifying your signature, handsome though it is. It uses absurdly many bytes. -- Hoary (talk) 07:24, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Sure, and thanks! The ⬡ Bestagon ^{[t] [c]} 08:01, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, The Bestagon. Here is how I think of it as an administrator who has blocked nearly 7500 accounts but banned almost none. A block is an action that an administrator can take on their own, although the block must comply with current policies and guidelines. A ban, on the other hand, should reflect community consensus and should only only be reverted as the result of a community-wide discussion at a place like WP:AN. Sometimes, an account that I have blocked files a convincing unblock request admitting that they made newbie mistakes and pledging to do better. An administrator reviewing unblock requests may ask for my opinion, and I may say, "yeah, sure, they seem to understand our policies now, so go ahead and unblock". A decision to unban, on the other hand, requires a community-wide discussion, rather than a brief interchange among two administrators. Cullen328 (talk) 08:02, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I didn't say so before, but a ban can be from a particular article, a topic area, or in the extreme all of Wikipedia. Blocks can also be limited to particular articles. 331dot (talk) 08:04, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the ability to pageblock rather than topic ban is a relatively new technical option that I find quite useful in some cases. There are certain personality types who have deep understanding of a certain article topic but for whatever reason are unable or incapable of editing neutrally and collaboratively regarding that article topic. In the past, a topic ban would have prevented them from saying anything at all about the topic. A page block, on the other hand, prevents them from disrupting the specific encylopedia article (or articles) but allows them to make well-referenced edit requests on the article talk pages, and through that process, to learn how to contribute positively. It doesn't always work but it is often worth the effort. Cullen328 (talk) 08:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Name style for piped links for "Under" 17, 21, 23 etc football teams

Can someone direct me to where is designated the naming styles for the "under" 17, 21, 23 etc football teams as (an example) "under-21" will appear followed by "under-21" or u21 or u-21 or U21 or U-21? It gets confusing.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 07:38, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

The place to ask would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Football. I notice that a couple of the articles mentioned as under discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Football had "Under-13" and "under-16". I suspect that there isn't total consistency. - David Biddulph (talk) 08:37, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Crimea

Hello,

I would like to know why you consider Crimeea as a russian teritory, as shown on Wikipedia maps (ex. Tatarstan map)? As we all know, this teritory was illegaly taken and recognised only by 3 countries.

Thank you. Vali Ion (talk) 08:56, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Map_of_Russia_-_Tatarstan.svg tells us "The boundaries on this map show the de facto situation", and it provides a link to a page that discusses this policy. (The same map shows Iturup and other islands grabbed from Japan as Russian; for all I know it may show other such land-grabs as well.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:08, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Questions about Linking Articles One Made

Hi,

If one creates an article, is it okay to link it in other pages that it's relevant to (like could actually benefit from a link), or is that considered self-promotion?

Thanks, Pear12345678 (talk) 00:15, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

hi @Pear12345678 and welcome to the teahouse! it's actually encouraged to add links to the article you created in other, relevant pages! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:00, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Sounds good, thank you! Pear12345678 (talk) 01:15, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

But not for promotion. See Help:Link#Wikilinks. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:29, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

write a Article about Atlas intelligence group a hacker group

Am asking here for help to help me and my team to write a article about a hacker group named Atlas intelligence group Kushiratu (talk) 09:22, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kushiratu Your first hurdle is to show clearly that Draft:Atlas Intelligence Group (A.I.G) (assuming that's it) meets the requirements of WP:GNG/WP:NORG. If you can't find the sources demanded there, write about something else. Or somewhere else. Another thing is that you can only use sources that talks about the article subject. For example, in the section "First Credit and Investment Bank" you link to an article an article in The Hindu which can be a good source, but it doesn't mention your subject, so it's worthless there.

You also need to learn how to add references correctly, see WP:TUTORIAL on that. Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computing may have editors interested in your subject. Hope this helps. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:43, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Basketball Player Edit

I'm trying to update the bio of a uruguayan basketball player, while trying i notice that the team colors do not appear when i update his team, just a black and grey combo, i've also noticed that this appear to be a generic edit, so i would like to know if there's a possibility of update the team colors to his bio instead of this generic combo. Sorry if it's confuse. Ivanovictor (talk) 05:10, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

It would help if you would tell us which article. The only articles you have edited are Lucas Mariano and Larry Taylor (basketball), neither of whom is Uruguayan. ColinFine (talk) 10:11, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Adding to existing Wikipedia pages

I know these people:

• Corinna Harney
• Ted A. Bohus

I'm in the process of doing an interview with them and I'm going to put it up on my blog, but I'd also like to put up new information that is not on their Wikipedia page and use my blog article as the source. I'll be doing a live interview so that Wikipedia can verify the information written is correct.

Am I allow to do this? Christinadanderson (talk) 14:07, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Christinadanderson Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Blogs generally are not considered reliable sources as they lack fact checking and editorial control. Interviews with a subject have limited utility here, as we are primarily interested in what independent reliable sources say about a topic. Primary sources are only acceptable in certain circumstances. 331dot (talk) 14:15, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Please also review conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 14:17, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Both articles are lacking references for existing content. You could add that. As a new editor, I recommend creating refs in your Sandbox, and only when satisfied with the format, cut/paste into the article. See Help:referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 14:27, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Christinadanderson Interviews do not contribute to whether or not a subject is notable, and notability is required in order to have an article. I see that these are already articles, although David notMD says that some info is not referenced. You can't use your interview to fill in missing references -- an article should be based on what independent, reliable, published sources say about a subject, not what the subject says about themselves. Reliable sources need "a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking", to paraphrase one of the guidelines, and unfortunately your blog won't have that (blogs as a whole don't have that). It still may be an interesting exercise, and the interview will help your blog, but the material can't be used here. Sorry. David10244 (talk) 11:12, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

How does someone qualify for approving/releasing a draft article?

What are the required characteristics or qualifications for somebody to be able to release article drafts? Bernhard.rulla (talk) 12:11, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

The criteria are at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Participants. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:18, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Error on page

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

Content in Wikipedia is subject to the laws (in particular, copyright laws) of the United States and of the US state of Virginia, where the majority of Wikipedia's servers are located.[citation needed] By using the site, one agrees to the Wikimedia Foundation Terms of Use and Privacy Policy, some of the main rules are that contributors are legally responsible for their edits and contributions, that they should follow the policies that govern each of the independent project editions. and they may not engage in activities, whether legal or illegal, that may be harmful to other users. In addition tot the terms, the Foundation has developed policies, described as the official policies of the Wikimedia Foundation. Ffyyff (talk) 04:19, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ffyyff, you may raise this issue on the page's WP:TALK page. Please be sure to give a detailed description of the problem.-- Quisqualis (talk) 05:57, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

You haven't said what you think the error is. If you're referring to the "citation needed" tag, that is provided for information and will be found on 477,456 other Wikipedia pages. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:33, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Relevance of Demographics in articles?

Hi I was just wondering if some editors could explain what the relevancy of covering ethnicity, religion and other demographic-related topics is to geographical articles like counties cities towns boroughs and such? I understand Wikipedia wants to be comprehensive but what relevance does say for example, Ethnicity have to do with Nottingham and Religion with Brighton and Hove/Norwich?

If someone could explain what is accomplished by having demographics involved in geographical articles. I'd be interested to understand why they are relevant?

DragonofBatley (talk) 12:12, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

You might find our article on demography enlightening in explaining the importance and relevance of demographics. No doubt it is more relevant to some articles/places than to others. If you feel it is not relevant to any particular article you are welcome to make your case on the article talk page. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:28, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a topic that's attracted a lot of interest from the public, the newspapers, and those who study society, and so because there is good sourcing available, and evidence people regard it as important, we reflect it. You must be reading the newspapers as much as me: you must be aware that the right wing press spends a lot of time worrying that in many areas of the UK, traditional white Brits are a minority, while the more flexible, global elements of society like to know about our global links and the influences of other cultures across the UK, which do vary from place to place. It's rooted in history and geography; Norwich has a closer link to the Netherlands than Nottingham would, even though both cities of course have a history in textiles. And the shifting patterns of religion matter to society too; different religions have brought different social norms over the centuries, influencing law, commerce and education. Even now, there are arguments about the goods and bads of faith schools, and it's linked to the make-up of the city: I'd guess Norwich has more Catholic than Islamic schools. And yet if you want to understand the history of Norwich, you have to understand how this has changed over the years: Norwich was a hotbed of non-conformism, with a strong Quaker community. It's a big subject. Elemimele (talk) 14:40, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

How to sign a message

Hi everybody, I got a message about how to sign after I reply to an editor. I am old and don't understand. Please, help. Thank you. Corolla1955 (talk) 16:35, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

The instruction about signing is from a boilerplate welcome message that's slightly out of date. Recent modifications to the software mean that messages on talk pages are automatically signed for you, so you don't need to worry about that. DS (talk) 17:05, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@DragonflySixtyseven Strictly speaking, the automatic signing only happens if you have used the "reply" function to respond to someone else's post. If you use the "edit source" option, you still need to "sign" using four ~ (tilde) characters. Failing to do that will mean that pings and mentions don't alert other editors, although on many Talk Pages there is a bot that will normally sign your contribution if you forget to do so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:24, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Import a page from Dutch Wikipedia?

I want to import the content for Larry Murray (musician) from Dutch Wikipedia. There is no corresponding English Wikipedia page for that individual, although there are English Wikipedia pages for more than one Larry Murray, so I would need to provide the necessary disambiguation.

Although I have some experience editing Wikipedia articles, I have never created a new Wikipedia page. Also, there may be some Netherlands-centric content that is interesting to Dutch readers, but not to English readers. I expect that one of the responsibilities of creating an English Wikipedia article is having the page be as relevant as possible to users of English Wikipedia.

FYI, I tried editing the Dutch Wikipedia page to correct an omission; however, although my browser can display the page in English, I cannot edit the page in English, and I do not speak or write Dutch. The semantic structure of the English translation is occasionally cumbersome, so I would need to clean up the grammatical construction somewhat, but I am prepared to do that in order to have a page that reads well for English readers.

Is it possible to import the page from Dutch Wikipedia into English Wikipedia? Thanks in advance for any help in this matter. Here is a link to the Dutch Wikipedia page: https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Larry_Murray Freevito (talk) 17:00, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Freevito imported for you on your sandbox.User:Freevito/sandbox Lemonaka (talk) 17:09, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Freevito Also, see WP:Translate. David10244 (talk) 11:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Freevito: if there's something missing on the Dutch Wikipedia, I'd recommend adding your suggested comment, in English, on the Dutch article's talk-page. You can explain that you happened to notice a missing fact but you don't write Dutch. English literacy levels in the Netherlands are probably rather higher than they are in the UK, so you'll be understood. Elemimele (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Have I done enough on a page to warrant removing a notice template?

Hi, I edited Drummerworld to remove a lot of advertise-y language and unsourced statements. Since I'm still new to WP, I'm unsure if my edits would warrant removing the "This article contains content that is written like an advertisement" notice. The talk page was last active in 2008, so I ask if someone could look over what I've done and see if its enough to remove the template.

Thank you. 🎜Oktavia Miki🎝_talk 16:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hey, @OktaviaMiki, and welcome to Teahouse. Yes, I think you could remove the advertisement tag, but honestly it looks like that article needs to go to AfD. There is literally a single claim to notability -- that it won a "Drummie award" for best drumming website, and I'm not sure that's really enough. The other three sources are blogs and their own website. Valereee (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not comfortable enough with WP to make that call, but it is pretty sparse. I did what I could, at least.

Thank you. 🎜Oktavia Miki🎝_talk 17:05, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@OktaviaMiki The article has now been nominated for deletion. If you wish to make a comment on that, the discussion is at WP:Articles for deletion/Drummerworld. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:20, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@OktaviaMiki, the work you did was helpful, FWIW. Removing promotional stuff helps others see that there's not enough significant coverage. So yay, you! Valereee (talk) 18:53, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Change username

How can I change my user name Cjmodica? Cjmodica (talk) 01:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Cjmodica. You can find out more about this at WP:CHANGEUSERNAME. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:34, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

Cjmodica, changing your username to avoid scrutiny of your previous edits and then returning to the same pattern of editing is not permitted. Cullen328 (talk) 05:37, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

I changed my name to reflect my nick name, not to avoid any scrutinys of my edits. I just prefer using my nick name over my real name. Is that wrong? CharlemagneJane (talk) 21:23, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

There are good reasons and there are bad reasons. There's nothing wrong with the reason you provided. DS (talk) 17:00, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. CharlemagneJane (talk) 23:21, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible to edit a wikipedia png file with a map of states were self driving cars are legalized in the USA? Several editors have done so over the years.

A few editors have updated a Wikimedia File of a map of states were self driving cares are legalized in the United States https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Self_Driving_Cars_Legalized_States_in_USA.png over the years.

I wanted to update it to include Iowa since Senate File 302 was passed in 2019, which allows them to be driven in that state. Also Maines abbreviation is incorrect. The map has it as MN when the abbrevation is actoually ME.

Is there a way for me to edit the file and fix the abbrevation and update Iowa? If not, should I make a new similar map in an editable format and upload it? Greshthegreat (talk) 21:23, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Considering that neither of the contributors are active, I would just create a similar map, and make it a bit better looking (i.e. reducing the font size for smaller states, better colours). I'm not an expert with images, so someone who is may have some better ideas rather than creating a new map. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 21:56, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Greshthegreat, a good place to ask for help on maps is at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Great. I already made a similar map and replaced the map file with it since that was fairly easy to do. I'll definitely keep the Graphics Lab/Map workshop in mind for any other Wikipedia mapping and graphics related help I need.

I'm also still subscribed to this question in case anyone else replies with any additional suggestions or other thoughts. Greshthegreat (talk) 00:43, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/yankee

Dear meassage co-ordinator.

I have logged in to edit the Yankee page, as it is writen in the subject.

I have added a "Scotish origin hypothesis" with four small paragraphs. It would be locate right after the "Dutch origin hypothesis".

Unfortunately, when doing the insertion of a citation, I lost the page and I couldn´t recover it from other source of text.

The text was 99% done. It was just finish it, and the to publish.

Can you help me to recover it?

(visual editor)

I just signed in ones. Caledonia9

With all best hopes,

LG Caledonya9 (talk) 20:08, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Caledonya9 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, if I read this right- if you didn't click "publish changes" before you lost the page, there is no way to recover your edit. 331dot (talk) 20:11, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay.

I will back again tomorrow.

It is only four paragraphs. I can do it again, and perhaps better.

Thank you anyway. Caledonya9 (talk) 20:17, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Caledonya9 With poor network, it's better to first make some edits on Office Word which has a function of autosave, and then copy the content your edit to Wikipedia. Lemonaka (talk) 02:34, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

why speedy deletion on my content

my content went to speedy deletion. Jeeb Groceries (talk) 07:16, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

OP blocked for username and promotion. 331dot (talk) 07:19, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Deleting a talk archive page currently serving as a redirect

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I'm planning to delete Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Anime and manga/Online reliable sources/Archive 5 after its content was moved to /Archive 2 (there is already /Archive 1 so I intended to auto archive the next threads to /Archive 2, but I misunderstood the {{User:MiszaBot/config}}'s "counter" parameter so I moved the archived threads from /Archive 5 to /Archive 2). I'm not sure if WP:G6 could be used so I'm asking here to delete the hyperlink above on behalf of me (and also lecture me on what to do in the future to avoid such circumstances). Thank you. Centcom08 (talk) 08:08, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Centcom08 G6 should be completely fine, as it was an accident with a bot. Thanks, echidnaLives - talk - edits 08:33, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Megaherbivores. Is the subject notable ?

Hi, I want to know if the subject Megaherbivore is notable, is it right for Wikipedia and does it deserve it's own article. Draft:Megaherbivores 20 upper (talk) 22:06, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 20 upper. When I looked at your draft, I saw that an entire book about the topic was published by a prestigious university press. You have plenty of references. I have not examined them closely, but appears to me that the topic is notable and eligible for a Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 22:21, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@20 upper I'm a reviewer at WP:Articles for Creation and this is a highly promising draft. It needs work before submission, but that's more to do with proof-reading and referencing. An unquestionably decent article and definitely notable. Well done! MaxnaCarta (talk) 22:37, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@20 upper feel free to ping me over at the drafts talk page if you need anymore help. I am willing to assist you if you need anything. MaxnaCarta (talk) 22:38, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I wonder about the title, 20 upper. Category:Animals by eating behaviors shows a slightly uncomfortable mixture of singular and plural titles, with singular in the majority. But you needn't lose sleep over the (non-) issue. (Then again, perhaps you've already thought it over, and your choice of plural is the result of thorough ratiocination.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:54, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

If the proposed article is about the extant megaherbivores themselves, it's superfluous – Wikipedia already has articles on Giraffe, Rhinoceros, etc. If it's about the group, it needs to go into more detail about the status of the group – does it have a standard definition used by zoologists? Who invented the group, and when? The title is "Megaherbivores", but as it explains, it's only about extant megaherbivores; there should be consistency between title and content. And, it says "There are 9 extant species of megaherbivores", without specifying what they are. The article Giraffe discusses several possibilities for the number of giraffe species. Maproom (talk) 08:55, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Check neutrality

Where can I request to check the neutrality of a page? so that someone experienced can review and remove or place the maintainence tag. 456legend(talk) 11:03, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@456legend: wikipedia:neutral point of view/noticeboard is a place to report articles that may have a problem with neutrality. lettherebedarklight晚安 11:40, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay thank you 456legend(talk) 11:45, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Revision | About Cherub the content on Wikipedia

Yesterday I wrote you that I was also reading about Cherub and would like to make some revision to your content but I do not know where is the email address of the editor so I wrote here. I read about Cherub from the Book of Exodus (*not Leviticus, sorry for the revision from yesterday's note.)

