Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1195

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1190←Archive 1193Archive 1194Archive 1195Archive 1196Archive 1197→Archive 1200

Translation attribution

I just created the article Sachiko Kiyono and it contains a translation from her Japanese article. However, I forgot to put that in my edit summary. Even though I put a notice on the talk page I know I made a mistake. What should I do? (Also, how do I connect her new English article to her Japanese article in the language tab up top?) I would appreciate any help.  theomached  (talk) 23:04, 20 July 2023 (UTC)

@Theomached: the credit you've added on the talk page is sufficient. Also, the language tab is done with Wikidata; it has been added and if you do a hard refresh you should see it. Elli (talk | contribs) 23:09, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your prompt reply. I will keep this in mind for the future.  theomached  (talk) 23:11, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Elli, Help:Translation#License_requirements says that "[a] new, translated article must credit the source article"; the method being: "Provide in the first edit summary of the target article a statement of your translation, together with an interlanguage link to the source (translated-from) article." It describes addition of a template to the talk page as an optional extra (and one can infer that it's a desirable extra), not as a substitute for an informative edit summary for the article itself. However, this edit of Theomached's has done the job. -- Hoary (talk) 01:22, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hoary: Ah, you're right. Hadn't read the relevant guidelines in a while and misremembered them, thinking that talk page attribution was sufficient. My apologies. Elli (talk | contribs) 17:32, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Editing a page

I wanted to edit the page about czech traffic signs, but only the first image and first paragraph showed up and i couldnt go lower. HolubyDoHuby (talk) 07:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

If you mean Road signs in the Czech Republic, you need to click the edit button beside the title of the section you want to edit. Shantavira|feed me 07:48, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
@HolubyDoHuby: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1195. I assume you are using the source editor and clicked on the "edit source" link next to one of the headings, which will only display that particular section for editing. You can have access to editing the entire article by clicking on "edit source" at the top of the page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:23, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
In the mobile interface, there's no icon to click in order to edit the full article at once. There are two options to achieve this functionality:
  1. Switch into the Visual Editor and back into the source editor
  2. Edit the URL such that instead of ending e.g. editor/0, it ends editor/all (in this case, https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Road_signs_in_the_Czech_Republic#/editor/all)
User:HolubyDoHuby, may you know it. Folly Mox (talk) 19:12, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia Adventure Issue - Stuck. in a loop

I'm not sure what I'm doing wrong, but the Wikipedia Adventure seems to get stuck in a loop when WillKomen leaves a message on my userpage. I click the friendly reply and the loop starts, and I also tried adding my own personalized reply, and submitted is sucessfully but it still puts me in a loop. Southpaw70 (talk) 03:11, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Southpaw70. If you are trying to play The Wikipedia Adventure game on a tablet, laptop or smartphone using the mobile site, you may run into problems. Scroll to the bottom of any page on mobile to switch to the fully functional though sadly misnamed desktop site, that works just fine on most modern mobile devices. Cullen328 (talk) 08:26, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Another option, if you are confident enough, is to just stop playing that silly game, and just start boldly editing the encyclopedia, learning as you go along. Cullen328 (talk) 08:29, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you @Cullen328, I will try both of those things. Southpaw70 (talk) 19:31, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Sock revert needed

Can anyone please help to undo these 2 edits made by the sock. [1] and [2] at Joy Alukkas. The user who made this edit is a confirmed sock as per Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/SAMEBREED. They have been abusing the page Joy Alukkas for a long period of time. 202.164.131.11 (talk) 18:05, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. This looks to have been fixed by lettherebedarklight. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:33, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Location of publication, Place of publication

Visual edit has fields headed "Location of publication" and "Place of publication". The former is followed by "Geographical place of publication; usually not wikilinked; omit when the publication name includes place", the latter by "Publication place shows after title; if 'place' or 'location' are also given, they are displayed before the title prefixed with 'written at'". What is the difference? How should each be used?

I've searched the Teahouse and Help desk archives but not found anything mentioning both. Mcljlm (talk) 18:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mcljim. These are explained at Template:Cite book/doc#Description. It says If only one of publication-place, place, or location is defined, it will be treated as the publication place and will show after the title; if publication-place and place or location are defined, then place or location is shown before the title prefixed with "written at" and publication-place is shown after the title. So place or location (they are alternative names for the same parameter), if used as well as publication-place, show where the item (eg a news story or article) was written.
These are the names used with the template in the source editor. I'm not quite sure how they map on to the fields in the Visual Editor, because I've never used it. ColinFine (talk) 20:04, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
In some cases at least I can tick/check the boxes in the Visual edit list for both which results in fields for both appearing. Mcljlm (talk) 23:17, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
VE uses the descriptions given in the #TemplateData section of most templates. Because of the length of Template:Cite book/doc, the template data section points to a subpage, Template:Cite_book/TemplateData, where the descriptions for |location= and |publication-place= in VE can be found. Mathglot (talk) 19:44, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

How to adjust column widths

I pasted ia spreadsheet on to a page I'm composing, but the column widths need adjustment.  How can I adjust the column widths in the WSYWYG interface?  The page I'm composing is at: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?create=Create+new+article+draft&editintro=Template%3AAfC+draft+...