And about the interpretation, it is from The Book of Revelations.

Merry Christmas (again).

)

God Bless you.

Please get the editorial team to read my message and change the wikipedia content so it won't be misleading. Thanks a lot. 182.3.45.7 (talk) 08:39, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! most wikipedia articles, including Cherub, can be edited by anyone, including you! if you'd like to get thoughts on the matter before changing it, you may open up a discussion over at Talk:Cherub. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 08:52, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello. You seem to have some misunderstandings about how Wikipedia works. This a volunteer project and not one of our nearly 6.6 million articles has an "editorial team" and there is no "email address" to communicate with that non-existent team. Any individual editor who is interested in the topic Cherub can we work to improve that article at any time, as long as they comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. Specific, well referenced recommendations can be posted at Talk: Cherub, but that is not a place for spouting off. The Bible is a primary source that is thousands of years old, and there are multiple, often contradictory translations into English. Our Wikipedia article about the Book of Revelations says, that book is filled with obscure and extravagant imagery and nobody really knows what it means although countless people confidently propose contradictory theories and interpretations shared by very few others. Wikipedia articles about such topics should summarize what the highest quality sources say about the topic, such as academic scholars of religion. Cullen328 (talk) 09:26, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

To amplify part of that, Wikipedia works on secondary sources, published by publishers who have a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control. As Cullen said, the Bible is a primary source, which has limited possible uses in Wikipedia. You would need to find secondary sources that discuss the same information that you want to add to the article. Perhaps some theologians or biblical scholars have published books about this. If so, you could cite (click here) those sources in your update to the article. Without these kinds of secondary sources, updates you make will be undone ("reverted"). David10244 (talk) 11:51, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Are Wikipedia pages instantly accepted?

So if I create a Wikipedia page, it seemingly goes through instantly, but when I search it on the usual web it isn't indexed. How come it's right there on Wikipedia but isn't indexed or doesn't have any kind of approval process? Do stubs go through automatically and then an editor checks them out to see if they are valid? thank you. Mixed Biscuit (talk) 09:59, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mixed Biscuit, and welcome to the Teahouse. No, new articles are not indexed by external search engines until they have been through New pages patrol, or until 90 days have passed.

Incidentally, I would advise any editor that did not already have a track record of creating articles that stick not to try creating any article directly, but to use the articles for creation process. It often takes much longer, but it can be less painful. ColinFine (talk) 10:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mixed Bisquit. Editors who are autoconfirmed can create new articles in mainspace. That means that the user account is at least four days old and has also made at least ten edits. In order to be indexed by search engines, the article must have been marked as reviewed by the New Pages Patrol, or be at least 90 days old. Certain highly trusted editors with an established track record of creating consistently high quality content can be awarded the autopatrolled user right. This means that their new articles are indexed on creation. Since I have this user right, I have had the experience several times of seeing a new article that I have written show up at the top of Google search results within a minute or two. That is a pretty impressive experience that indicates how seriously Google takes well-written Wikipedia content added by highly experienced editors. Cullen328 (talk) 10:30, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Cullen328 these editors whom you observed whose work being indexed, are they not autopatrollers though? – robertsky (talk) 10:36, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

I am sorry, Robertsky, but I do not understand your question. Cullen328 (talk)

@Robertsky: asking if these editors whose new articles are being indexed immediately by Google are autopatrollers. – robertsky (talk) 21:16, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Robertsky Do you mean autopatrolled, as in "having the autopatrolled user right"? I have not heard such editors called "autopatrollers". David10244 (talk) 11:26, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@David10244 yea – robertsky (talk) 12:22, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Robertsky  :-) David10244 (talk) 13:59, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mixed Biscuit You created a tiny article about the Anti Bot Federation, with poor sourcing including what appears to be a blog written by you. Not surprisingly, the article has been nominated for deletion and is unlikely to be retained. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:55, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

BHARATHI, Common Script

Bharathi is a script first invented to be a common script for all Indian languages. As it can transliterate any phonemes of any language anywhere in the world, it is now internationalized. Ebook is published by three parties. There is official website for it, from where all details and free Font can be downloaded by anybody completely free. It is a very good script with a lot of new features which no other script do have. Is 'BHARATHI, Common Script' a "notable" subject for an article in Wikipedia? Kindly reply. Sreejit TK Ramchand (talk) 10:48, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@sreejit tk ramchand: are there at least three independent, reliable sources that cover the subject significantly? if so, then the subject is notable. if not, it is not notable. lettherebedarklight晚安 11:01, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sreejit TK Ramchand There has been a Wikipedia article about the script since October this year. It is at Bharati Script and of course you can add information there provided you can cite reliable sources for it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:04, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Untitled

who is Francis Neale 112.134.79.187 (talk) 14:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

See Francis Neale. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shantavira (talk • contribs) 14:16, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

What fonts can you use for a signature?

I was kind of wonder what fonts I could use for a signature because I know some fonts that I might like but I'm not sure whether they'd be visible to others or if they might break something? I've been Googling and searching all over Wikipedia for an answer but I can't seem to find one. I've looked at a lot of the signatures in the "real life examples" article but none of the fonts I see are what I'm really looking for.

(specifically, something a little similar to cursive but not overly illegible?) phrogge 'sup? 00:29, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Please don't bother to specify any font: doing so merely reduces the signal/noise ratio. And don't specify any size, either, unless you do so in percentages less than 100. As it is, your signature (as I view it in Firefox) spills over onto adjacent lines of text, reducing legibility. I note that your current signature uses CSS to specify the attribute color but not also the attribute background-color: a mismatch that contravenes a rather obvious "usability" (legibility) guideline. -- Hoary (talk) 01:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC) Struck through one part that now puzzles me considerably. (The result of temporary insanity?) -- Hoary (talk) 03:42, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

  phrogge 'sup?   <span style="background:#2BA">  [[User:Phrogge|<span style="color:#0F9">phrogge</span>]] [[User talk:Phrogge|<span style="color:#9F9">'sup?</span>]]  </span>

here's an alternative signature you may use that removes the padding and size, but maintains the overall design. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:24, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Alrighty, I'll fix it ASAP! phrogge 'sup? 02:29, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

is this signature okay? phrogge 'sup? edits 03:10, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Not to me. I can't read it. Personal opinion here, of course, but I see no point in fancy signatures at all. They add nothing to the encyclopaedia. Too many cannot be read as simple English names or words, which just generates hesitancy in communication on Talk pages. Keep signatures simple, and allow messages to do the hard work here. HiLo48 (talk) 04:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC)[

I totally agree with HiLo48. Keep signatures simple.--Bduke (talk) 05:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Phrogge There is a much better "keep it simple solution". That is to navigate to your Special:MyPage/common.css and add the line of code #bodyContent a[title="User:Phrogge"] { background-color: #008080; color: #ffffff; font-weight: bold; }. Then you, and you alone, will see your signature on Talk Pages highlighted in green while the rest of us won't be distracted by garish and largely illegible splodges of colour. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:17, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Will my article meet any criteria of Wikipedia?

Hi,

I want to write an article about Best Countries in the World which is an annual ranking published by US News, and, I have sufficient independent sources for this article. But, I have doubt that, will this article meet any criteria of Wikipedia or not.? Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 15:46, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto: Very likely it is not an encyclopedic article. You can check to see if there are articles on other similar topics, but beware of WP:OTHERTHINGSEXIST. UtherSRG (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto There is already an article on happiness economics which is a related topic, as is World Happiness Report. If your draft meets the notability guidelines and doesn't duplicate what is described elsewhere, I don't see why it shouldn't meet the criteria (although personally I think that the word "best" is not very scientific). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:55, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Although the general subject of "the best countries in the world" is probably too subjective and contentious to become an article, it may be that an article specifically about this particular annual ranking has potential, if other independent reliable publications have written about it at some length. If you have what you think are some good sources, slap together a preliminary draft (in your own words, avoiding direct text copying), forget about it for a week, and then try to look at it objectively. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 51.194.245.235 (talk) 16:07, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull Thanks for the comment. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 16:45, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto My opinion is slightly different. As a reader, if I wanted to know what countries are (currently) considered the "best" by US News, or by any other source, I would use a Web search engine -- I wouldn't look to an encyclopedia. Do you plan to write about the existence of the list, or do you plan to present the (current) list itself, or both?

The list, and US News's (subjective) ranking of countries, may very well be copyrighted. (And I would want to read their explanation of how they ranked the countries, which they generally include in such articles.) I don't know if you are allowed to copy such a list, wholesale, into Wikipedia, and you would need to paraphrase their methodology. I could be wrong about this; maybe other Teahouse hosts have more info. Finally, if you include the list itself, the article will become outdated every year, when a new list comes out, right? Will you edit the article every year? And how can you have any sources for this list that are independent of US News? Those are my thoughts. David10244 (talk) 11:31, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto: I think I agree with David10244. If this list is so well-known and influential that a lot of other sources independent of US News write about it, then it might be appropriate to have an article about the list and its influence. It would not be appropriate to mirror the list, or use the article to describe which countries US News considers the best, because that's their job and we're not a mirror. We give an overview of multiple secondary sources. There is no point in us writing an article to reflect a single source; our readers might as well just read that single source. I think we could have a general article on countries considered the best, but that would be an overview article citing multiple secondary sources, i.e. stating that the Nordic countries tend to be highly rated for general happiness, based on multiple lists and surveys over multiple years, and possibly discussing the reasons those sources give, and any pros and cons of the survey methods. Such an article is much more future-proof because it's not "this is the list of best countries", rather it's a discussion of such lists in their historical context, which doesn't change, and merely needs updating if there are dramatic changes to the overall way the lists work and what they overall report. We shouldn't be concerning ourselves too much on the itty-bitty details of whether one list places Sweden ahead of Denmark, or whether Denmark did better than Norway in 2022 but worse in 2021. Elemimele (talk) 12:20, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele I got it, I have decided not to write about it.. looking for other subjects. Thanks for the comment.. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:29, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto Well, I hope we weren't "piling on". The distinction between the list itself and its members is kind of subtle, and somewhat interesting... David10244 (talk) 13:47, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

... I didn't mean a pile-on either! It's a good question, and opinions will always differ anyway. Elemimele (talk) 14:29, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

At what point should I stop using AfC? And what should I do instead?

The title says it all. From the AfC article-acceptance message, I'm not sure whether the AfC people see themselves as just a tool for inexperienced editors, or the standard way that all editors are encouraged to use in the submission of articles. I get two, distinct but conflicting feelings: (1) that it's frowned upon to submit articles without going through the draft+AfC route, but (2) that AfC is wildly over-worked. It's also frustrating that I've been waiting 4 months (minus 3 days) for a draft to get assessed now, and while I understand that AfC is staffed by volunteers, none of whom might have the remotest interest in the subject of the article, it's a bit unfortunate if Wikipedia is thereby limited only to articles on subjects that are interesting to AfC reviewers. My only attempt at submitting an article directly was a bit of a mess. So, (1) at what point is it expected that editors will stop using AfC, and (2) is there any guidance on how to do all the stuff that the AfC people would normally add when they accept an article? And (3) is draft-space reserved for articles on the AfC route? Or can it be used for any draft article? Any help gratefully received! Elemimele (talk) 12:09, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Elemimele, it's best that a reviewer does not have the remotest interest in the subject of the article. That way they can implement Wikipedia's policies, and particularly those concerning notability, without bias. Editors should stop using AfC once they've that learnt enough about Wikipedia's policies that their own judgment can be trusted. Maproom (talk) 13:54, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele The guidance at WP:AFC suggests that well-stablished editors shouldn't clutter up the AfC queue if they don't need the support the reviewers will provide. All new articles get a certain peer review by the new pages patrol in any case. The use of Draft space to develop articles is open to anyone and is probably a better way to go than starting with a work-in-progress in mainspace. Speaking personally, I tend to use AfC for topics where I'm not sure my writing skills will establish the notability of the subject (the single reason most articles are declined), whereas for topics that clearly will pass I write largely offline, just using my sandbox (without saving/publishing) to check that the markup is correct. Then I place the completed work into mainspace directly. So, I suggest you do whatever you are most comfortable with: including moving that 4-month old draft into mainspace if you are happy it is OK. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:55, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks both! I'll be braver, and start putting a few of my own drafts into mainspace when ready. I mostly do translations of fairly non-contentious subjects, so hopefully I won't cause chaos to the new page reviewers. Elemimele (talk) 14:32, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

About your question of is there any guidance on how to do all the stuff that the AfC people would normally add when they accept an article?

When an experienced editor starts an article directly in mainspace, they routinely take care of things such as:

• that the subject is notable, and that there are no other reasons why their new article should be deleted, such as having copyright issues. And also that such an article would not be redundant in light of already existing content on Wikipedia.
• that the article is correctly named.
• that the three core content policies of neutral point of view, prohibition against original research, and verifiablity are followed, and that the article has a required degree of sensitivity with regard to a living person if it contains information about that person.
• that they follow conventions of layout, categorization, and if needed disambiguation.
• that the prose is competently written, in proper encyclopedic tone, with as few shortcomings in terms of grammar, typos, and formatting (such as involving citing sources) as possible.
• that they tag the article as being in scope of relevant projects, and if they have created it as a stub, that they mark it as such.

When an editor does not feel certain about being able to fulfill the above requirements with regard to an article they want to create, AfC is probably recommended. This includes very experienced editors, who may be sure about all of the above most of the time, but with regard to a specific subject, they are unsure about a few things. Cheers —Alalch E. 15:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Subtle antisemitism

Hello everyone,

I am seeing some seemingly subtle acts of antisemitism in my vandalism reverting. See the latest edits on Henry Morgenthau Jr. as examples. I need to cite good reasons for these reverts, as with any reverts though. Just want to make sure I am always doing the right things in my vandalism reverting. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 23:31, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Moops, if the two edits you reverted most recently in that article are typical of those "seemingly subtle acts of antisemitism", then I have to disagree with you. There's nothing subtle about them. The IP is either an antisemite or a troll posing as one; you don't have to waste your time wondering whether they're the one or the other. Excellent reversion. -- Hoary (talk) 23:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh okay thanks. Yes, that is what I was wondering about. Just not sure if when someone inserts "Jewish" (when the person is in fact Jewish) into a bio's lead section when that is or isn't antisemitic? I can tell that this user was trying to be an antisemitic troll, but other times might be less blatant then maybe? — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 23:49, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

Moops, I'll quote. Henry Morgenthau Jr. (/ˈmɔːrɡənθɔː/; May 11, 1891 – February 6, 1967) was the Jewish United States Secretary of the Treasury during most of the administration of Franklin D. Roosevelt.. I don't want to get into linguistics here (and I'll use sloppy terminology in what follows), but there are two imaginable interpretations of an adjective stuck in front of "United States Secretary of the Treasury" (USST) within this sentence. One is what we can loosely call defining. Imaginably, there were two or more USSTs: let's say an Eastern and a Western USST, for matters east and west of the continental divide respectively. But we know that there were not; and the notion of a USST for Jewish affairs is ludicrous. The other interpretation is merely a descriptive supplement. Religious or ethnic affiliation hardly seems overridingly important, but competence, venality, etc, do. It's horribly easy to imagine a venal USST. But "Joe Blow was the venal USST during most of the administration of Rick Moe" would be unthinkable. WP can and should demonstrate his venality, but not in that way. And thus "Jewish" is unacceptable there even as a parenthetical comment. Well, I don't want to continue; because I imagine that nothing delights trolls more than to see their stupid edits taken at all seriously. You seem to know what you're doing. (The fact that you have doubts about it is a good sign.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:10, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, makes sense. Just wasn't sure what my revert edit summary should say then is all I was really asking. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 00:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

It's a good thing you reverted those edits: I feel like the fact that they added "Jewish" to the beginning was supposed to get people to automatically make an opinion about the guy mentioned before they even read about him, which in turn (in my opinion at least) would be anti-semetic. Like what @Hoary mentioned, it is certainly a strange adjective to add on to the Secretary of the Treasury, especially if nothing notable about their religion ever came up when they served. phrogge 'sup? 00:53, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

It's not such a strange adjective to add, for those who are convinced that "Jews" (ugly use of the word; sorry) control banking worldwide -- the Rothschilds, right? Ugh. Glad that was caught. I agree that it was outright antisemitism. David10244 (talk) 11:39, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Pinging @Moops, @Phrogge. David10244 (talk) 11:41, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Understood and agree. Thank you to all for your feedback. — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 19:57, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

editing

i my name is james and i am visiting this on the notice that i cant edit anything. i am signed in but i am on a kindle v10. i dont have anything else to get to wikipedia on. so please get back to me soon. thanks! (i know that i dont have any links but my kindle cant copy or paste. so sorry.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jamalamaloo (talk • contribs) 19:41, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello jamalamaloo, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not clear to me what you're asking for, but you might find. Help:Mobile access#E-readers helpful. ColinFine (talk) 20:37, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Jamalamaloo, this post you've made to the Teahouse is technically an edit! You may not be blocked from editing. Your user page, User:Jamalamaloo was created with a chitchat-type message (hi landon i know your are there.), which is not an accepted use of a userpage. Wikipedia is not social media, but you can edit without a user page (I do), so, if you are here to build an encyclopedia, go right ahead with your Kindle. Quisqualis (talk) 20:45, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

An article about Holoportation

Hi,

I want to write an article about Holoportation, I have searched this subject on Wikipedia.. I found that, There is no article with such subject i.e Holoportation but, there is a similar article which is Microsoft Holoportation.. So, my doubt is... If I write an article about Holoportation separately.. then, will it get verified? Thanks. —𝐏𝐞𝐫𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨𝐝𝐞𝐟𝐞𝐜𝐭𝐨(𝚝𝚊𝚕𝚔) 12:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Perfectodefecto How would your proposed article differ in concept from our existing article at telepresence? Microsoft's use of the word holoportation seems to be a trademarked name that reminds me of Star Trek. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:38, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Perfectodefecto, a very large percentage of Wikipedia's existing articles are defective in one way or another. A large percentage of these are defective in rather obvious ways and can be improved to some extent by judicious use of reliable sources that are available on the web. I strongly suggest that you work to improve existing articles, rather than continuing your somewhat desperate-sounding quest to find a new subject that's worthwhile. -- Hoary (talk) 00:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Is there a way to find all articles using a specific infobox?

I want to know how to do this generically, but specifically looking to find articles using Template:Infobox_national_military. Thanks! JeffUK (talk) 11:34, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@JeffUK: This can be done by using Special:WhatLinksHere, and hiding default links and redirects. list for Template:Infobox national military. Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:40, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

From the template page, use the "What links here" link from the left hand toolbar. - David Biddulph (talk) 11:40, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Perfect, thanks! JeffUK (talk) 12:10, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@JeffUK: "What links here" is the easiest method if you just want the list of all articles. You can also use Help:Searching#hastemplate: and write hastemplate:"Infobox national military" in the normal search box. This method can be combined with other search parameters to find a selection of the articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Help (Vandal edits)

Hello Sir/Madam, Please clearly observe the edits from 6th December on N. Chandrababu Naidu by user named Chinnusaikrish to till date on the article. He first replaced the content with a negative tone. Secondly removed sourced content about the subject, Lastly retitled the categories in a disruptive nature and used a negative tone entirely. The page was already suffering from a fan point of view due to slight glorification of the subject. That doesn't mean to address this maintenance tag we defame the subject/person on Wikipedia right? I tried removing the negative tone and suggested the user to discuss about it on the talk pages before adding or changing. Till now ge original content is not present there. We were actually supposed change the tone of the original content to neutral and not to defame the subject. Someone experienced users please help, he is not at all responding to any pings on talk pages or his userpage. He was also already warned by other user for disruptive edits on another pager. I really don't know what is his/her motive on Wikipedia. Someone help. Thank you 456legend(talk) 20:10, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 456Legend, and welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't looked very closely, but I don't see vandalism, which is editing designed to damage Wikipedia. I see a content dispute with strong feelings, which is already being discussed on the talk page. If you and @Alalch E. and @Chinnusaikrish cannot reach a resolution, then please follow the steps in dispute resolution. There is no "authority" who will step in and resolve the issue: it is up to you (collectively) to resolve it. ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much in the response. I will follow this to reach concensus.456legend(talk) 02:56, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

About adding references and citation for a composer or musician

Hi, Can a composer's Spotify or other streaming companies profile be placed on article? Induvadhone (talk) 02:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

A website like Spotify is fine for routine details, but I wouldn't rely on it as a reference. (See the Reliable Sources Noticeboard.) If you're talking about leaving external links, usually not unless you'd say that's the subject's official website. The guideline for that is at Wikipedia:External Links, or specifically WP:ELNO. – Anon423 (talk) 03:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you Mr. Anon423 for the valuble information. Induvadhone (talk) 03:28, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Contributing to Wikipedia

im enquiring about how I go about writing for Wikipedia. I'm a newcomer 2A02:8084:3A1:6300:41F9:C041:676E:6D61 (talk) 03:42, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP, welcome to the teahouse. Help:Introduction is a good starting point to learn about contributing. Additionally, though not required, consider creating an account as creating one has various benefits, thanks! Justiyaya 03:49, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

You should create an account, because many articles are locked to IP editing. Having an account will also give you access to tools which make it easier to do certain things like apply tags and templates. Dinglepincter (talk) 04:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Log out of other devices

Is there an option to ensure my Wikipedia account has been logged out from any other sessions other than my current one, primarily for security concerns. Hgh1985 (talk) 06:29, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I don't believe there is, Hgh1985, because a precondition of this would be that there is a way to get all sessions by a given username, which was proposed in 2021, but not actually implemented yet (phabricator ticket). Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:59, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not certain how reliable this is. But I just tried changing my password and it seemed to cause other sessions to expire and require me to log in again. JeffUK (talk) 11:44, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

JeffUK that might well be. I am not entirely an expert in PHP session handling, however, it would make sence to change some internal session/account secret (e.g. the token generation secret behind the "keep me logged in" checkbox) when the user changes passwords, to ensure that no sessions authenticated using the old password are still useable. As an emergency measure it would be certeinly desireable, however, I am not sure of the benefit of doing this more often. Courtesy ping Hgh1985. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:25, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Leaving my username permanently

Hello! I'm going to leave Wikipedia permanently at the end of this month due to my unexpected circumstances and also due to my personal reasons. However, my username doesn't allow me to vanished my account although I'm going to retire as an editor after 10 years. Kindly give me an advice on how to delete my account permanently. RenRen070193 (talk) 00:51, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

RenRen070193 It is not possible to delete an account, as all edits must be attributable to someone. If you were turned down for a vanishing, your only option is to stop using your account. You can mark it as retired with {{retired}} placed on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 01:02, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@RenRen070193 You can also change your password to a meaningless string of characters before you log out. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Help

someone kindly help in checking what this user wants to edit on this page:Nara Lokesh (refer to the talk page). I can't explain him further please kindly check the edit history and the content he added+deleted and decide the good to ensure neutrality. Thank you 456legend(talk) 12:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

The article talk to page is the right place to discuss this, as the other editor has already created a section there I suggest you continue discussing it and try and find some common ground. If that doesn’t work then check out the content Dispute resolution page. JeffUK 14:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage

Hello! protected page [1] - a section listing ordinary accidents of gas pipelines is not needed. Please delete the "See also" entirely. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Primut (talk • contribs) 15:38, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

The place for suggesting improvements to an article is on its talk page, in this case Talk:2022 Nord Stream pipeline sabotage. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)-

Wiki for my father

I just made a wiki page for my father . He is a well published physicist. When he retired, the head of the University Physics department said "He did not know anybody that had done more for Nuclear physics than Fred" . I dont even know if you can see it . I dont know if I did it right . The title is "Cornelius Fred Moore" . It is short and I plan to add to it later. He is no longer with us 100% but I do know he was considered for a Nobel in his 20's early 30's . I thought it appropriate to give him a footnote . He worked 18 hours a day his entire life. https://prnt.sc/xkxOORZ9IbKd . https://web2.ph.utexas.edu/utphysicshistory/CFredMoore.html . His real accomplishment that few know about is starting online education . I'm not kidding. The internet did not exist , there were no graphics on the "Interweb " and he was up all night making a testing program. Timpadden (talk) 00:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

What you did, Timpadden, was create a draft in your user page. This isn't what user pages are for; and I have therefore moved the draft to User:Timpadden/sandbox. However well-intentioned the draft may be, it is problematic; but I'll leave an explanation and advice to some other editor(s). -- Hoary (talk) 01:36, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Firstly you need to read about conflict of interest. That means that if an article about him were published you should not edit it directly but would have to use the article talk page to suggest edits, supporting the suggestions by independent reliable sources. I haven't looked in detail at your sandbox draft, but at first glance it looks too much like as CV, and could look too much like promotion, which Wikipedia doesn't accept. I haven't looked at the external links which you've included, but what a draft article would need is properly formatted citations (see WP:References for beginners) to support the text. The guidance on notability for academics is at Wikipedia:Notability (academics). - David Biddulph (talk) 02:00, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

I've taken a quick look, Timpadden. The text makes major claims. Each of these has to be verifiable via a reliable source. One necessity for reliability is independence from the subject. Three sources are specified: a 1973 paper by the subject, a list of five papers that each cite a particular paper by the subject, and an odd video hosted by Youtube (most of which is a talk by the subject, the remainder seeming to be an odd jumble of material irrelevant to him). Imaginably, among the five listed papers there's one or more that discuss FM. If so, that would help. The first and third sources will be of no help at all. I suggest that you pause your work on this draft and gain experience improving existing articles. When you've become accustomed to this and have digested the material about conflict of interest, you should understand what needs to be done to your draft. -- Hoary (talk) 03:10, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Timpadden at the end of your draft article you provide what I assume is contact information for your father. I strongly suggest that you remove your final paragraph. It does not seem wise for your father to potentially begin receiving hundreds of phone calls and emails at his place of employment due to his contact information being listed on a Wikipedia sandbox. Karenthewriter (talk) 06:02, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

I should have written your father's former place of employment, since he is now retired. I've worked at places where former employees still kept getting mail and phone calls, and that just made extra work for those currently employed. Wikipedia is not a good place to provide information on how to get in touch with the subject of an article. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Interlanguage linking + how to add MusicBrainz artist ID?

Hi, I was trying to link Kim Ji-sook (singer) to her articles in other languages (such as :ko:김지숙 (가수)) and I tried using WP:ILLSIDEBAR but it doesn't make sense to me. I would like some help. Her wikidata ID (?) is Q12588796 if that is helpful. I am also curious as to how I add the MusicBrainz artist ID, as I saw it on another member Kim Jae-kyung's page. (Oh, and Merry Christmas) Atsumoo (talk) 19:18, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you to Deor who linked it together - I figured out how to add the MusicBrainz artist ID too thanks to that :) Atsumoo (talk) 19:43, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

If you go to the very bottom of Kim Ji-sook's Wikidata page, you will be able to see a list of articles on different languages of wikipedia. Someone else had already gone ahead and added that as a link. Because Kim Ji-sook's wikidata item already has MusicBrainz artist ID, you just need to add {{Authority control}}. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 19:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Beat me to the explanation. I'm a slow typist. Deor (talk) 19:46, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Page deleted

My wiki page was deleted after someone tried to hack it and add false info 2600:4040:A3C3:AD00:109D:5ADF:7B3E:9D01 (talk) 17:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP editor, Merry Christmas, and welcome to the Teahouse. What page are you referring to? Sarrail (talk) 17:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Christian Benner 173.70.178.236 (talk) 17:18, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

And Merry Christmas too you as well 173.70.178.236 (talk) 17:18, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

1) Thank you! 2), is this AfD discussion related to the article? If it does, it probably doesn't meet notability guidelines. Articles will need reliable sources in order to be notable. If you still want it to be created, create a draft article. Sarrail (talk) 17:22, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

It was up for about 8 years. Someone a few months ago tried to add false info, then it disappeared. 2600:4040:A3C3:AD00:49B5:1BE7:C0FA:ABB3 (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Christian. Wikipedia has thousands and thousands of articles which should not be here, but were created before we became as careful as we are now at making sure that they are properly sourced, neutrally written articles about notable subjects. If the article about you had been up for eight years, it is quite likely that nobody had ever looked at it critically. It is also likely that it was exactly because somebody made some controversial changes to it that it came to @Ingenuity's notice and was marked for deletion.

As the deletion discussion (linked by Sarrail) says, it is possible to request undeletion so that it could be worked on; but according to the comments in the discussion, it was hopelessly promotional, and had no reliable sources; and the editors there could not find the sources necessary to establish that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability. So unless you (or somebody) can find such sources, it will be a waste of everybody's time to undelete it.

Note that if you do now meet the criteria for notability, and somebody creates an article about you, the article will not belong to you, will not be controlled by you, will not be for your benefit except incidentally, and will not necessarily say what you would like it to say. Please see an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Soft Deletion

FYI

 – Merging with above section. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:43, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Christian, the link for you to request undeletion is in the AFD discussion linked above. If an admin consents to undelete it (which is by no means necessarily the case) I very much doubt whether they will restore it to article space, but only to draft or user space, to be worked on. As I said above, this is a waste of time unless you have found suitable sources to establish notability. ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

A page about Christian Benner has been soft deleted, can we restore it? 2600:4040:A3C3:AD00:F5AB:7409:3BD8:2AD0 (talk) 18:34, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

See the section #Page deleted above. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:36, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Codswallop

I am the son of a Collier, (who was also a Master slater & tiler, a SOLDIER, and a man everyone knew as the nicest human they had ever met.I 95.144.150.101 (talk) 21:21, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

And? What is your question about editing Wikipedia? ColinFine (talk) 21:26, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, it’s nice to meet you. Dinglepincter (talk) 23:26, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, the Teahouse is exclusively for Wikipedia-related questions. Please refrain from posting unrelated content in the Teahouse. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 00:20, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

wikipedia editing for school

I have a project from one of my courses to learn about wikipedia. the project is to edit wikipedia and use wikipedia as a source to draw conclusions about reliability and accessibility. are there any recommendations for success in these types of projects? I read a lot of policy documents but i can't find a good summary of what are the most important parts of the policy or tips/tricks for new editors. thx! WhaleNow (talk) 04:51, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

I just posted a welcome message on your talk page. It has a number of links that should help answer your questions. Happy editing! Dinglepincter (talk) 04:58, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

seen. thx again! WhaleNow (talk) 05:15, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure which type of school it is (I don't need to know it), however, depending on the type of schoool Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors might be worth a read. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:32, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

It would be wise for you and your instructor to read the advice at Wikipedia:Student assignments. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:36, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Whalenow, and welcome to the Teahouse. Help:Introduction and Reliability of Wikipedia would be good places to start. ColinFine (talk) 12:13, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

thx everybody WhaleNow (talk) 00:26, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

AfD patrol?

Where can I patrol for new AfD and contribute there again? I cannot find it. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 22:02, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion#Current discussions the place? – Anon423 (talk) 22:18, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Moops, WP:AFDT is an easy to remeber shortcut to AfD debates in the current calendar day. There is a navigation arrow you can use to find previous days. Cullen328 (talk) 00:29, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Okay, I will save that bookmark from now on. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 00:30, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

A WP article pointing out that PubMed does not equal NIH endorsement of the views expressed might be useful.

Over at the Morgellons article there seem to have been repeated incidents of people editing the article based on the idea that the NIH has acknowledged that Morgellons is caused by spirochetes, because PubMed has some papers that take that view. Morgellons may or may not be caused by spirochetes, but apparently the NIH has not endorsed any such idea at the moment. See also this Talk:Morgellons/Archive_14#NEEDS_UPDATE:_NIH.GOV_says_"true_somatic_illness" which sounds like this has been happening on other pages too. Might be useful if someone added a WP article to that effect. (Or would I be allowed to do that myself? I'm not sure what PubMed's criteria for including things actually are and it seems like that might be useful to add). Wombat140 (talk) 09:04, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@Wombat140 The first sentence of Pubmed states that it is a search engine attached to a database of articles, so by implication "Pubmed" expresses no opinions about the content of the articles. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 09:45, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

"Implied" doesn't seem to be working, though  :-D Still, that article might be useful to point to if it happens again. Wombat140 (talk) 03:17, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree, such an article would be beneficial and we would encourage you to add it. Cheers Dinglepincter (talk) 04:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

I was just about to create the article "HMS Huntley" but it already exists.