...and my OnWiki user name is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:PatrickStingley if that helps.


Thank you PatrickStingley (talk) 17:01, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@PatrickStingley Irrespective of the editor you are using, I think that the problem is the very long URL in the first entry, which the table software is refusing to wrap. I think that a better solution would be to link the first column to the URL and not have any second column. So you could use Adobe Enhance AI as the first column/first row. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:41, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Another advantage of that approach would be that you would have space for a column linking to the related Wikipedia article, if there was one: Adobe Photoshop in that instance. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:19, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Google chrome history deleted page, why?

Why was the google chrome history page deleted? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Google_Chrome_version_history?source=post_page-----1e7d07966d6c---------------------- 188.24.213.176 (talk) 20:48, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. This page should help explain things: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Google Chrome version history (2nd nomination). We hold deletion discussions in which the editing community can make recommendations on deletion or retention, based on our Notability criteria. It would appear that the community felt a page of version release notes was more akin to a manual than an encyclopaedia, and should be removed. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:06, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Is it just me?

How do i make the second thing on my menu go next to the first one instead of under? Here is the thing so far.

⌬ CH₃mificαtion! ⌬ 23:09, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Chemification: I think I understand your question. I've swapped them over on your master page at User:Chemification/Menu. Is that what you wanted to achieve? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:20, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

I think @Chemification meant something like Special:Permalink/1166497068 instead. (But Chemification, please check the history and choose the one you want, or clarify your question. — Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 23:37, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: That works ⌬ CH₃mificαtion! ⌬ 23:39, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Unable to format my page for US rocket pioneer

Hello,

Because it doesn't exist I started a wiki page for American rocket pioneer Edward S Forman who was one of the founders of Aerojet Corporation. His name appears on many other wiki pages...Jet Propulsion Laboratory, Guggenheim Aeronautical Laboratory, Frank Malina, Jack Parsons, but there's no landing page for him). He has been written about in books as well as press. Unfortunately I completely stalled out because the formatting was way too difficult for me. My sandbox page start has now been sitting unfinished for 5 years. I'm a professional writer so the writing, references and citations are no problem. It's the page building. Do you have freelancers who will actually build the page for me?

Thank you LynnMaginnis (talk) 00:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