Welp, Some Random Dingus (talk) 07:37, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

The article HMS Huntley doesn't exist, but at least a redirect to Hunt-class minesweeper (1916) could be created. - David Biddulph (talk) 07:47, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh, Ok Thanks! Some Random Dingus (talk) 08:00, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Frustrating to have my article deleted after putting so much time into it…

Really frustrating to have the article I put so much time into quick deleted for promoting…I would post a link to my draft but that was of course quick deleted hence my feedback here…I spent time learning how to wiki code things with links and references etc only to have it all deleted…would be better just to tell me exactly what wasn’t “neutral” enough or what was too much “promoting” so that I could just fix it instead of having it all deleted… Heaven As Earth (talk) 19:38, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Heaven As Earth, welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, since the draft has been deleted, only an admin can see it, so non-admins can't give you much feedback. If you want to retrieve the draft and keep working on it, here is a list of admins who'd be willing to provide a copy, but you should probably substantially rewrite it before reposting it to Wikipedia. Focus on finding reliable, independent, secondary sources and summarizing what they say, without any reference to what the subject of the article would like it to say. This may help pin down language to avoid. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:49, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

The reason given on your Talk page was "This has been done under section G11 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the page seems to be unambiguous advertising which only promotes a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to be fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic." Given not Speedy deleted for copyright violation, an admin who left a mote on your Talk page should be willing to rescue a copy for you. Be aware that what the topic of the article writes about itself (website, interview, press release) doe not sustain notability. David notMD (talk) 20:47, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Heaven As Earth, I am an administrator and so I could read your deleted draft. It was overtly promotional and poorly referenced. It failed to make the case that this forum is notable as defined by Wikipedia. It resembled a marketing brochure much more than an encyclopedia article. Promotional and marketing content simply is not allowed on Wikipedia, and it is routine for administrators to delete content like that. Cullen328 (talk) 20:58, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok…can I have a copy of my work that was deleted for my own future reference? Heaven As Earth (talk) 03:45, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok thank you I have applied for a copy now. Heaven As Earth (talk) 03:43, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your reply and yes I have applied to administrators to help rescue a copy of my work for me. Heaven As Earth (talk) 03:42, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Heaven As Earth, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry if you put in a lot of work into a doomed project; but I'm afraid that that is often the experience of new users who plunge into trying to create an article before they have learnt the basics of Wikipedia's requirements. That is why I always advise new users not to attempt this before they have spent a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to existing articles. ColinFine (talk) 21:52, 19 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah…I tried to be neutral and not promoting but the administrators did not agree…I even made a declaration of conflict of interest but that wasn’t even enough…I’m considering requesting anyone else write the article for my website…and when I get my draft back I’ll try to fix the problems mentioned above…maybe when I get the draft back I can get more opinions from you and others on how to fix it… Heaven As Earth (talk) 03:53, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Heaven As Earth I noticed you said that you wanted "Someone to write the article for your website" what did you mean by that? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

I saw an option on here to request someone else write an article on this subject so I was going to select that option… Heaven As Earth (talk) 20:39, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

@Heaven As Earth, article requests are, unfortunately, rarely fulfilled. WP:Requested articles are only occasionally and haphazardly acted on, and almost never as soon as the requestor would like. Paying third parties to create an article for a topic which has already been declined once may turn out to be a complete waste of your money. A topic needs to be WP:NOTABLE to be included. What is the name of the article you're trying to create? And is your purpose to raise awareness? That is not one of Wikipedia's purposes.-- Quisqualis (talk) 00:06, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Well only awareness for our online forum and for the industry we‘re in… Heaven As Earth (talk) 10:51, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

@Heaven As Earth: Unfortunately, that runs counter to Wikipedia's goal of being a neutral encyclopedia for notability as the term is used here. This should be one of the last places something is mentioned. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:08, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Yeah I’m starting to realize that now…most people like me think that Wikipedia is the first place something is mentioned when as you said it should be the opposite… Heaven As Earth (talk) 18:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Heaven As Earth Right; it takes a while to figure out if something will have lasting notability. Movies that haven't been released yet are one such type of article, and there are many others. Good luck. David10244 (talk) 09:16, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Editing The page "Jacob Zorzi" And can not find any sources for any information on it

Can i get a bit of help searching for just 1 source? Some Random Dingus (talk) 09:11, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

The so-called "source" which you did add to Jacob Zorzi says: "Source(s): Wikipedia (Creative Commons)", so I have reverted it per WP:CIRCULAR. - David Biddulph (talk) 09:29, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

It was the only source i could find, im going to see if i can find a new one Some Random Dingus (talk) 09:33, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

You ought to be suspicious when the wording of a "source" is exactly the same as the Wikipedia article. This usually means either that the "source" is a Wikipedia mirror or that the Wikipedia article is either a copyright violation or at least plagiarism. --David Biddulph (talk) 09:35, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

oh Some Random Dingus (talk) 09:38, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Sourcing a YouTuber

If a YouTuber makes a statement and the statement is added to a Wikipedia page, would linking the YouTuber's video at a specific timestamp using &t= be sufficient citation, or would an external reputable news source be required in order to cite the statement?
Stenkos (talk) 18:05, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Stenkos: A external reputable news source should be used over YouTube videos instead because YouTube is generally unreliable as it is a user generated website. If the YouTube channel is something like an official, verified news source then you may use it. You may also see WP:RSPYT for more info. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 19:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Stenkos, and welcome to the Teahouse. I agree with Harobouri: in some circumstances it may be appropriate to cite him on YouTube, as long as it is on his official channel; but the question is always: if no news source has reported on this, does it really belong in the article? ColinFine (talk) 20:34, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Stenkos: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1174. The average person makes quite a few statements in a day, let alone YouTubers. The only thing that citing the YouTuber's video in which they make the statement would do is confirm that they made the statement; it would not establish wikinotability, in which case it'd be better to get that information from an independent reliable source. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:50, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Stenkos, @Tenryuu I was hoping someone would say this! Yes, using the source would confirm that the person said something, and that is all. Just wait until deepfakes become more accessible to everyone; then you could make a video in which anyone says anything you want them to say... David10244 (talk) 10:11, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

You can certainly do it, but I think it's probably better to go the route of getting it from a reliable source. If no independent source wrote about it, it's probably not a notable statement. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:56, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

About musician citation, reference, or external links

Can i add Spotify or another major streaming platform album links in the musical artist's article where required? Induvadhone (talk) 03:25, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, I don’t see why not. Dinglepincter (talk) 04:39, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@Induvadhone: It may be ok for some things, but I wouldn't rely on it for notability or more expansive facts because of WP:PRIMARY, Wikipedia's policy on primary sources. @Dinglepincter: Considering you have made just two edits to Wikipedia articles (or mainspace), I would recommend you get some more experience before answering questions in the Teahouse. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 06:22, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@Induvadhone "Where required" is the entire key here. As JML1148 says, you need other, reliable, independent sources that demonstrate notability (click here). And I'll echo the note about Dinglepincter; maybe he doesn't "see why not", but WP has lots of rules and guidelines and "why not" might be explained in those guidelines... David10244 (talk) 10:25, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Where does one ask about requesting permissions for say, an internship, to fix this and other interwiki\wictionary-interwiki-interop functions

Where does one ask about requesting permissions for say, an internship, in San Francisco. I read WMFoundation jobs and mission statement, and _someplace_ on the site it mentioned "Intern"(s) but not how to apply. The shortened Mission Statement (or was it CEO\EXECDIR pullquote from same?) was like less than ten lines long, but very specifically focussed on linguistic diversity\clusivity...

[e.g. add a filter to change default to sort this page's query by checkboxed criteria (such as a default-on [SHOW ONLY FOR PAGES INCLUDING IPA infobox OR UNICODE FONT-DISPLAY WARNING] 99.120.79.91 (talk) 06:03, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Special:WithoutInterwiki. — Qwerfjkltalk 09:04, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. It sounds as if you want to get involved with developing the MediaWiki software. Anybody can do this - you don't have to be an "intern", and there's no reason to be anywhere in particular. I suggest you look at mw:How to become a MediaWiki hacker. ColinFine (talk) 10:40, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Notes with letters

How do you add those small letters on articles like for example [a.] and when you press on it it gives a small dialog with another messag message? Hgh1985 (talk) 14:30, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

I think you’re referring to footnotes and reference lists. See Help:Footnotes. Cheers Dinglepincter (talk) 14:50, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

There are a number of different ways, and the choice of which one to use depends on how you want the note to appear and the existing style, if any, used in the article already. The simplest way is just to put it between two reference tags, like this: <ref>Note goes here</ref>, but this will give the notes numbers rather than letters, and it mixes them in with ordinary citations. You can find more information at Help:Footnotes. XAM2175 ^(T) 14:51, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Decadebox on mobile missing

For a while now I noticed the decade box showing the millennium, century, etc, for a specific article, for example 1990s is not showing at all on mobile, I'm using a 2021 Android phone running the latest version of Chrome, and I remember it use to show, but I can only see it now if I force it to show the desktop version. Why? Hgh1985 (talk) 15:54, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Hgh1985. The desktop version also shows {{20th century}} at the bottom while mobile omits it. Navigation templates and sidebars are automatically omitted in mobile to save space on small screens, maybe also for layout reasons and sparing a little download data on mobile connections. Previously {{Decadebox}} showed because it made its own table code instead of using {{Sidebar}}. It was tagged for conversion in 2018 [2] and converted last month [3]. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:47, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Pictures of News Articles

Is it acceptable to use a picture of a news article on Wikimedia and Wikipedia? CharlemagneJane (talk) 23:11, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm guessing that you're asking about uploading such a picture and then using it. Start by assuming that the news article is conventionally ("All rights reserved") copyright. Do you have compelling reason to believe that it is not (e.g. that it's a century old)? If you do, you can upload it to Wikimedia Commons. If you do not, you can't upload it to either Commons or Wikipedia. (If instead you're asking about using a picture that's already there, in principle you can; but Commons unfortunately contains a lot of stuff that it shouldn't, and I'd be very wary of pictures of news articles.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:20, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

It is a newspaper article written in 1931 and has a picture of the person I am wanting write about. I have not found any other pictures of him with exception on Ancestry. Are Ancestry pictures free to use? CharlemagneJane (talk) 00:28, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

When and where was the article published? And is the picture (photograph?) attributed to a particular artist (photographer)? And whether you're asking about ancestry.com or something else, what copyright information do you find on the specific page? -- Hoary (talk) 00:35, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

There's also fair use claims, which I think based on what's been described so far is an option here. Make sure to read the fair use guidelines closely if you're going to claim that. (From what I've heard here, it seems like this falls under #10 under Guideline examples > Acceptable use > Images.) Also, remember that you cannot use the image on a draft article – wait until the article is published, then upload it to Wikipedia. (It cannot be uploaded to Commons – they only accept free images.) Skarmory (talk • contribs) 00:52, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

It could indeed be an option, Skarmory; but as it should only be considered for an image that cannot be uploaded to Commons, perhaps it would simplify matters not to bring it up until it's shown that the image can't be uploaded to Commons. And apropos of drafts, CharlemagneJane, the presence of one or more images in a draft doesn't help to demonstrate that the subject is notable. It may be better first to work on the text content, then get the resulting draft accepted as an article, and only after that take the trouble to find illustrations. -- Hoary (talk) 01:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

NB my answer above is dangerously simplistic. (If something is not conventionally copyright, this doesn't mean that it's acceptable. It must either [A] be in the public domain [according to the legal definition of this term, not its everyday use], or [B] be copyright according to one of the copyleft licenses that are acceptable to Commons.) But before anyone elaborates further, it would help if you said exactly what news article you have in mind. -- Hoary (talk) 00:25, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Not sure if this can be view from here. https://www.genealogybank.com/doc/newspapers/image/v2%3A11FCD9F6C526DCD9%40GB3NEWS-168A85B7873F130D%402427382-168A6CC26CA96989%4023-168A6CC26CA96989%40?h=1&fname=Ward%20&lname=Jaycox&fullname=&kwinc=Gay%20Nineties&kwexc=&rgfromDate=&rgtoDate=&formDate=&formDateFlex=exact&dateType=range&processingtime=&addedFrom=&addedTo=&sid=wmeeegiohjdxxbevlnelofomegisbooy_wma-gateway014_1671932630185 CharlemagneJane (talk) 01:44, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

It asks me to create an account, I don't have one on the site. I don't really feel like creating one right now, but someone who is willing to or has one would probably be able to access it. Skarmory (talk • contribs) 01:55, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. CharlemagneJane (talk) 02:07, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

CharlemagneJane, Copyright law can be incredibly complex, which is why some highly paid attorneys spend their entire careers working on it. But there are a few general principles to keep in mind. Current copyright law in the US where Wikipedia is hosted says that material published more than 95 years ago is in the public domain, and there is an annual January 1 release. So, everything published in 1926 or before is in the public domain, and material published in 1927 comes into the public domain on New Years Day in one week. You need to assume that anything published in 1928 or after is copyright protected, unless you can provide persuasive evidence to the contrary. There are countless exceptions but you need to explain the specific exception that applies, which is very difficult if you know little about copyright. You cannot say, "I think this is copyright free because it was published in 1931." You need to furnish actual evidence instead of uninformed opinions. As for WP:NFCI #10, that applies only accepted encyclopedia articles about people who have died, not to drafts. Cullen328 (talk) 03:01, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

If the photographer has been dead for 78 years, is the photo free to use and if the photographer has been dead for 70 years, is it free to use? CharlemagneJane (talk) 03:30, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

CharlemagneJane, please take a look at the Hirtle chart on Commons. Cullen328 (talk) 17:31, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Where to place documents referred to in my draft

Hello. I have unpublished documents such as a letter from a university proving a diploma, and have photographs I need to add to my draft. Where can I place them in order to link to them in the article draft? Thank you. Ajo47 (talk) 18:18, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ajo47 Wikipedia has no facility to store unpublished documents, which would count as original research, which is not part of the purpose here. In addition, proving that someone has a diploma will not count towards their notability, which is likely to be the issue in getting a biography accepted. Drafts don't need photographs and, again, they don't help with notability. However, provided you personally took the photos, and hence own the copyright, you can upload them to Wikimedia Commons at Commons:Special:UploadWizard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:28, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. If I did not take the photo, how old does it have to be to be in the public domain? Ajo47 (talk) 18:32, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Ajo47 I want to clarify Mike's advice; you cannot use an unpublished document as a source at all. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 18:45, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Ajo47 (talk) 18:54, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Ajo47. Copyright law is very complex and there are countless exceptions. But the most common rule is that things published over 95 years ago are in the public domain. So, that includes anything published in 1926 or before. Things published in 1927 enter the public domain on January 1, 2023. Cullen328 (talk) 18:57, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Misspelling on the Carpathian Mountains page

On the Carpathian Mountains page, “Carpathians” is missing the “h” in the title over the first picture. Would some computer literate person reach out to the community that handles that page? Thanks!

2600:1700:1188:4570:FC6D:2095:C3F3:733A (talk) 15:32, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

The "community that handles that page" is the entire community of Wikipedia Users. Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that "anybody can edit." There are, in fact, a FEW limits to that (some trouble-makers are banned or blocked; some pages that are contentious or prone to mischief can be under some "protection."). But anybody could come in and make that fix; I just did. Uporządnicki (talk) 15:44, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix and the info! Best to you, Uporzadnicki.

— Newbie 2600:1700:1188:4570:FC6D:2095:C3F3:733A (talk) 19:20, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia. The proper protocol to address this issue is to start a discussion on the article talk page and achieve consensus to make the change you are requesting. Cheers Dinglepincter (talk) 15:46, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Dinglepincter For simple typos like that, there is no need to seek consensus and I would expect anyone to be WP:BOLD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:51, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Death note

Hello. I read death note manga and know it's rules. Do you think it would be good to add them to wikipedia or it is no necessary? Wolfp5 (talk) 21:14, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Wolfp5: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1174. That seems like trivia that wouldn't be appropriate on Wikipedia. The Death Note FANDOM wiki should have that information already; if it doesn't, feel free to add it there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:19, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

An IP user deleted a warning I gave them two months ago. Is that normal?

I got notified that a warning that I added to an IP user talk page was removed by the user. Should I do anything about this or just not worry about it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:47.205.69.71&diff=next&oldid=1114556639&diffmode=source CoderThomasB (talk) 00:16, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@CoderThomasB: Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, it is normal for any user, even anonymous editors, to remove warnings on their talk page as it signifies the editor has read it. See WP:OWNTALK and WP:NOTWALLOFSHAME for more info. Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him • WP:APARKS) 01:31, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Change username

I want to change Sanni Jimoh Yunus Lukman (talk) 01:15, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sanni Jimoh Yunus Lukman. Please read Wikipedia:Changing username. Cullen328 (talk) 01:35, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

External links

Hi,

Are there any other relevant links that can be added to the "External links" heading of the article Draft:Dylan O'Donnell?

Thanks. LIUC.Camilla03 (talk) 22:21, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @LIUC.Camilla03! Per the guidance page on external links, well-written articles should keep them to a minimum. The laundry list of external links that you see on some articles typically should not be there. For a photographer biography, having the external link to his website and nothing else seems perfectly fine. If the majority of his work is for a single client, then maybe add a link to his landing page at that client's website if it exists. Otherwise you're all set as is. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:07, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Why is Wikipedia So Biased to the Left

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

---

i wonder if legitimate discussion of this question is possible. Carla Rogers FL (talk) 04:53, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

If you can prove that bias with empirical evidence then discussion is possible. MarnetteD|Talk 04:55, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

How about you prove the sentence you posted as a reply carries any meaning whatsoever? Carla Rogers FL (talk) 05:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Discussion is usually not feasible with someone who questions whether discussion is possible. Robert McClenon (talk) 05:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I think the reason Wikipedia is bias to the left is the result of investments from governments and other wealthy entities, to pay people to promote their narrative. This is a component of an ongoing operation to manipulate public opinion through manipulation of media. Carla Rogers FL (talk) 05:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I suggesting your situation is comparable to Blind men and an elephant. Whoever you are, you have probably read a very select sample of the several million articles on English Wikipedia. Fabrickator (talk) 05:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

A more parsimonious reading of the situation is that this is a garden variety troll in dire need of blocking. Heiro 05:25, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Seconded Andre🚐 05:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

This edit alone should have resulted in a block. EvergreenFir (talk) 05:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

that quite a Marxist viewpoint, @Carla Rogers FL EvergreenFir (talk) 05:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

See WP:OWB #43 and WP:CONSPIRACY as that might apply here. Firestar464 (talk) 06:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Carla Rogers FL, you are perfectly free to think that the sources that Wikipedia editors have concluded are reliable are not actually reliable. You are perfectly free to think that lying disinformation websites that are trying to twist your mind are more reliable than the type of websites that the editors of one of the top ten websites worldwide have concluded are reliable, and that Wikipedia is actually lying to you. You are perfectly free to believe that down is up and black is white and that east is west and that con artists are great leaders, based on what you read online written by paid professional liars who buy mansions and luxury cars through the art of deception and the extraction of your money from you and millions like you. You are free to believe whatever deceptions you want to believe, but Wikipedia editors are much more interested in reality. Cullen328 (talk) 06:28, 27 December 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.

What's this mean

On the article revision version history section of articles what's cur and prev mean? Also, when on the page where you can see the contributions of users, what's diff and hist mean? Hgh1985 (talk) 23:57, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Hgh1985. "Cur" means the current version. "Prev" means the previous version. "Diff" displays what has changed. See HELP:DIFF and "Hist" refers to the edit history of the article. Cullen328 (talk) 00:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hgh1985: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1174. Diff refers to a version of a page made by an editor, while hist will bring you to the edit history of that particular page. The first two terms you asked about should be thought of in relation to the revision, or diff, that you're looking at. Cur compares changes between the revision you're looking at with the most recent version of an article, while prev compares changes between the revision you're looking at with the one immediately before it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Hgh1985, here's an annotated example of a page history:

You can find more at H:HISTINTRO. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb Cool chart! David10244 (talk) 07:08, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

About Reference and Citation

Hi, A person's awards or nominations are not in newspapers but are clearly visible on the award organization's official Facebook and Twitter account, Can they be joined as reference or citation on a article? (this is a much needed question in article I am creating). Similar sources like Facebook : Twitter : Induvadhone (talk) 02:27, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia likes newspapers and other reliable, independent sources. How does a reader know it's not just a bored teen making up an award on Facebook? A certain skepticism is needed to protect Wikipedia from hoaxes or puffery by advertising organizations.

If the awarding organization is well-established and it's an official Facebook/Twitter/other social media account, then it's probably usable. I would consider it preferable to use their official website, if the information is there. See WP:SELFPUB and Wikipedia:Identifying and using self-published works. If you can find a source, it doesn't have to be in English. – Anon423 (talk) 03:31, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Induvadhone, is the organization notable and respected and is the award they hand out notable and respected? I recently learned that at least five different organizations hand out Edward R. Murrow Awards, and one hands out nearly 100 such awards a year. I could set up a website tomorrow to hand out a new Albert Einstein Award, with you as the first recipient, me as the second recipient, and anybody who agrees with me as subsequent award winners. An award like that should never be mentioned in a Wikipedia article. What we need is actual evidence of reliable independent sources discussing this award, so that mentioning it is a benefit to the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 04:11, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Nominations website link is not working or dead, only award organization's official Facebook and Twitter URLs are available. Can you tell me is SIIMA the right notable and respected award organization or not? Induvadhone (talk) 05:08, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

If it's the South Indian International Movie Awards, it seems to meet our general notability guideline: significant coverage (at least paragraphs) in reliable (trustworthy) secondary sources that are independent of the subject. If you're certain this is the organization you have in mind, that's good, though most well-established organizations are expected to have their own websites and/or third-party coverage.

If the nominations website is dead, you may be able to find it in an archive such as at archive.org. If that's unavailable, then perhaps the official social media pages are usable, but I wouldn't use it for more than a brief mention. To put it another way, if it's this difficult to find record of, it probably wasn't that significant. See what Cullen328 said. Absent further documentation or news coverage, I probably wouldn't consider it to materially contribute to the notability of a person (see WP:ANYBIO and WP:ARTIST). – Anon423 (talk) 22:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Why would a notable award organization let its website go dead? Weird. David10244 (talk) 10:19, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

This main official website link looks like http://siima.in/sf.php , so i found some other sources from their official award organisations social accounts like..

• South Indian international Movie Awards Official Twitter Post
• Official Facebook Post.

can we use this official social links as reference or citation?? Induvadhone (talk) 10:43, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Look, if source reliability is at all in question, lean toward no. A good rule of thumb is that if it's actually worth mentioning in the article, some journalist has probably mentioned it. You can use social media posts made by very well-established organizations (or figures about themselves), but if you're not sure, it's easier to not include it. The difficult thing is that you probably know better the answer for this situation than we do. If you're not sure, remember the content policies and ask yourself if the addition is neutral – you can be sure it's not promotional – and trustworthy. Do what you think makes the encyclopedia better. Include content that's authoritative and leave out what's not. – Anon423 (talk) 07:28, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

References

GA reassessment

Not sure if this is the right place to post this, but the GA reassesment for Russia has been open for over two weeks now. Is there any way I can help move this along? Firestar464 (talk) 04:43, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Firestar464, that reassessment has been open since early October. This is obviously a highly controversial topic. Is there some reason why you want to rush it along? Cullen328 (talk) 07:46, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I just personally felt that it was going on for long enough. While you definitely have a point about topic being controversial, I thought it was inactive. Didn't notice the comment by IP being new. Firestar464 (talk) 08:31, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Local man: Lester M. Griffith -

Lester M. Griffith - Designed the local Friedens Flag also the Somerset County Flag in which Friedens is in........ 2600:8800:23A2:8300:157A:7807:4467:4A67 (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1174. Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:17, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@2600:8800:23A2:8300:157A:7807:4467:4A67, welcome to the Teahouse. However, I could not understand your question. Lemonaka (talk) 09:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Awarding a Barnstar

There's this user who I want to give a barnstar. Where do I add it? The ⬡ Bestagon ^[t] [c]  14:12, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

For clarification, I have read WP:BARNSTARS which says put it on the recipient's talk page, but the recipient puts their previous barnstars on the user page. The ⬡ Bestagon ^[t] [c]  14:16, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@The Bestagon Best to stick to the convention that we normally only add stuff to other editor's Talk pages. If they want to move things to their user page later, that's up to them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:48, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

The easiest way to award a barnstar is to click on the little heart symbol next to the “add to watch list” button. There are many different types of barnstars for different things. Make sure you have selected the correct barnstar for the situation (like don’t give an admins barnstar to someone who isn’t an admin, etc.). Dinglepincter (talk) 14:57, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@The Bestagon, welcome to the teahouse. There's a heart button on the left-top of the user talk page. Press that button and it will open a message box called wikilove. Lemonaka (talk) 09:08, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Starting New Article in Sandbox

May I start another article in my Sandbox if my current draft has not been approved? CharlemagneJane (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes you may. And you can start additional sandboxes, e.g. User:CharlemagneJane/sandbox02. -- Hoary (talk) 00:16, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

To start another article in my sandbox, do I delete all of the writing in my sandbox and start over? I don't need it anymore but don't want to break any rules. CharlemagneJane (talk) 03:34, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@CharlemagneJane you can create multiple sandbox or draft pages. If you no longer need a sandbox page it's best to delete it. Simply add {{db-user}} to the page and one of the many janitors here will come along to mop it up. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 08:12, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! CharlemagneJane (talk) 13:05, 25 December 2022 (UTC)

@CharlemagneJane If you follow Hoary's advice, in the comment that you replied to, you can create a new sandbox, and it will start out empty... and you won't need to delete anything. Either way is fine. David10244 (talk) 06:50, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! I will try that. CharlemagneJane (talk) 13:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

How can I make a Biography Page of an artist

Hello,

I need assistance to make a biography page for an artist. Kindly help me with this. Rohit Jawalkar (talk) 12:23, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Notability criteria are at Wikipedia:Notability (people). If the subject is notable, see the advice at WP:Your first article, but the usual advice is to become familiar with editing existing articles before embarking on the more difficult task of writing a new article. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:31, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

Just make sure it’s appropriately sourced and you can demonstrate that the subject is notable. Read some other biography pages to see how they are written so you can see how to format it etc. Dinglepincter (talk) 18:39, 24 December 2022 (UTC)

@Rohit Jawalkar If you model a draft after an existing article, please make sure it's a good article. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 09:38, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

The best way to think about notability is how often the artist is mentioned in other publications. The publications you want to find will be ones that the artist doesn't control and cannot edit, and should have an editorial staff. The links others have provided cover this in more detail.--~TPW 15:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

question about composer and music director guidelines

if the subject has composed music for two telugu movies, and released in theatres and has featured in multiple reliable major newspapers, can WP accept the article under Wikipedia policies and guidelines? Induvadhone (talk) 12:16, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Induvadhone: Welcome to The Teahouse! For the most part, WP:NCOMPOSER has the answers you are looking for. Was the movie featured in multiple major newspapers, or was the music? If the latter, then perhaps. But notability is not inherited, so just having the movies being notable does not confer notability on the composer of some of the music of those movies. UtherSRG (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

thank you for ur valuble answer. Induvadhone (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

??

I added information to a page with an academic citation - this was information about a historic building in on a page about Maida Vale, an area of London. The building was founded by an individual of note with a Wilipedia page, BKS Iyengar. The edit was deleted twice. Could anyone suggest what I'm doing wrong?

Many thanks! Melissaloddo (talk) 08:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Melissaloddo, welcome to Teahouse. According to your user talk page, someone reverted your edits thought you have conflict of interests against the subject of the article. Lemonaka (talk) 08:41, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Lemonaka Thanks for your reply. But I don't have any conflict and the information I added is cited in an academic publication by a respected writer. Should I just try again? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Melissaloddo (talk • contribs)

Yes, you could try again with an edit summary Lemonaka (talk) 08:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I suggest you read the edsum on the edit that reverted you first. It tells you why you shouldn't try again. - Roxy the dog 08:53, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for your help. I'm new to Wikipedia so am learning the ropes :) Melissaloddo (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Follow-up questions to archived topics

Hello, I had some follow-up questions to a topic of mine, that was answered. I only found it in the archive and clicked on the "reply" button available. Now I see that my questions were deleted with a comment "Reverted new user modifying archives": so my guess is that follow-up questions to archived topics are not possible. I think of the following possibilities for me in the future:

1. Ask follow-up questions faster, before the topic goes into archive
2. Open a new topic for my follow-up questions

Please advise.

I think it is strange, though, if follow-up questions of that kind would not be tolerated, but a reply button is provided nevertheless.

Bernhard.rulla (talk) 16:28, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I already found the answer to my question, at the top of the archive page. No further answer necessary, thanks! Bernhard.rulla (talk) 17:16, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Non-notable South Park character

I doubt whether Clyde Donovan is notable enough for a separate article. There are no sources that focus on this particular character, and a few of the sources on that page don't seem to mention this character's name at all. I think almost all the information is already at List of students at South Park Elementary#Clyde Donovan or List of South Park characters#Clyde Donovan (why are these two separate pages anyway?) So am I wrong or should something be done about this? 2601:640:4000:3170:0:0:0:F6D3 (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

If you really don't feel the article should exist, you could propose its deletion, or nominate it for deletion at AfD, instructions are available here. However, since quite a lot of characters at the main list have individual articles, you might prefer to start a discussion at the talk page of the main list to check with other editors which of the characters are sufficiently notable to need a separate article. I personally worry about individual articles about characters from fiction, which often degenerate into plot summary fan-cruft. Elemimele (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Getting URLS from Microsoft Edge Browser?

Does anybody know how to get the text of the URL of a page rendered by the Microsoft Edge browser? Copying and pasting the URL that appears in the input box(?) at the top of the page makes a summary of the sort of site appear, not the URL. For example, copying and pasting "https://www.cnn.com" yields "CNN - Breaking News, Latest News and Videos." I'm asking in the context of filling the URL field in citations. With long URLs, it's hard to type in the URL manually. I could switch to a different browser, but I am asking specifically about Edge. I've searched the archives for this question but didn't see it. Thanks. – Kekki1978 ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 00:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kekki1978, I was able to replicate your problem. That is indeed annoying and unexpected behavior. One workaround I found is that it appears pasting it in some places will get you the actual URL. So if you go to google.com and paste the CNN link, it'll paste the URL rather than here where it will paste the name. You can then paste from there to the citation field. I hope that's at least a bit better than typing out the full URL manually each time! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 03:03, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kekki1978 and @Sdkb, it seems to be another feature added by Microsoft and enabled be default (probably for new users, since I don't have it and never heard of it until now). go to edge's settings > share, copy, and paste], then flip the URL copy & paste format default setting to plaintext. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:09, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sdkb, thanks for finding that workaround, and @Melecie, thanks for finding that approach! Yes, I just switched laptops and am working on a new installation of Edge. Changing that setting will make things much easier. I appreciate the help from both of you! – Kekki1978 ^{(talk ✉ | contribs ✎)} 07:32, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Kekki1978: Late to the party, here, but in some contexts you may have the option of "paste as" instead of just "paste". You can then paste as plain text. If Microsoft would just stop trying to be helpful, and stop fiddling with things that work fine as they are, and stop inflicting all these 'improvements' on us, the world would be a much happier and more efficient place. @Melecie: thanks for the more permanent solution. Elemimele (talk) 18:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, is this a valuable reference?

Woni Spotts has 50 articles, a BBC radio interview and classes named after her. Are these class links useable?

https://www.williamfordschool.co.uk/attachments/download.asp?file=1291&type=pdf

http://www.birchfld.bham.sch.uk/images/foryou/curriculum/2021-2022/t22/2.pdf

https://sevenmills.towerhamlets.sch.uk/year-6/

https://s3-eu-west-1.amazonaws.com/sh2-sevenmills-towerhamlets-sch-uk/media/downloads/year6meettheteacher.pdf

https://resources.finalsite.net/images/v1627062714/brightonacademiestrustorguk/adyxaivuvjifyljk4xhb/Newclassnames.pdf

https://www.schoolandcollegelistings.com/SG/Singapore/771860109498951/Dover-Court-International-School 20:49, 26 December 2022‎ TabbieCatz

TabbyCatz,the article about Spotts has been deleted twice, because Spotts was found not to be notable by the standards of Wikipedia. If much has changed since the deletion, you might want to create and submit a draft about her, with reliable sourcing to demonstrate her notability. However, her being a subject of study this year in a number of primary schools is not going to confer notability. Wait until she is written up in a major newspaper, and not just an interview. Journalists need to cover the phenomenon of Woni Spotts in depth first.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Great. It's confusing because people that visited every country have a wiki page with no media coverage, just a link to their travel org as proof of visiting every country. Thanks TabbieCatz (talk) 14:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I had a look but can't find reliable sources apart from interviews (these don't count for notability). As she's being used in educational resources, hopefully this will get picked up by education media at some point. I have wikilinked her name in the Jessica Nabongo article, to get her on the radar of Women in Red. Several of the Nabongo refs mention her. Tacyarg (talk) 14:56, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Linking Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Woni Spotts from 2019. Can't see the other deletion discussion. Tacyarg (talk) 15:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@TabbieCatz, you say,"...people that visited every country have a wiki page with no media coverage, just a link to their travel org as proof of visiting every country." @TabbieCatz, I'm not sure you're referring to Wikipedia. Can you point to one example?

There are many wikis on the Web, with a variety of standards for their articles. everybodywiki.com is an inclusionist encyclopedia on which you should be able to host your article.

Even if Wikipedia has an article with the characteristics you describe above, our standards have tightened as Wikipedia has grown to have millions of articles. We haven't managed to "clean house" yet. See Other stuff exists. Quisqualis (talk) 18:10, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok, thanks. TabbieCatz (talk) 18:13, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, the travelers are on Wikipedia. I don't want their pages removed. They are using a travel org. link to prove their travels. The travel org is new and not reliable. TabbieCatz (talk) 18:15, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@TabbieCatzHow about one example, as I don't find your claim to be credible. Quisqualis (talk) 18:20, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I was told the pages were created in 2016 when the rules were not as strict. TabbieCatz (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@TabbieCatz, 2016 is different from 2007. I still am incredulous regarding your assertion.-- Quisqualis (talk) 18:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Is this a valid page for me to try and publish?