LynnMaginnis, all the references currently cited in User:LynnMaginnis/sandbox/Edward Forman are to a single book that's about somebody other than Forman. So, currently, the referencing is a problem. (Please see WP:GNG.) The freelancers would have to search for information about Forman. As for the formatting, you've done it pretty well; what's the particular problem that you face? -- Hoary (talk) 00:32, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi again, thanks for getting back to me. The article is much longer and uses multiple references. I had to quit writing in the sandbox so started writing the rest of the draft in Pages/Words. Getting what little is there on the page formatted was so frustrating and time consuming I had to quit. I can't do the sidebars, indexes, expanded photo boxes with birth, death, organizations, etc. I don't need freelance writers. I have plenty of sources. I need freelance page builders. LynnMaginnis (talk) 00:46, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
LynnMaginnis, I've already made a few edits to formatting. A sidebar or expanded photo box (or "gallery") is completely unnecessary. The list of contents has been generated automatically, and if you add or subtract headers then the list of contents will be updated automatically. Formatting tables prettily is tiresome but you probably won't need any table; formatting anything else is pretty easy: just try; and if you're stuck, ask here. (Free of charge!) -- Hoary (talk) 00:55, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
PS LynnMaginnis, if by "freelancer" you mean somebody who'd do this for payment, please forget the idea. It's unlikely to bring a happy result, for any of a number of reasons. -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
So who can help me? Wouldn't Wikipedia want to fill in the missing history of a person who is mentioned on your other pages? LynnMaginnis (talk) 00:51, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Really, LynnMaginnis, do your best to DIY. Easier for you, after a little initial irritation. If/when you get stuck, ask. If you're using Pages or Word, one problem you'll probably face is that plain, single quotation marks (' ') will be autotransformed into "typographic" single quotation marks (‘ ’). Their italicizing and emboldening functions will thereby be lost. Solution: Copy out of Word/Pages and paste into a text editor; use the text editor (I use Geany but any should be OK) to convert "typographic" quotation marks to plain ones; continue editing in the text editor. -- Hoary (talk) 01:05, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
LynnMaginnis, we can help you here at the Teahouse as often as you want, but you are going to have to do most of the work yourself. Your content should be in the draft where experienced editors can see it, not in some "Pages/Words" document off-Wikipedia. Do not worry about sidebars, indexes, expanded photo boxes with birth, death, organizations, etc. because all of that is secondary. What matters far more that that stuff is well written, neutral, well referenced encyclopedic prose. On another note, you uploaded File:Ed Forman1.jpg, a photo taken by a staff photographer at Noel Studio in Pasadena in 1931 or 1932. You claimed that photo as your own work. With all due respect, I consider it unlikely that you were a professional portrait photographer in 1931 or 1932 and are now editing Wikipedia in 2023. The math seems implausible. Please clarify the provenance of this photo. Cullen328 (talk) 01:24, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Teahouse Hosts are generalists, here to advise on Wikipedia practices, but not be co-authors. Consider the Malina and Parsons articles as models. David notMD (talk) 01:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
If we don't know when the copyright holder of the photograph died, and if we have no compelling reason to think that the photograph predates 1932, then according to Prof Hirtle we have to assume that it remains copyright until 2052. (Thanks, Disney Corp!) So I'd be looking for a published photograph to replace it. -- Hoary (talk) 02:27, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
So did you delete the photo and box that I had? This morning I see it's gone now. I wanted to fix it instead of start over. LynnMaginnis (talk) 16:00, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@LynnMaginnis, it was removed by Theroadislong as a potential copyright violation. It still exists over on Commons (link) but it will be deleted in six days unless you can provide proof that it is not a copyright violation. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:06, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Of course I am not claiming provenance on the photo...the error is there because I have trouble with the tools. Even in Visual Editor, which is all I could use..,.forget html source code. I am using the Jack Parsons pages as a model. I am a 77 year old grandmother trying to fill in a gap of history. I'm pretty surprised at how unfriendly and critical some people have been on this forum. LynnMaginnis (talk) 17:50, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for this tip LynnMaginnis (talk) 15:57, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the tip Hoary on the text editor. LynnMaginnis (talk) 16:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hoary ... I think it was you that cleaned up my citations (the a,b,c format with one source footnote instead of several), which was one of my issues. How did you do that? I've seen it on other pages but didn't know how it was done. LynnMaginnis (talk) 16:21, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
LynnMaginnis, yes it was me, and this (which incidentally is called a "diff" in Wikipedia-editing-speak) was the edit. It shows you precisely what I did, but I realize that it may not be so easy to understand and digest (one reason being that I moved one quasi-paragraph from the foot of the draft to its head, thereby getting other paragraphs out of sync). ¶ I noticed that you had several references to the same book, each reference being to a specific page, or page span, of that book. (What you'd done had a system to it, and it's an entirely legitimate way of referencing: please keep reading.) I guessed that this was a draft that would eventually cite a larger number of sources, and that (my personal preferences aside) the existing referencing system would make it unnecessarily hard to edit, without particularly benefiting its readers. And so I retained one of your references, renaming it from the opaque ":0" to the slightly less forgettable "angel", and removing the page number, for which I instead used Template:Rp. Thereafter, you, or I, or anyone, could refer to the book via combinations such as <ref name="angel" />{{Rp|page=125}} and <ref name="angel" />{{Rp|pages=32–34}}, etc.; the labeling of each instance as "a", "b", "c", etc would be automated by Wikipedia's software. ¶ As mentioned above, I happen not to like the system you had used (entirely separate references for each cited page, or page-span, of a book), but it is a system, and Wikipedia makes it very clear that "Editors should not attempt to change an article's established citation style merely on the grounds of personal preference, or to make it match other articles, without first seeking consensus for the change." So, very unusually, I broke a rule here. I did so because in this particular situation "seeking consensus" seemed likely to do little more than further confuse and annoy. -- Hoary (talk) 23:11, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
By the way, @LynnMaginnis I think Hoary has picked the best citation style for new editors for you.* I used it for my first article. It makes it very easy to use the same source multiple times - if you're in Visual Editor, just click on the footnote, press ctrl+c, then paste it wherever you want to use that source again. imo, it's easiest to switch over to Code Editor afterward to go put the page numbers in.
`*Most established editors (at least in the hist/lit/bio areas I tend to work in) prefer Template:sfn, and I personally find that really easy for writing in with the source code editor. But sfn is almost completely useless in Visual Editor, so it's probably not something you want to use (yet). -- asilvering (talk) 03:30, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
@LynnMaginnis Have you tried using Visual Editor? That will look and behave more like a word processing program than source code. -- asilvering (talk) 05:14, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
asilvering, I only used the Visual Editor, and when I struggled with that I figured there was no hope for doing myself. LynnMaginnis (talk) 17:53, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
Alas, sorry to hear it. But it really does look fine so far. Don't worry too much about making it look perfect. Most articles that go through draft reviews at AfC have some kind of formatting error or other. There are editors who seem to actually enjoy fixing those minor things, adding infoboxes, and so on, and it's perfectly acceptable to leave some of that for someone else if you're getting frustrated. If your draft has citations that are so broken a reviewer doesn't know what they are, that's a problem. Otherwise, don't sweat it. -- asilvering (talk) 08:45, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the insights asilvering. LynnMaginnis (talk) 15:55, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello LynnMaginnis. Back in 2010 I’d had a few magazine articles published, but was intimidated by the Wikipedia article process. Here’s what helped me. I created my encyclopedia article offline, adding the formatting as I wrote, using Help:Cheatsheet. For needed formatting I didn’t know I’d find a published article that contained what I wanted to learn, and clicked on "Edit" to see the formatting.