I would like to draft a page for a charitable organisation called Iyengar Yoga London Maida Vale but I don't want to waste time if this seems like inappropriate content. I'd be grateful for any views. Many thanks in advance!

Rationale for page:

Iyengar Yoga London Maida Vale is a charitable centre founded by BKS Iyengar in 1983. It was the first Iyengar yoga institute outside of India and Iyengar yoga is now the most widely practised method of yoga in the world. BKS Iyengar taught at the centre and helped fund the original site and a new building constructed there which was Europe's first purpose built yoga studio. BKS Iyengar taught at the centre and stayed there on his visits to London.

The site is of historical as well as architectural interest, “One of the main theories behind yoga is that the mind must be freed from all external disturbance and distractions to achieve inner peace. This philosophy has been translated into the design” (2)

(1) Suzanne Newcombe https://www.equinoxpub.com/home/yoga-britain/

(2) The Architects Journal, July 1994 by Deborah Singmaster, "Simple approach helps yoga hall unite mind and matter"

(3) Transcription of original typed speech held at Iyengar Yoga London archive: https://iyengaryogalondon.co.uk/bks-iyengars-speech-at-opening-of-maida-vale-institute-november-1997/Melissaloddo (talk) 16:25, 27 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]

(4) Goldberg 2016, p. 384.Goldberg, Elliott (2016). The Path of Modern Yoga: The History of an Embodied Spiritual Practice. Rochester, Vermont: Inner Traditions. ISBN 978-1-62055-567-5.Melissaloddo (talk) 17:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Melissaloddo, in order to have an article accepted into Wikipedia, you need to be aware of Wikipedia's notability criteria, as well as the characteristics of a reliable source. Also, please check out Your first article. Quisqualis (talk) 17:43, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much I'll have a read Melissaloddo (talk) 18:44, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Empty section in the Direct democracy article

In the Direct democracy article, the section titled "Electronic direct democracy" appears to be empty. Looking at the article's history there seems to have been some disputes where that section might have been accidentally deleted. Can someone check what happened to that section and where it was deleted or just wasn't there in the first place and what should be done to fix it?

Direct democracy#Electronic direct democracy CoderThomasB (talk) 09:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@CoderThomasB, my impression is that the section was created without content on the assumption that it would be trivial to create, as a subset of the material found at E-democracy, No one seems to have tackled it yet, though. Quisqualis (talk) 18:47, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

How can i tell what a credible source is?

Are any of these credible sources and, if not please share the list of credible sources so I can know in the future. Is it just online news? Please notate the "credible" sources and all of their forms.

Thanks! 2600:8802:3A12:E700:E1D8:F4B:925C:B2A (talk) 15:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. I can say that IMDB is not considered a reliable("credible") source as it is user editable. Reliable sources generally have a reputation of fact checking and editorial control. It may help you to read WP:RS as well as to view a list of commonly used sources and evaluations of their reliability. 331dot (talk) 15:10, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources Karenthewriter (talk) 15:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! TabbieCatz (talk) 15:48, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I looked at some of these earlier after seeing and responding to your question about Woni Spotts. There are some sources here I think are reliable, but the problem for Spotts specifically is that interviews don't count for establishing notability. So https://travelnoire.com on a brief look seems ok to me - the name of the article's author is given and there is no indication that the content is promotional or paid for. But, again for Spotts specifically, the article I was looking at was an interview. You might find WP:Interviews useful (note that it is an essay and doesn't have policy status). I will add also that https://www.fotolog.com/woni-spotts looks as if it is a synthesis of interviews with Spotts which were published in other sources, so isn't additional coverage. Re the Sage Journals link, I would expect that to be a reliable source, but without the link to the actual article it is difficult to say. It could be reliable but not significant coverage of the subject. Apologies if I have got the wrong end of the stick and you are not evaluating these sources with a view to Spotts. Tacyarg (talk) 16:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

If the Sage Journals article is this one, that seems reasonable coverage of Spotts from an independent and reliable source. The author says less about Spotts than Nabongo, but does discuss Spotts, particularly towards the end. Another couple of sources of this quality and I think Spotts would not be at risk of deletion again. Tacyarg (talk) 16:35, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, Woni Spotts has a lot of coverage but it's difficult to tell what is acceptable. I'd like to create an article because she was overlooked for an Instagram personality. She was never allowed to provide verification but it's all on her page along with most of the coverage. https://www.wonispotts.com/media CNN and other outlets were forced to acknowledge Ms. Spotts. https://face2faceafrica.com/article/with-173-of-195-countries-visited-this-ugandan-woman-is-set-to-be-the-first-african-to-travel-the-world Thank you for all of your advice. TabbieCatz (talk) 17:42, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@TabbieCatz, I fear you misconstrue what Wikipedia is for. Wikipedia is a serious encyclopedia, and not a back-up plan for when a subject is overlooked by Insta. Rather than spin your wheels with Wikipedia right now, consider the possibility that it may be WP:TOOSOON for an article on Spotts, and wait for any major media coverage to be published. Not every interesting and popular person meets the criteria for inclusion in Wikipedia. Patience.-- Quisqualis (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

How do i add pictures or images to articles?

Kindly put me through on how to add images to articles on wiki page, thanks.

SANGODINA (talk) 22:27, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@SANGODINA Welcome to the Teahouse. Basic rule of thumb: any random picture you find online is probably under some sort of copyright and can't be used on Wikipedia. Now see WP:IMAGES. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:53, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Is there any photos of Champagne Delamotte that can be used on the article for it.

I'm trying to find photos of Champagne Delamotte to add that are copyright free. I don't know how to add photos either. Any help is appreciated. Hellworld72 (talk) 00:19, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hellworld72, the text of Champagne Delamotte has serious problems. Adding photos to this article would do nothing to fix those problems (or to lessen the risk of deletion). I suggest that you work (from reliable sources, of course) on the text. -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Question: Are these Reliable Sources?

I'm trying to expand You.com with information regarding the brand-new YouChat (looks to me like a potential ChatGPT competitor), but I found only 2 sources that seem reliable at first glance:

[4]

[5]

Are these reliable? (Sorry about this, but I am relatively new to this encyclopedia [technically not, but I've only done edits to my userspace before I did a minor edit to ChatGPT]) EeJayEss2008 (talk) 03:38, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@EeJayEss2008, both articles appear to be compilations of what YouChat and its people have said about it (unreliable). What is needed is objective reviews.-- Quisqualis (talk) 06:56, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Oh. Waiting for the likes of The New York Times to cover this. EeJayEss2008 (talk) 06:58, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Turns out those 2 sources were the only two sources I could find. Someone-123-321 (talk) 03:46, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Catagories

What does this mean and how can I fix it on the Ray Byars article? This article needs additional or more specific categories. Please help out by adding categories to it so that it can be listed with similar articles. (December 2022) CharlemagneJane (talk) 21:24, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, CharlemagneJane, and welcome to the Teahouse. At present Ray Byars is in only two categories: Category:1899 births and Category:1952 deaths. I assume that the Infobox put it into those categories automatically. It needs to be added to some more to group the article with other articles about similar subjects; for example Category:American motorcycle racers - but perhaps it should be in a subcategory of that.

You can add it to a category by picking the "(+)" at the end of the list of categories at the end of the article: you start typing the name of the category, and it will offer you the available ones. ColinFine (talk) 21:57, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, CharlemagneJane. How about Category:People from Beaumont, Texas? Cullen328 (talk) 22:17, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you; yes, I will try to add this category, but might need help. This is new to me. Please be patient with me. I really want to make it right. CharlemagneJane (talk) 00:04, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I tried to add a category but it is in red at the end of the sources on Ray Byars. Can you fix it for me? I don't know what I did wrong. CharlemagneJane (talk) 00:20, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@CharlemagneJane, you may want to try Wikipedia:HotCat. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine "the "(+)" at the end of the list of categories" is a setting that needs to be chosen, though. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:10, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you: I didn't remember that. Apologies for givng you unhelpful advice, @CharlemagneJane. ColinFine (talk) 09:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Editing football team's kits

Hello i tried to edit a football team kit (the third one). It was quite succesfull, the color kit was shown, but remains visible on the back of the kit the description of each item (for example "genoa2223t.pgn)... any help? Thanks Bertox77 (talk) 10:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not sure I quite understand your comment. Do you need help with editing, writing articles, the user interface, or another aspect of Wikipedia? Since your account seems to be relatively new, you may find Help:Introduction a useful resource. Iscargra (talk) 11:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

to be more clear, check the third kit of the team on this page :

https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genoa_Cricket_and_Football_Club Bertox77 (talk) 11:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

That is the Italian Wikipedia. This forum is for the English Wikipedia. All Wikipedias have different policies and management. The Italian Wikipedia seems to have a help page here on where to ask questions. Iscargra (talk) 11:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Working to make Draft:Stoneface and Terminal suitable for approval

Ive been working to improve my Draft article Draft:Stoneface and Terminal .

As artists in an underground genre (trance and progressive) it makes notability from mainstream media articles difficult. I believe however they have a claim at notability through section 5 of the "Criteria for musicians and ensembles" in the guidelines. I just added citations to the releases they had under the major labels, Sony ATV, and Universal Music Group which should qualify it.

If the above does not work, might someone be able to give me a hand with this? Mystixa (talk) 13:46, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Mystixa, you would have to find someone with an interest in that subject who is willing to help you. I would suggest asking around in one of the relevant projects groups. The teahouse is for answering basic questions about editing, not recruiting people to do things for you. Cheers Dinglepincter (talk) 14:53, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mystixa That answer was a bit harsh, but it's correct. David10244 (talk) 07:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Yea it wasn't helpful at all. ..and it was also inaccurate as I wasn't 'recruiting people to do things' for me. Many other questions here are asking the selfsame question on other topics and haven't received such a dismissive answer. Mystixa (talk) 14:21, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, you can ask here for assistance with an article, but beyond detailed explanations of how to do things, the Teahouse hosts don't often jump in very deep into actual article writing. Although, I have seen several of the hosts make corrections to mis-formatted references. As Dinglepincter said, the Wiki projects are a better place to look for willing collaborators.

If you don't find collaborators, you might just need to submit the article for review, and you will get feedback. I see a non-sentence "The pair met in school and where and would DJ school parties", and a sentence fragment that starts with "Head A&R". You should fix these. Good luck! David10244 (talk) 11:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Mystixa Ping. David10244 (talk) 11:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

non-profit organization notability

I created the page Sourland Conservancy and it was recently flagged with "The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guidelines for companies and organizations." I originally had one citation which referenced the organization's own website but I just changed this to reference a secondary source (New Jersey Monthly). Is this change enough reason to remove the Notability template? There are 3 more citations referencing secondary sources. JoeKaz (talk) 16:00, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

JoeKaz Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The issue is not just the sources themselves, but their content. The article currently does little more than document the existence of the organization. A Wikipedia article must do more, it must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the organization, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Nonprofits are treated no differently than for profits. "Significant coverage" is that which goes beyond merely telling about the organization and what it does; it goes into detail about its importance or significance as the source sees it. 331dot (talk) 16:05, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree with @331dot and not @Dinglepincter in this case. Adding the additional reference doesn't tell us why this organization is notable. Why should we care about this organization, or take mental note of it? What sets it apart from other organizations that are doing similar work? We agree that it exists, but is planting 10,000 trees significant enough to merit an encyclopedia entry? I am not sure. David10244 (talk) 11:50, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi JoeKaz, yes, your change is sufficient to remove the notability tag. Cheers Dinglepincter (talk) 17:23, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

How to qualify for an editor

Hello, I have some questions in order to clarify based on which criteria someone qualifies to relöease draft articles:

• ''a minimum of 500 undeleted edits to articles'' How is that number counted? Can I see my statistics on that somewhere? I do not find it on my profile... so far.
• ''thoroughly read and understood the reviewing instructions''. How is that understanding verified? Who verifies? On demand?
• ''a demonstrated understanding of the policies and guidelines ...'' Again, who verifies, after what kind of trigger?

Thanks in advance!

Bernhard.rulla (talk) 17:22, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla You can find out how many edits you have made to articles by navigating to your contributions page at Special:Contributions/Bernhard.rulla and using the drop-down menu "Search for contributions" to restrict the search to article space. There are two sorts of reviewers of new pages. One set look at draft articles and the details of how to participate is given at WP:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Participants. The second set are the new page patrollers, who check all new pages that haven't gone through the WP:AFC process. Their joining criteria are at WP:New_pages_patrol/School. Anyone who is autoconfirmed, (which you are already) can create articles in mainspace: if you do that, it will be subject to attention by the new page patrollers and will not be indexed by search engines until they have done so, or 6 months have elapsed. Bottom line: inexperienced users should always use WP:AFC. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:56, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla: @Michael D. Turnbull: Even experienced editors occasionally use AFC. I've been on Wikipedia 16 years, an administrator for over 10 years, and if I feel unsure about the notability of a topic, I can submit a draft to AFC and get some useful advice. For example, I started an draft about a best-selling author but the reviewer felt the sourcing was borderline for the author but stronger for the book, so after letting it sit for a year I finally re-cast it into an article about the book series, Gameknight999. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:11, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Anachronist Thanks so much for that reply! OK, I get it and will exercise in patience. I understand that Wikipedia needs reliable contents in order to be credible. I want to support that. Cheers from Germany. Bernhard.rulla (talk) 10:24, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla, @Michael D. Turnbull To find your edit count, it's easier to go to that Contributions page and click "Edit Count" at the bottom. That's a direct link to a page that will show how many edits you have made in various categories, and you won't have to filter. David10244 (talk) 12:25, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft question

Can drafts explain information? 172.56.216.64 (talk) 19:44, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP user. Welcome to Teahouse. I do not quite understand your question. What information specifically? To understand what drafts are see WP:DRAFT. It's a space to make experimental/test edits before an article goes into regular mainspace. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:49, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

I am just asking that could have drafts would explain information to users. 172.56.216.64 (talk) 19:51, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Drafts should be articles that will ultimately explain information to readers, but as drafts, they do it very inefficiently, because they are not listed by Google or other search engines, they will not be linked from other Wikipedia articles, and they're quite hard to find (unless you know how to use the Wikipedia search system rather well). Think of them as unpublished articles, waiting for publication as soon as those writing them feel they're sufficiently complete. Elemimele (talk) 19:57, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Elemimele and Shushugah:  OK, question done 172.56.216.64 (talk) 20:00, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Important to note that drafts that are not edited in 6 months will be deleted. David10244 (talk) 12:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

How to recover my Sandbox

I foolishly "Published£ the content of my Sandbox when I wished to simply "save" my work. I have now, quite rightly, had it declined twice. I seem to need to have the text deleted so that I can again access an empty Sandbox. How can the current content be deleted? Many thanks Stevepem (talk) 12:21, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Stevepem. You can simply WP:BLANK your sandbox if you want to start working on something new. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:25, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Very many thanks for your swift reply. I will try to do that. Stevepem (talk) 12:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi again Stevepem. You may and probably should remove all of the content from your sandbox. There's no need for the AfC decline notices and comments at the top of the page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:45, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

good to go now

Please, I believe that this page now meets all the requirements to be featured on Wikipedia. Draft:BJ_Sam

Though It was rejected before because some of the sources used wasn't independent, reputable nor reliable but now all the cited sources mentioned in the draft are from independent, reputable, authoritative and widely read sources. Please kindly review and approve this draft Aniekan7777 (talk) 22:18, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Aniekan7777: No. Not until you and User:Rubiesar comply with WP:PAID requirements, which is a legal obligation agreed upon creation of an account here. Are you the same people? What is your association with the subject? ~Anachronist (talk) 23:05, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Both accounts now blocked for undisclosed paid editing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 23:09, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull The OP posted a "what do I do" (about getting the article approved) question to User talk:Aniekan7777, after being blocked. They declared that they do own both account names, and also the music company. And they still don't understand what "paid" means. David10244 (talk) 12:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Well, blocked. Anyway, the sentence structure is convoluted in this short article. It's hard to tell which thought in a sentence is being referenced by a footnote. The claim "the 3rd most available television network in the word [sic]" is not supported. David10244 (talk) 12:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Requesting Peer Review

I wanted to try out peer review for a draft I'm working on. As instructed in the directions I added {{subst:PR}} to the top of the article's talk page and saved it, producing a message of "This template should be substituted on the article's talk page." What does that mean? It's already on the talk page!? Iguana0000 (talk) 14:43, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Iguana0000: The peer review process is not for draft articles. If you go to Draft:Welfare Colonialism, you will see "Review waiting, please be patient.", indicating that the draft has already been submitted for review via the articles for creation process. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 14:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

It's not clear whether the "Welfare Colonialism" of the draft refers to

1. Investment by wealthy organisations in poor communities, or to
2. the belief (or fact, or theory) that such investment generally turns out to have bad consequences for the communities.

The draft needs to be clear on this, and to use the term consistently. Its current state suggests PoV writing, by someone who believes that the results of such investment must be negative. (I agree with this belief. But it shouldn't be stated in Wikipedia's voice.) Maproom (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Creating a Wikipedia page for my father, a published author

My father (Bernard J. Packer) is the author of 12 novels, 4 that were published in the 1970s and 1980s, and the last eight self-published and available on Mr. Bezos's platform.

The author has led an interesting life, traveled extensively, and the film rights to his first published novel were opted, though the powers-that-be in Hollywood decided to produce "The Boys From Brazil" and shelved my father's's darker, twistier revenge plot.

I have the text (biographical data) and external links prepared. Are there Wikipedia contributors willing to complete the entry (even for a minor fee)? He's 89 years of age and deserves a modicum of recognition. I run two small companies, and as the sole employee, am hesitant to undertake too many projects right now. Language Service (talk) 16:22, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, @Language Service welcome to the Teahouse, I strongly advice you not to do so, because this is clearly WP:COI Lemonaka (talk) 17:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Language Service, I do understand what you're trying to do, and it's admirable, of course. So I'm going to try to be tactful--a quality for which I'm not noted. I'm afraid that one does not get a "page for oneself" on Wikipedia to achieve recognition. It's really more the other way around; if one has attained recognition, someone might then write an ARTICLE ABOUT that person. Wikipedia is ideally one of the last places to give someone recognition--after they've been recognized by others. And then, it won't be a "page for" your father, because neither you nor your father will have any control over it.

I see someone put a notice on your own talk page about paid contributions; you responded that you are not being paid and don't expect to be. I wonder if someone put that there because of this (it WAS a "canned" notice), where you proposed paying a small fee to a contributor. That, of course, would entail some contributor working for a fee--for someone, you, with a direct interest in the subject. The ideal contributors to Wikipedia are all volunteers, and many of them frown on people who get fees to contribute (and many of those who take fees are scam artists, anyway). Uporządnicki (talk) 18:00, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Language Service. First, I would like to welcome you to the Teahouse and thank you for coming here to inquire about an article about your father rather than attempting to write an article first. Much of what is said above is very sound advice and I would recommend you consider it before making a decision. There is nothing on Wikipedia which specifically forbids you from writing a Wikipedia article on your father or assisting other editors with writing an article on your father provided it is written in a neutral and encyclopedic way cited to reliable and verifiable sources. Like my fellow editors above I would caution you though, that neither you nor your father would have any control over what was written at any given time. This could lead to much heartache and consternation for both you and your father so you both should weigh and consider that. The concern with you authoring such an article would be your closeness and obvious fondness for your father. I can tell you love him because you are here wanting him recognized for what I am sure has been a very successful and truly remarkable life. Because of that fact it may be difficult for you to maintain a neutral position. That isn't a bad thing. It's actually commendable and admirable but makes you a terrible source. I learned long ago that something's worth and value is not dependent upon whether it has a Wikipedia article or not, neither is it's truth confirmed or denied by it. The articles in this encyclopedia are primarily supposed to be what reliable sources say about a subject (i.e. notability). Please do not pay someone to write an article about your father. I fear it will not go as you hope and I would hate to see you or your father affected negatively. --ARoseWolf 18:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

user creating multiple accounts

What do I do if I suspect a user has created several accounts with different names in order to make it appear like more users support their position in an argument about an article? Red Slapper (talk) 19:25, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Please see WP:SPI. Shantavira|^{feed me} 19:35, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Should a WikiProject be created that focuses on a single aspect of an article?

Hey. I was considering making a WikiProject based on adding audio files to people's infoboxes. However, I'm not sure if that function would be critical enough to warrant a WP. Additionally, if I recall correctly, WPs require deticated articles, and unless we're willing to slap a WP Voices in Infoboxes banner in the talk pages of people born in the past 150 years, I'm not sure if this is a critical topic that requires the formation of a WP. I primarily wanted to establish one since I was starting to add audio files to biographical articles and wanted aid from fellow editors to hasten the process. Should I still form a seperate WP or should this matter be relegated to either WP Biography or WP Infobox? Knightoftheswords281 (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Volunteers

Is everyone on Wikipedia a volunteer? Is there anyone that is employed by Wikipedia? CharlemagneJane (talk) 01:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Nearly everyone you may notice editing and participating in discussions here is solely a volunteer, although Wikimedia.org employees can choose to volunteer on their free time. Paid Wikimedia employees maintain the servers and do programming and administrative work, among other things. Quisqualis (talk) 01:19, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Are the names of paid employees public information? CharlemagneJane (talk) 01:25, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

You may see some names of higher-ups on the Wikimedia.org website. The rest have no reason to be publicized there, for the sake of their privacy. Quisqualis (talk) 01:29, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

So, are you saying that some employee do not fall under the "Open Records Act?" CharlemagneJane (talk) 20:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Some names at Category:Wikimedia Foundation people subcats. There is also the founder's talkpage, User talk:Jimbo Wales. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:43, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

When Wikimedia Foundation staffers edit, which is very rare except when discussing relationships between the Foundation and the volunteer community, you will always see "WMF" in their signatures. Cullen328 (talk) 08:50, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! CharlemagneJane (talk) 20:06, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Very interesting! CharlemagneJane (talk) 20:08, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Paid editing is against Wikipedia's rules unless disclosed properly, per WP:PAID. The vast majority of editors are volunteers. However, the Wikimedia Foundation runs and hosts Wikipedia and other Wikimedia Projects. Their employees are paid and will have "WMF" in their user signatures. Iscargra (talk) 10:33, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you; this is interesting to know. CharlemagneJane (talk) 20:05, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Can one link to a specific portion of a graph via redirect?

Hey y'all. I'm working on the article List of Generation Z slang and I was wondering if it was possible to create redirects that direct the reader towards specific entries in the graph (e.g, [[Rizz (slang}]] to the part of the graph where Rizz is actually mentioned, rather than just redirecting towards the article)? I'm primarily asking this to better format the disambiguation pages for a lot of these terms. Knightoftheswords281 (talk) 20:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

{{Anchor}} should do the trick! DecafPotato (talk) 20:39, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Company taken over by new management, but can't make any edits

Hi, we have recently taken over a company through NCLT (Indian court),and all the assets including patent, digital assets, etc belong to us by the order of court. but whenever I try to edit the page, it is edited by others to previous page. I have also put in the order of the court stating the our new ownership. the issue is that previous page seems to be very negative stating how the employees resigned, how the owner went bankrupt ( who is not the owner anymore is still shown to be the owner) and company was dysfunctional. I want to edit that page and show that who are the current owners and we are back into production , is there any way I can get that old page down and get a new one? thanks in advance Sanchitsekhwal (talk) 10:51, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles are not owned by the subjects of their articles. You did not buy the article when you bought the company. See WP:COI. All editors here have to abide by all Wikipedia policies on editing, including subjects of articles when it comes to editng those articles. Heiro 10:54, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I agree, but how can I make edits to that page. they keep on removing the edit. I am citing the order of the court also. pl help Sanchitsekhwal (talk) 10:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Sanchitsekhwal. I've added a welcome template to your user talk page that contains (blue) links to various Wikipedia pages that you might find helpful. Please take the time to read through these pages because I believe they will help you understand some things about Wikipedia that you might not know and how to proceed in making changes to the article about your company. You might also want to take a look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content because it further clarifies what Heiro mentioned above about "owning" pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:03, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Sanchitsekhwal Your contribution history shows no edits except here at the Teahouse. Which article are you referring to? The correct way for editors who have a WP:PAID relationship to a company to suggest changes to the article is to make {{edit request}}s on its Talk Page, for non-involved volunteers to decide what should be included in the live article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:06, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello Sanchitsekhwal, and welcome to the Teahouse. One of the reasons why you should not edit that article yourself is that you may be tempted to remove or reduce the "negative" material in the article. Wikipedia will not remove that part of the company's history just because the owner wants it removed; but if you make an edit request with a reliable source that says that the company is under new ownership, the article can certainly be edited to say that. What it may not say, until there is a reliable independent source to cite, is anything about the company's intentions or behaviour since it was taken over. ColinFine (talk) 21:14, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Review of draft: Larry Packer

Hi - How do I get someone to review my draft article on Larry Packer and provide useful feedback. My previous attempts to publish were denied. I've addressed all the issues as I see it. Thank you, Phil Hildenbrand

CMScrapbook (talk) 19:49, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, CMScrapbook. I guess this is about User:CMScrapbook/sandbox. Your draft is filled with promotional language and name-dropping, which violates the Neutral point of view, a core content policy. Vast swathes of your draft are unreferenced, which violates Verifiability, another core content policy. In other words, the draft needs a lot of work before it can be accepted. What is your relationship with Larry Packer? Cullen328 (talk) 21:23, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Article Creation

 Courtesy link: Draft:Marius Andrei Feder

Hello here, I a new editor and iIcreated my first article ,but it was not accepted ,and iIdont' seem to get the reason for it.

Thanks for your help in advance. QDJ22 (talk) 18:52, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello QDJ22 and welcome to the Teahouse. The reason given is in the edit summery of the decline. [6] --ARoseWolf 19:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, QDJ22, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you have made the extremely common mistake of assuming that, because Wikipedia is "the encyclopaedia that anyone can edit" that means that anyone can create a new article without studying what this involves. This usually leads to a lot of frustration and disappointment.

I always advise new editors to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to existing articles before they try it. (I see you did spend a day making small improvements; but copy edits, while they are important, will not give you a chance to learn anything significant about Wikipedia's policies).

Please read WP:notability. I observe that not one of your sources meets the triple requirement of being reliable, independent and having significant coverage of Feder. ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Assistance With Newfold Digital Article Draft

Hello, all! Posting on the Teahouse to request help with Newfold Digital – as disclosed on my user page, I work for Newfold Digital.

For some quick background, I originally posted here on the Teahouse several months ago to request assistance creating a draft for a new article about Newfold Digital, a large holding company in the web presence business, which owns companies like Bluehost, Web.com, HostGator, Network Solutions and many more. Newfold Digital was formed from the combination of the holding companies Endurance International Group and Web.com Group; these holding companies no longer exist as a result (although the Web.com brand, which is distinct from the former holding company bearing its name, still exists).

I received assistance from a very helpful editor, and with his extensive help, put together an article draft. It was declined once, and I worked with that same editor to make improvements to the sourcing. It has been declined again, today, and so I am reaching out to the Teahouse in hopes of getting someone with interest in the industry/subject to take a look with a fresh set of eyes and let me know what I’m missing. I am very new to Wikipedia and would greatly appreciate any insight or guidance from a more experienced editor.

There are some key points I am confused on, that I hope to get some clarification on so I can make edits:

1) Notability. I believe Newfold Digital is notable based on the sources provided, which indicate it is the parent company for dozens of brands, many of them quite prominent in the web presence industry. Endurance International Group and Web.com each have their own Wikipedia pages, many of the brands under Newfold Digital have their own Wikipedia pages and all of these were evidently deemed notable; shouldn’t Newfold Digital, as the parent company of those brands and the combination of the holding companies that previously owned those brands, be even more notable? The sources provided for the article outline this ownership and the relationship between Newfold Digital and the previous holding companies.

2) WP:TOOSOON. The company has been around for nearly two years and there are over a dozen independent sources provided to speak to its notability; at what point is it no longer too soon? I feel there is some urgency here, because Endurance International Group and Web.com Group no longer exist; with millions of customers served by the brands under Newfold Digital, I feel there is a public interest in having information about the current company available on Wikipedia, rather than information about companies that ceased to exist nearly two years ago.

3) Routine sources – I am not sure what makes the sources provided ‘routine;’ coverage about web presence companies is rarely splashy or sexy; it is a large industry in terms of revenue and number of customers, but not something the New York Times, for example, is likely to report on with any frequency. Many of the brands under the Newfold Digital umbrella have their own articles with similar sourcing, and it is unclear to me how the sourcing could be improved in this regard. The sources provided are industry-specific, but credible, along with some local sources based in Jacksonville, Florida, because the company is based in Jacksonville, Florida.

4) Adding a mention of Newfold Digital to the sub-brands/holding companies – the last editor to comment on the article suggested adding a mention of Newfold Digital to the Web.com page; but Web.com is only one of the many brands Newfold Digital owns, and it would need to be added to all of them. It seems odd to me to mention a company on dozens of articles and have no article explaining what the company is, why it exists or what it does.

5) Reader experience. Ultimately, I am concerned the current reader experience on this subject is a poor one; at best, a reader who wishes to learn more about this company that owns many prominent brands in the web industry can read about a holding company (EIG) that hasn’t existed for nearly two years, with a brief note about the new holding company and no further information. I feel this is a poor reader experience, and one I believe the new article will rectify. I am not sure how adding a note about Newfold Digital to a number of existing articles without an article to link back to improves this experience.

I would appreciate any insight the editors here on the Teahouse would be willing to provide. I am open to taking any action to improve the article, and any help would be greatly appreciated! Zach at Newfold (talk) 17:15, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Zach at Newfold, I've checked the first six references in the article. One of them is behind a paywall, but the other five all report on what senior employees of the company have said, and so don't count as independent and don't contribute to establishing the subject as notable. If some of the other sources you cite are independent, you could consider removing some of the non-independent ones, so as to make the good ones easier for a reviewer to find. Maproom (talk) 17:30, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for taking a look @Maproom! Just want to make sure I understand – any article that includes a quote from company figures is not independent? Even if the outlet is independent/not owned or paid by the company in question and is just reporting on them? Isn't it pretty common for news articles to include quotes from their subjects? Zach at Newfold (talk) 18:39, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Zach at Newfold, you're correct that quotations are very often found in news and feature articles. There is a difference between using a pithy quote and simply being a conduit for the words of the subject. When it seems like we are transmitting "from the subject's lips to Wikipedia's pages", we have to draw a line. Quotations don't make a source verboten, but they can be a tipoff that the media being sourced are just echoing interviews, press releases, Twitter and the like. Hope this helps. Quisqualis (talk) 19:23, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your response! That seems like a tough distinction to make. Is there a set of guidelines on this? I guess my confusion comes from the fact that these are independent media sources... the Jacksonville Daily Record, for example. It's a weekly newspaper, it publishes articles of interest to people in the Jacksonville area. If it publishes an article about Newfold Digital, and includes a direct quote from an executive, I don't see how that compromises the independence of the source. Would an article from a national newspaper of record like The New York Times or The Washington Post be held to the same level of scrutiny? Zach at Newfold (talk) 22:07, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Zach at Newfold To use ColinFine's words: 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.

That's why sources that are mostly interviews are not great. It does take some getting used to, as you indicate. David10244 (talk) 12:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate your feedback! If you have a minute or two, could you take a look at this source I included in the article? It discusses Newfold Digital from the perspective of people unrelated to the company, who have chosen to publish a discussion of the company and related industry matters. Is this the type of source I should be looking for? Zach at Newfold (talk) 17:26, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

To address some of your questions:

Notability is not inherited. Just because this company owns a lot of notable properties doesn't mean that this specific company is notable. The general notability guideline lays out the basics of what's required, but the sources can't be press releases or anything else company executives can arrange to put out there. Wikipedia also isn't a directory of companies; readers come here for information about notable subjects, not all subjects.

You may also want to read up on the conflict of interest and paid editing policies. ~TPW 19:36, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the response! I understand the requirement about general notability, thanks to assistance from an editor on here a few months ago. With his help, I selected independent sources, rather than press releases. I understand based on a comment above that some of the quotes may seem like they are coming directly from the executives, but I am not sure how to avoid that. Almost all articles about companies such as this one includes quotes from employees at the company. It seems a shame to exclude a fact-based article from an independent newspaper or website simply because it includes a quote from an executive. I am unsure where to find sources that do not include quotes from the subjects being covered.

I've read up on the conflict of interest and paid editing policies as well, which is why I've disclosed my conflict of interest and submitted a draft for review, rather than attempting to make edits. I want this article to be entirely unbiased and factual and am trying to get it into that state.

My efforts here are not promotional; I understand Wikipedia is not for marketing. But today there is an outdated and inaccurate article about a company that no longer exists live on Wikipedia, on the one hand. And then, on the other hand, there is a draft of a new article, which contains accurate, up-to-date information about a current, active company, which has been rejected twice. And the old article should be no more notable than the new article, because it uses similar sources and covers similar subject matter. The only major difference between the two is that one is outdated and inaccurate and one is not. So, I am scratching my head a bit here.
Zach at Newfold (talk) 22:02, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

A comment, now that I've read more of the draft. Two non-notable private equity forms have formed a joint enterprise, which owns a bunch of other businesses, many of them notable. This draft is about the joint enterprise. But it's barely a thing at all, it's just a bookkeeping exercise. Maproom (talk) 20:29, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

“(…) it's barely a thing at all, it’s just a bookkeeping exercise.” Would you say the same thing applies to any parent company, joint venture, corporate group or holding company? There are many articles on Wikipedia covering those, including the outdated and inaccurate one about Endurance International Group that is currently live. One example: List of holding companies Another: Category:Joint ventures Zach at Newfold (talk) 21:45, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Zach at Newfold Please read other stuff exists. It could be that these other articles are also inappropriate and simply not addressed yet. As this is primarily a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to get by us. 331dot (talk) 09:59, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for sharing that, it was helpful! If I'm understanding it correctly, the 'other stuff exists' argument can be valid or invalid depending on how it is used. In the case of using this argument for the creation of an article, I would want to "(...) demonstrate that articles of a similar nature and construct are included throughout Wikipedia." The joint ventures category alone includes 331 articles. There are 127 articles on holding companies based in the United States alone: Category:Holding companies of the United States That's not to say that this alone qualifies Draft:Newfold Digital for an article; I know that the sources provided need to demonstrate notability and I have been working to achieve that end. But I don't think the nature of the company should disqualify it from notability, given that articles of a similar nature and construct are included throughout Wikipedia. Zach at Newfold (talk) 17:22, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I would say the same about any entity which does nothing itself except owning things, and is itself owned. Maproom (talk) 21:56, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft possibly never released... ?