When my draft was finished I went to Wikipedia:Article wizard/version1/Ready for submission and, for my first article, I used the draft option. I copied and pasted my article title into “Enter your draft name here”, then copied my article manuscript, clicked on "Create new article draft" and pasted the article in the space provided below the Instructions section. After that I clicked on "Show preview" to see what needed corrected. The next step was clicking on "Publish page" which saved everything to the public drafting area. I then had the option to come back later to work on the draft some more, or I could click on "Edit" then add subst:submit (with double brackets around it) at the beginning of my draft, which indicted that I wanted my draft to be reviewed. I am thankful that I received a Notice informing me that my article had been accepted. I hope that you find this helpful. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:01, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Thanks sooooo much Karenthewriter. This is the kind of nuts and bolts help I need. Glad your article was accepted! LynnMaginnis (talk) 17:40, 18 July 2023 (UTC)

Lynn, don't worry about formatting, images, or anything else. Just do two things: read reliable sources and 1) summarize what they say in your own words (don't copy!), and then 2) cite those sources, as you have been. One more thing: to get your draft accepted, make sure you find some sources that have significant coverage of Forman—i.e, not just a passing mention, but multiple paragraphs; a whole book chapter about him would probably nail it, or a couple of independent newspaper articles that aren't an interview of him, but *about* him. (Note: different newspapers all printing the same news agency story, count as one independent source.) If you can get three solid sources like that, it's very likely your draft will be accepted. Once you have that, you can try submitting again, or if you wish, ask for review here again. Note that I've added a header and a section to Draft talk:Edward Forman which may help. Mathglot (talk) 20:34, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Lynn, I've done a bunch of changes to the page, some of which includes copying some text from the Jack Parsons article; as this overlapped some of the previous content that was there, there is some overlap, now, in various places. I think with the expansion, and the new sources, this now has sufficient references to establish WP:Notability, but because of the copying and moving stuff around, it's kind of rough and doesn't have a smooth flow. If you can pick it up from here, and consolidate duplicate content, provide better segues between paragraphs or sentences that seem to jump around, and just generally smooth everything out so it reads better, I think you'll have a releasable draft. Check with other helpers here to see what they suggest, as far as getting it ready to submit. Mathglot (talk) 00:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Mathglot I appreciate you having taken time to help. However, I cannot access my sandbox page with the link I was originally given. I get a redirect saying the page has been moved, then click that link and a big Option box appears with choices that I don't understand .... Why did you move the page? Where is my sandbox now? What is the new direct link?
I briefly saw the page you had rewritten completely, which wasn't the help I requested. But I don't know how to get back to it to pick it up from there as you suggest.
Just an FYI, I have not submitted anything for review. I have a draft written in Word which has more info and multiple solid sources. LynnMaginnis (talk) 18:34, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Marking a not verifiable page

How do I add the 'this page doesn't cite reliable sources' warning sign? Lucuusb (talk) 20:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Lucuusb, and welcome to the Teahouse. You find the appropriate template in Cleanup templates - probably {{more citations needed}}, but you might find a more appropriate one - and insert it at the top of the article (in the double curly brackets). ColinFine (talk) 21:20, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Lucuusb: If you're referring to an individual citation, you can add the tag {{failed verification}} after the closing </ref> tag of the citation. It appears like this:[failed verification] ~Anachronist (talk) 02:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
The easiest way is with Twinkle. Preferences>Gadgets>Browsing, if you want to turn this on yourself. -- asilvering (talk) 03:35, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Please note that it's highly recommened to attempt to fix the problem yourself first before tagging the article, as the amount of articles tagged with cleanup templates grows rapidly. Also pay attention if the article is worth it, you can read WP:CTT for more information NotAGenious (talk) 05:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
I think you're looking for {{unreliable sources}}, but consider fixing the problem yourself. You can just remove content supported by unreliable sources. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:53, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. I learned. Lucuusb (talk) 01:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Language of sources