Hello, I have a new article in draft status. It has, as of today, the note saying "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 3,681 pending submissions waiting for review."

So, if the drafts are reviewed in no specific order and the number of pending submissions and the number of estimated time stay on the same level... then the odds of my draft staying a draft permanently are better than the odds of my draft getting actually released some day. Am I wrong? How are you other, more experienced authors deailing with this issue? Bernhard.rulla (talk) 11:06, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Bernhard.rulla, welcome to the teahouse. The idea that "if the drafts are reviewed in no specific order and the number of pending submissions and the number of estimated time stay on the same level... then the odds of [your] draft staying a draft permanently are better than the odds of [your] draft getting actually released some day" is incorrect in reasoning because it does not take into account the amount of new drafts being submitted. I would say because there is no specific order, assuming that the queue size does not change (and that reviews are done completely randomly), the probability of your article being reviewed on the first day is as good as any day, however there are specific categories for submissions that are pending for a long time which may be patrolled/cleared by patrollers. Justiyaya 11:34, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Justiyaya Thank you for your reply to my question.

Could you elaborate a bit more on your sentence "...there are specific categories for submissions that are pending for a long time which may be patrolled/cleared by patrollers."

What/who are "patrollers"? What does "cleared" mean, will the draft be deleted?

Does my article fall in such a category of articles pending for a long time? Bernhard.rulla (talk) 17:07, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla Sorry, the wording was not really correct, I meant patrollers as in AFC reviewers who "patrol" or "clear" the category of really old AFC submissions by reviewing them so that they are no longer pending till there is no more backlogged articles in that category, thereby "clearing" the category. Drafts are not usually deleted unless not edited by a human for 6 months, the oldest pending submission right now is around 4 months. Justiyaya 17:26, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla Your draft Draft:Sandra Mae Frank has already been reviewed once and a suggestion made as to why it wasn't acceptable in November: that was done on the same day as you submitted it. The current hurdle is likely to be to show that this person is notable, so you should ensure that there are several sources that have discussed her in depth and are independent, not based on interviews. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:37, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thank you very much for your reply. You write correctly that I received the first feedback on my draft article on the same day, so I guess this spoiled me. I wonder now why after the changes that I made in the meantime there is no significant response anymore for some weeks now.

My first motivation for writing this draft was, that all of the other main actors in the TV series New Amsterdam (2018 TV series) have their articles, just not this actress. So, would it be a good way to proceed to compare in which way these articles are different from my draft article?

Concerning the sources I am referencing, I have now cited eight different sources (enough or not for "several"?) which are not editable, have an author noted and are mostly no interviews. Oh, one is an interview. I will first delete it, look for a better source and then provide that source or leave the point out. Bernhard.rulla (talk) 16:59, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla, yes, it would be of benefit to compare your article to the articles for the other characters in that show. Most especially, compare the types of sources used to support the content, and note the age of the articles, as they may have existed prior to their subjects' work in New Amsterdam. Quisqualis (talk) 19:01, 27 December 2022 (UTC)

@Quisqualis Thanks a lot for your feedback. You have given me a further idea of what to pay attention to. I am now collecting bit by bit all these hints. Would it not make sense to add them to the topic of source reliability? Yes, "outdated" is mentioned there, but the articles that I am citing are not from 1950.

I am eager to learn, just these criteria sometimes are so fuzzy and I am a "is/is not" kind of guy.... Bernhard.rulla (talk) 10:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

In reply to your wondering why it happened, Bernhard: you'd have to ask the specific reviewer, but it is noticeable that the more work it takes to review a draft, the longer it often takes. Many drafts are so obviously inadequate that a reviewer can pick them up and immediately decline them. A few are obviously satisfactory, and a reviewer can quickly accept them. Most take more work, which requires a reviewer to decide to put in the time to look at them. (This is not a comment on your particular draft, which I haven't looked at)> ColinFine (talk) 09:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine Thank you for your reply. I understand that long drafts take longer to review. My draft is quite short and I hope it will get more contents from other participants. The topic of notability is important but also quite fuzzy: at which point is the status of someone/something "switching" from "not notable" to "notable" ? I will search / learn further. Bernhard.rulla (talk) 10:20, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Like many things in Wikipedia, Bernhard, this is a judgment call, and editors may disagree. Usually if one reviewer accepts a draft another won't dispute that judgment; but it can happen. (Also, even once a draft is accepted, new pages patrol have still to look over the article, and may push it back to draft for other reasons). ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Jim newton article deleted

Hi there, I was working on an article about Jim Newton and was wondering if I could get some help on finding independent sources that would allow the article to meet the necessary wiki criteria? I thought I included enough second-hand sources, but I would really appreciate any advice you can offer! Thanks! Lauren Laurenmunro810 (talk) 19:08, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I believe that Draft:Jim Newton (journalist) is the correct link. Karenthewriter (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Approving draft for entry about the film Esme, My Love

Hi there! I have a draft wikipedia page for a movie, and I'm hoping to get it live: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Esme,_My_Love It seems to meet all the requirements-- can someone help with this? Thanks! 98.116.59.83 (talk) 21:18, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. The draft is waiting for review, but there is nothing to prevent you from editing it in the meantime. --bonadea contributions talk 22:57, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Largest Women's Only Riding Club is Wind Sisters International

Largest Women's Only Riding Club is Wind Sisters International and nobody is reporting this correctly. Linda Begin has a facebook group and they are fully organized and patched internationally, estimated to have 5500 members. 174.112.171.182 (talk) 22:06, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1174. Did you have a question about editing or using Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:27, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, IP editor. If Wind Sisters International meets our essential notability criteria for organizations (see here), then it may merit a page in Wikipedia. In that case, you are welcome to start working on a draft article and then submitting it at Articles for Creation.

Notability is the bar here - meaning that any subject must have been written about in detail and in depth by totally independent sources. We never base pages on the existence of a group's own website or FB page, nor what it or its fans or members say about itself. If those Reliable Sources don't exist in print or online, then it would not merit a page. Does that address your concerns? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Overturn a Speedy Deletion Please!

Hi, could someone please remove this "Speedy Deletion" from my page! I can't really enjoy Wikipedia until this is gone, made when I was just starting. Thanks, HistoryIsKeytoKnow. HistoryIsKeyToKnow (talk) 22:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello HistoryIsKeyToKnow, and welcome to the Teahouse. I presume you are referring to a speedy deletion notice on your userpage which resulted in it being deleted on 28 November by an admonstrator named Explicit? These edits (though not fitting in with what we permit on userpages) were totally innocuous and are only visible to administrators like them and myself. They are not of any concern to anyone, and do not - and will not - reflect badly on your editing habits. But neither do they fall within the criteria for total removal through WP:OVERSIGHT. Just don't fret, and move on, now adding whatever you wish to your userpage that does conform to guidance available at WP:USERPAGE. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

If the notice on your talk page is bothering you, just edit your talk page and remove it or WP:ARCHIVE if you want to take the time to learn it now. WP:OWNTALK if you want to learn more about your user talk pageSlywriter (talk) 23:50, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Please help me edit my article

 Courtesy link: Draft:Anthony Golez

Hi! I have posted a draft of a biography about a certain politician in the Philippines whom I work for. I have already disclosed my employer in my userpage and I since I am not allowed to further edit the article I would like to ask for your help to edit my article. I don't know how to insert links here but I think the title was Draft:Anthony Golez. Please please help me with this so it can get published. thanks! Madona Jace (talk) 10:34, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Anthony Golez I think this was the link. I hope I don't violate any rules. Madona Jace (talk) 10:41, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@madona jace: erm, you can edit a draft. when it is no longer a draft, then you may not edit the article. lettherebedarklight晚安 10:42, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I'm not even sure if the article meets the notability guidelines (WP:N). Someone at AfC will probably have to decide that. But, for now, you can edit the draft. You haven't submitted it for review yet. Iscargra (talk) 10:44, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

I just recently noticed that I had to submit it for review in which I now did. Would it still be okay for me to edit the draft? Madona Jace (talk) 10:48, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Yes, you probably can. But your article will have to be reviewed by a reviewer at the Articles for Creation project and have cleanup work done on it by non-involved editors if it is approved. Iscargra (talk) 10:55, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Madona Jace Yes, your WP:PAID relationship to the subject of the draft still allows you to edit it up to the point that it is accepted into mainspace. If it is declined, the reviewer will specify what needs to be improved and you can address these concerns before re-submitting. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:58, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi Madona Jace. Since this is related to this previous question you asked at the Teahouse a little more than a week ago, I've asked Cullen328 (who is one of those who responded to your original question) to take a look at your draft and see if he has any suggestions for you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:07, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

The draft has been accepted by an AfC reviewer. I made a couple of minor edits but I do not know enough about the politics of the Philippines to do much more. Cullen328 (talk) 17:19, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for the help! Madona Jace (talk) 01:28, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi.

I wanted to know that is my article eligible or should I make some changes? Draft:Fit India Quiz-First Edition

I made an article today, is it eligible for being a proper article now, made some changes. Manan Sethia (talk) 08:41, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Manan Sethia. A topic is considered notable when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. As far as I can see, none of the references now in your draft meet that rigorous three part standard, so it seems unlikely that your draft will be accepted at this time. Cullen328 (talk) 09:01, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

But, how can I make it more independent? It is based on the movements and citations mentioned and as I have been a part of that quiz, I wrote it in a way that every other participant has felt. Manan Sethia (talk) 09:09, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Also, the sources and the paragraphs I have added are totally reliable, as this topic doesn't completely have an independent source, I am the first to make a source other than the news articles and government websites. Manan Sethia (talk) 09:12, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Manan Sethia You've submitted it for a review- and we don't usually do pre-review reviews- but, since you're here- You can't "make it" independent. Wikipedia is not a place to just document the existence of something and tell about it. A Wikipedia article must summarize what independent reliable sources say about the topic. If no independent sources write about this quiz, it would not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. 331dot (talk) 09:13, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Ok, Thanks for your help🙏. New here but, will learn.👍 Manan Sethia (talk) 09:16, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

@Manan Sethia The draft has some cases of "it's" that should be "its". David10244 (talk) 06:59, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

do i need permission to cut a copy this info to face book

Added this line Subject: May i ask this Q: Would anyone of you non bots know do i need permission to re-post for public use and privet use. And or to copy and paste this search for Wikipedia, (below) Article copied Via cut and paste from: Wikipedia site from a originally generated popup window from Wikipedia home page.To my both public and or privet, Face book page status FEEDS or REPLY INPUT FEED on my Face book site. From Wikipedia and their affiliates END of Q: Original martial from: Wikipedia.org/ END. START: OF MY CUT AND PASTED (Following) Article,] (BELOW). Wikipedia is not for sale. A personal appeal from Jimmy Wales Please don't scroll past this 1-minute read. This Wednesday, December 28, as 2022 draws to a close, I humbly ask you to reflect on the number of times you visited Wikipedia this year, the value you got from it, and whether you're able to give $2 back. If you can, please join the 2% of readers who give. If everyone reading this right now gave just $2, we'd hit our annual goal in a couple of hours. The price of a cup of coffee is all I ask. Wikipedia is different. No advertising, no subscription fees, no paywalls. Those don't belong here. Instead, the Wikimedia Foundation relies on readers to support the technology that makes Wikipedia and our other projects possible. Being a nonprofit means there is no danger that someone will buy Wikipedia and turn it into their personal playground. If Wikipedia has given you $2 worth of knowledge this year, please donate now, it really matters. 2601:18C:4201:3F60:0:0:0:FBD5 (talk) 14:10, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Anything you find on Wikipedia can be used freely. ~TPW 15:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. And no, contrary to what True Pagan Warrior wrote, not everything you find on Wikipedia is freely licensed. Media files in particular, might not be freely licensed, but rather hosted here under the US Fair Use doctrine, and using them elsewhere might be copyright infringment. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:53, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

You want to copy the Wikimedia Foundation's appeal for funds, to a Facebook page? First, the Wikimedia Foundation has lots of money, the wording of the above notwithstanding. Second, just FYI, the volunteer editors here at Wikipedia are not involved in the fundraising (we have no control over it).

I suppose you could copy that text to FB. I'm not sure if the "donation link" will survive being copied to another domain. But good luck! David10244 (talk) 07:06, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

can i re post this info from a popup window i received when i loaded Wikipedia home page.

Added this line Subject: May i ask this Q: Would anyone of you non bots know do i need permission to re-post for public use and privet use. And or to copy and paste this search for Wikipedia, (below) Article copied Via cut and paste from: Wikipedia site from a originally generated popup window from Wikipedia home page.To my both public and or privet, Face book page status FEEDS or REPLY INPUT FEED on my Face book site. From Wikipedia and their affiliates END of Q: Original martial from:  Wikipedia.org/ END. START: OF MY CUT AND PASTED (Following)  Article,]    (BELOW).        Wikipedia is not for sale. A personal appeal from Jimmy Wales Please don't scroll past this 1-minute read. This Wednesday, December 28, as 2022 draws to a close, I humbly ask you to reflect on the number of times you visited Wikipedia this year, the value you got from it, and whether you're able to give $2 back. If you can, please join the 2% of readers who give. If everyone reading this right now gave just $2, we'd hit our annual goal in a couple of hours. The price of a cup of coffee is all I ask.    

Wikipedia is different. No advertising, no subscription fees, no paywalls. Those don't belong here. Instead, the Wikimedia Foundation relies on readers to support the technology that makes Wikipedia and our other projects possible. Being a nonprofit means there is no danger that someone will buy Wikipedia and turn it into their personal playground.

If Wikipedia has given you $2 worth of knowledge this year, please donate now, it really matters. 2601:18C:4201:3F60:0:0:0:FBD5 (talk) 16:43, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Why are you posting essentially the same question twice to the same page, within the space of a few hours? Uporządnicki (talk) 17:01, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

And there are answers to the first posted question, above. David10244 (talk) 07:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

You don't need permission, but I urge you to first familiarize yourself with Wikipedia finances in order to understand more of the context before your Facebook friends politely point this out to you. Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:02, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

National football team names

Redtree21 has objected to the consensus reached in the football project about the article names and truncated names of national football teams. What needs to be done to either uphold the consensus reached in the football project or for the discussion to continue? This type of objection has come of late several times. I do not know if it is because the person objecting is unaware of the consensus in the project or what.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 06:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Your first step should be to discuss the issue with the editor. Explain the consensus and provide a link to the discussion that led to the consensus. Cullen328 (talk) 07:09, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

My edit includes in the summary the appropriate reference.2603:8000:D300:D0F:A4A9:1E1:30A5:4340 (talk) 07:17, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

My wiki username is Tekariroyals.

 Courtesy link: Draft:Baigoman

My wiki username is Tekariroyals. I am working on an article "Baigoman" which as estate in British india. It is not getting accepted. I am not able to understand the reson behind it. Tekariroyals (talk) 09:48, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Tekariroyals Well, I see one point right away. I won't sit here and tell you it will get your article accepted, but it might give it a better chance. It's actually raised on your draft page.

In the "Edit" mode, move the references so that each one is immediately after the fact(s) it supports. The list of References will still show in the section for "References" (assuming you coded them correctly, and I haven't looked at that). But the little numbers will appear in the article text where they should be. Right now, you have the little numbers appearing in a string at the top of the "References" section, where they are no use. I thought about trying to help out by moving them myself, but I can't do that because I can't read the ones in Hindi. Uporządnicki (talk) 10:47, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Is handwritten script acceptable (mentioned by king of Tekari Raj) and their associates? Tekariroyals (talk) 11:00, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

probably not. Most handwritten sources will be primary sources, the evidence that a historian uses when they investigate history. We don't investigate primary sources ourselves, instead we wait for historians to publish the results of their investigation elsewhere, and then we summarise the historian's publications (which are secondary sources), not the original manuscript. If you've been doing your own work on this, you'll need to find somewhere else to get it published before it can be used in a place like Wikipedia. Elemimele (talk) 11:12, 29 December 2022 (UTC)

Hi, the problem is not COI, however, is your article was written without Wikipedia:Reliable sources Lemonaka (talk) 11:24, 29 December 2022 (UTC)