If we are editing a page in English, is it acceptable to cite online sources in a foreign language? Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 03:40, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to the teahouse. Yes, reliable foreign language sources are acceptable, see WP:NOENG for more information. Enjoy editing, Heart (talk) 03:54, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much for the prompt reply! :D Oona Wikiwalker (talk) 08:07, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Citations on lists

If a list is a grouping of a bunch of events, do the entries on the list with their own (decently sized) articles still have to have citations? I know ones that don't should, obviously, but it seems a bit redundant when the item already is elsewhere. I'm guessing yes. PARAKANYAA (talk) 05:58, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Also, should lists have short descriptions? PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:17, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, PARAKANYAA. You didn't cite an example, but my view is that there should be some sort of mention (with citation) in the main article that justifies that event, person or thing being included in the List article. If the main article doesn't mention that fact in a verifiable manner (and it's not sufficiently important that it needs adding to it) then, yes, a citation would be needed in the list article to justify its inclusion. 'Notable alumni' would be a good example. If the reason for the main article being included in the List article is clear and verifiable within that main article, then I would not worry about adding a citation in the List article.
Were it something like "List of fish in the River Foo", then I would not expect to see the River Foo mentioned in each fish article, but I would expect suitable citations to be included in the List Article. It certainly never harms to include references in List articles if you are unsure.
You may find the answer to your other question at Wikipedia:Short description. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 08:06, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
But if the main article provides a reliable citation for the fact that makes it included in the list, I don't have to cite it in the list article, right? Just link to the main one?
Also thank you. PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:41, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Wait you answered my question lol I can't read sorry. Thank you! PARAKANYAA (talk) 08:49, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Infobox problems

I'm having some serious trouble trying to make an infobox for a film article in my sandbox. Every time I try to make an infobox, it does not render. Does anyone have any suggestions or advice on how I can make a proper infobox and make it appear on a preview? Please and Thank you!

Love: The G-Man Gaered Linn (talk) 21:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

@Gaered Linn Welcome to the Teahouse. What I can see at User:Gaered Linn/sandbox looks absolutely fine to me. What specifically do you think is wrong? Note that WP:NONFREE images are only allowed in articles in mainspace, if that was the problem. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:57, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Well when I try to make an infobox from scratch, it always doesn't render. So I copy and paste another infobox from a different Wikipedia article and make changes. Sometimes it works and sometimes it doesn't, so it either feels like luck to me or if I'm doing something wrong. Gaered Linn (talk) 03:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Gaered Linn: I examined all your edits and didn't find a non-rendered infobox. If your code is broken then save it somewhere so we can see what is wrong. We are not psychic. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Should I create a separate page for "shared library"?

Currently 'shared library' is a part of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_(computing)#Shared_libraries and I am planning to add more description and coding and linking examples with it. But I am not able to take a decision that it should be a separate wiki page or just edit the shared section of this page? Any suggestions? Wikieditor 2027 (talk) 10:33, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, @Wikieditor 2027. Might a good way to proceed be to work to improve that section first? Then, if you find it has expanded to become too large, move the content to a new article, leaving just a summary of the topic in Library (computing) and a link to your new, 'main article'. An alternative route could be to develop that section in your sandbox and then link to it via a discussion on the article's own talk page to see what other editors interested in that topic feel? Does that help you decide what to do? Nick Moyes (talk) 11:14, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes Wikieditor 2027 (talk) 11:45, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Regarding My Article

I have Created an article Saroj Kumari Piploda some days ago , but why this article is still not shown in Google search. WikiAnchor10 (talk) 02:53, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, welcome to the Teahouse! New articles that are unpatrolled are not indexed until ninety days after creation. Please see WP:INDEXING for more information on how articles are indexed. Let me know if you have any more questions. Happy editing, Heart (talk) 03:58, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
WikiAnchor10 To clarify, either New Pages Patrol (WP:NPP) will look at the article, and if approved, clear it for searches, or if NPP does not get to it within 90 days it is automatically cleared for searches. Until then, it can be found via Wikipedia search but not external search engines such as Google. David notMD (talk) 11:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Visual Editing vs Source Editing

Hi. I am still new to Wikipedia. One of the things which I wanted to ask is that whenever I am editing a page, I see the option of "Source Editing vs Visual Editing". And honestly speaking, I find the Visual Editing extremely easy as compared to Source Editing. Just wanted to ask which one is better? Visual Editing or Source Editing? Thanks Charsaddian (talk) 09:38, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

@Charsaddian, welcome to the Teahouse! Out of old habit, I use the source editor myself, but I think VE is easier for beginners for most things. I have been told that there are some things the VE is worse at, but I don't really know what they are. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Not just worse, there are some things which cannot be edited with VE at all (this list is not exhaustive)
Plus several things that are doable but painfull
Additionally, VE has no support for resolving edit conflicts, and if you take too long (several hours) to save your edit, it might get lost irrecoverably. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:32, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Victor Schmidt Thanks for the feedback. Right now I am only using SE when it comes to making edits in Tables/Templates. Charsaddian (talk) 20:25, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for welcoming me. Yes agreed that VE is easy for the beginners. I also find VE easy currently but maybe once I gain more experience, I will become more comfortable with SE as well. Charsaddian (talk) 20:23, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Charsaddian "Old hands" here tend to use the source editor since the VE only became available much later. It also gives you slightly more direct access to tricks from the cheatsheet. However, those who are familiar with modern word-processors will find the learning curve with VE much smaller than with SE. The main area where I find VE is inferior is in the way it handles named references. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:17, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
indeed, AFAIK reusing refs isn't great, and if a reference doesn't have a name, it will get something like autoNumber Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:32, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
I generally enjoy visual editor more, but there are still certain features that it lacks. Sfn references (like Mike mentioned) are difficult, as are tables and lists sometimes. If I tried to use visual editor 100% of the time, there would be some errors I would never be able to fix. In addition, it's quite slow on larger articles in comparison to source editor. :3 F4U (they/it) 12:28, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree. Source Editor can open and edit just one section or sub-section of a page, whereas WP:VE opens the whole page at once. I tend to switch between them quite a bit. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:55, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes Thanks for talking part in the discussion. Do you think having Technical Background is important for getting understanding of Source Editing? Charsaddian (talk) 20:32, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Charsaddian Absolutely not. I don't know if you're old enough to remember a very famous piece of early word processing software called 'Wordstar' (precursor of WordPerfect and then MS Word). Every typist and office worker (like me) just had to learn a few simple characters to place before and after any word or sentence if they wanted to italicise it, embolden it or underline it. They all managed it and none had technical backgrounds. To be honest, it's very much like that.
There is one really useful (and often overlooked) editing icon in Source Editor that you should not ignore - it's a slanted grey pencil icon for 'syntax highlighting'. You can toggle highlighting on and off, which adds colour to all the tiny commands which make up reference templates, hyperlinks, wikilinks and usernames. It leaves actual text black, allowing you to ignore the coloured source code elements if you want to, rather than have everything on the page all one colour. It's really useful, and great for getting to the heart of any problem that's making something not display correctly. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:09, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Freedom4U I agree what you mentioned about the Tables and Lists. I found Source Editing very useful when editing Tables/Templates Charsaddian (talk) 20:28, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Charsaddian: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1195. I find it depends on what you're planning to do. If it's surface level like adding/editing citations or text, the visual editor is a lot better to use. If you're going to be editing a lot of tables or templates, you might want to get acquainted with the source editor. It's good to have some experience in using the source editor, as not all namespaces (such as article/user talk pages) allow the use of the visual editor. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:21, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Tenryuu Thanks for the detailed feedback. I feel due to lack of Technical Background, I will be having difficulties in using Source Editing frequently. Am I right? Charsaddian (talk) 20:34, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't think so. Michael D. Turnbull up above linked to the cheatsheet, so it's got basic formatting options for you that the visual editor covers. It's just that the visual editor has to go through more hoops than the source if you're trying to do something like putting parameters into a preexisting template. I personally like to be able to tell what's what in source, so I usually enable syntax highlighting so that it's easy to tell at a glance what's been italicised, what's a reference, and what templates are in use. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:40, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much for your response. Really helpful Charsaddian (talk) 20:50, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Charsaddian. It's 90% personal preference. I think most new editors gravitate to the visual editor because it's more intuitive. And most experienced editors gravitate towards the source editor because there are many niche features only fully implemented in source mode. If the VE works for you, that's great. If you discover more things that you can do in the source editor and decide to use it, that's also great.
As far technical skill? No, not really. Try looking at a page that you've edited before in the source editor with highlighting on. Also, if you run into confusion in source mode, feel free to post back here and ask questions. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 06:32, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
@Rjjiii Thank you very much for the detailed response. Really helpful Charsaddian (talk) 09:47, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Also, in the VisualEditor, you can't add template parameters if they're not in the TemplateData (most of the time, anyways). Templates are, on the whole, easier to manage in source mode. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 12:57, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
@Edward-Woodrow I agree that Templates are easy to manage in the Source Mode Charsaddian (talk) 11:55, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I use both, It is easier to add images and other media using the VE, but easier for templates in the SE. PaulGamerBoy360 (talk) 02:07, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
@PaulGamerBoy360 Yes I agree that SE is helpful when making edits in Templates Charsaddian (talk) 11:56, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Why do I have Issues When logging into my Wikipedia Account

I am Having Trouble logging into my Wikipedia Account I’m not blocked but I have issues logging into my account 2A01:B340:66:541D:153E:68FF:C956:B274 (talk) 13:00, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

What is the specific issue you are having? Does an error message appear? It might sound obvious, but make sure both your username and password are typed exactly correct. 331dot (talk) 13:07, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Have you tried resetting your password? Shantavira|feed me 14:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
It just won’t allow me to log in as usual that’s the problem & I tried resetting my password 2001:BB6:9028:5858:659D:7C25:F157:7949 (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Article content after Ref. section

Hi, for article Michel Soto Chalhoub after the References section there are four plain list lines. Appear to be the person's membership & alumni information. Question: should a section title be added for this content? Or moved into body of article? Or just deleted? JoeNMLC (talk) 14:42, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

That list is clearly worthless and can be deleted. Shantavira|feed me 15:11, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
I took care of it. It looks like this was a very early attempt (many years ago) to provide references supporting the subject's notability. It seems that most of them were later incorporated as inline citations, but the plain text didn't get deleted after that happened. Larry Hockett (Talk) 15:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

How?

How do you get infoboxes Malaquia100 (talk) 15:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

You can insert an infobox onto a page by using an infobox template. A list of these templates can be found at WP:INFOBOXLIST. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 15:57, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Adding Campaign Boxes

What is the process of adding Campaign Boxes for a war? I'm only aware of the addition into the article by name such as {{Campaignbox Afghan Sikh Wars}}, but where can the war template be made? RevolutionaryPatriot (talk) 15:41, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, RevolutionaryPatriot, and welcome to the Teahouse. I know nothing about these, but I think you'll find the information you need at Template:Campaignbox/doc. ColinFine (talk) 15:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

How to view recent changes across a specific language wikipedia?

I want to view recent changes made accross latvian wikipedia to combat vandalism and fix typos. Is there any way I can do this? Gatesby1 (talk) 14:08, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@gatesby1: it's here. lettherebedarklight晚安 14:12, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
...and by clicking on that link out of curiousity, I got a nice welcome message from latvian wikipedia. They really need to stop doing that sort of thing. Edward-Woodrow :) [talk] 16:02, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Policy on bot-maintained database lists

Hi, do we have guidelines or policies to cover database lists created by bots (e.g. List_of_human_protein-coding_genes_1). To my mind, these can be very useful, but they don't really fit the existing concept of WP:NOTDATABASE, and I don't know how we decide which lists are useful (genes obviously are) and which are not (for example a bot-maintained mirror of socker stats probably wouldn't be deemed acceptable). Elemimele (talk) 14:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)?

@Elemimele, list suitability overall is determined by WP:NLIST, which is admittedly not quite as well-defined as the notability criteria for non-lists. Whether the topic passes NLIST, rather than what was used to create it, is to me the more salient factor. Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)/Archive_197#Wikidata_lists was a large recent discussion on a similar topic that may be relevant. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 14:35, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Strewth! That discussion takes some digestion. It was an informative read, but clearly opinions differ wildly on that one. Thanks for pointing me to it. Elemimele (talk) 18:34, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Which infobox to use?

Hello Teahouse,

I am about to write / translate an article on a ruined religious building (temple-ish?). The building complex belonged to different religious groups, including the Church of the East in China and the Buddhists. The complex was sold in 1920s and demolished in the 1950s. Only the ruins survive on the site today. I am not sure which infobox I should use for this article.

Some candidates include:

  1. {{Infobox religious building}}: I am not sure if I can use this one, for the building is not there any more. Only the site and the ruins remain.
  2. {{Infobox historic site}}: Good one, but this building doesn't have UNESCO designation or any designation this template supports.
  3. {{Infobox ancient site}}: This is also plausible, but since the building complex was lost in the 20th century, I wonder if it could really be called "ancient".

If you wish to get more info on this site, please see [3] (in Chinese wiki) or [4] (in German wiki).

Many thanks in advance! TheLonelyPather (talk) 19:27, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome, and thanks for adding articles to Wikipedia. I suggest working on the main part of the article first. Things like infoboxes can be added later. RudolfRed (talk) 20:05, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Christianity

Who were the first people to adopt Christianity? 2601:189:457F:3740:93F:49A:ED4:9AD0 (talk) 20:39, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello. The Teahouse is for asking and answering questions about editing Wikipedia. You can ask general knowledge questions at the Reference desks. We have an article Early Christianity. Cullen328 (talk) 20:59, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Remove [1] from reference added.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Library_(computing), I added a reference numbered 22, but it printed like 22. ^[1]shared library, How do I remove the [1] from the text? Wikieditor 2027 (talk) 20:58, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

That is the link you added. When no title is given for a link Wikipedia just numbers them. You can use Template:Cite_web to cite websites. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 21:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Where do I rate an article?

Where do I rate an article? Can it be only done by those are chosen? Wikieditor 2027 (talk) 21:34, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@Wikieditor 2027, anyone can rate an article, although you should familiarize yourself with the guidance at WP:Content assessment before you do so. I tend not to rate my own articles, instead leaving that to others. Make sure that your articles are tagged with at least one WikiProject on their talk page. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:44, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
No. Providing you fully understand the WP:ASSESSMENT guidance, you can rate articles. However, I note you have less than 60 mainspace article edits, so do please ensure you do genuinely understand what is involved. See WP:RATER for a very useful tool to help with article assessment. If you'd like to give it a try and ask for our feedback on your assessment grade, you'd be most welcome. It's an easy (and extremely helpful) task to determine if the numerous 'Stub' articles are still deserving of that assessment, or merit either a Start or a C assessment grade. Going above that level of assessment is not recommended for inexperienced users. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:44, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Teahouse!

I was wondering if there was a way to merge two accounts. I just started a new account but upon discovering that my old account was still active wanted to merge the new one with the old one so there isn't a redundancy. Thank you! SacredForest (talk) 00:05, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @SacredForest! There is no way to merge accounts. What you can do is to mention your previous account on your userpage to show that you own both accounts. Ca talk to me! 02:35, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. :) I'll consider doing this. May I also ask if it's possible to mask one's IP address on the contributions page or anywhere else it appears? SacredForest (talk) 21:27, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
You can ask to have any edits attributed to your IP deleted at WP:Oversight. Wikimedia Foundation is working on an IP masking system, but it will not mask previous IPs. Ca talk to me! 01:24, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! SacredForest (talk) 22:22, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
You can use the Template:User alternative account name for this. NotAGenious (talk) 08:07, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, SacredForest. This may be a pedantic point, but the Teahouse does not have "moderators". Instead, the Teahouse has volunteer "hosts" who do their best to provide friendly and accurate answers to good faith questions. "Moderators" sounds similar to administrators, but Wikipedia administrators do not moderate content. I am an administrator. We deal with conduct issues mostly, and carry out the consensus of the community in various areas. In my five years as an administrator, I have never thought of myself as a "moderator". Cullen328 (talk) 08:18, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
I've deleted the word "moderator" and will try to never think such thoughts again. ;) SacredForest (talk) 21:28, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay! Thank you SacredForest (talk) 21:27, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Mystery jump in bytes

At LGBT rights in Pakistan, the page byte count suddenly went from 70,647 bytes when I made an edit here to 269,556, in 3 edits (by XI8Z). I cannot work out though, where this massive edit actually is in the article, or by looking at the diffs: [5] [6]. Is it hidden in some way, or ...? I'm not sure if it's a problem or not, but the article has been seeing some problem editing. Can anyone advise, please? AukusRuckus (talk) 12:18, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

@AukusRuckus Welcome to the Teahouse. I have undone the last three edits and returned the article to your version. In this instance, a user had duplicated massive amounts of content. But, because the article was already quite large, it made it rather hard to spot as it looked legitimate. The tip is to open a diff and use Ctrl-F to a sentence or set of unique words which you can search for in the article. That showed up the massive duplication which I have undone. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:35, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks very much, Nick Moyes. Possibly because I have some vision problems, when I tried cycling through to find repetitions of a phrase, the seek function did not appear to be moving on to a new part of the diff. So, despite it reporting that the sequence "Their presence in society is usually tolerated" was present 5 times, it appeared to me to be standing still, at the same spot. I considered doing a manual reversion to my earlier edit, but without understanding what was going on, was hesitant. Thanks for saving me from what for would have been an eye-watering task for me: I do not think I could have worked that out, my vision being what it is. AukusRuckus (talk) 03:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@AukusRuckus: This sort of thing is not uncommon. (I suspect that there may be some aspect of mobile editing that causes inexperienced users inadvertently to duplicate large portions of articles.) The way I usually spot it is to notice duplicated section titles—especially "References" and "External links"—in the Table of Contents. I frequently encounter such situations when patrolling Category:Pages with malformed coordinate tags, since {{coord}} templates are among the things that get duplicated, and the presence of multiple coordinate templates with |display=title is among the problems that puts an article into that category. Deor (talk) 15:13, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for that tip, @Deor: Those elements would be the best check for this kind of situation. Appreciate this advice; I'll tuck it into my toolkit! AukusRuckus (talk) 03:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Submitted Draft Article Flagged as Conflicting with a Redirect Page

Hi everyone,

I tried search for the answer myself, but I've got chronic fatigue syndrome, so that limited how much searching I could do.

I've submitted a draft article for publication on the Favorite Betrayal Criterion. Wikipedia has alerted me that there is already a redirect page on the same topic, which links to a single sentence within a much larger article.

What is the process for dealing with the conflict?

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jasavina (talk • contribs) 03:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jasavina: There is nothing you need to worry about right now about that. If the draft at Draft:Favorite_betrayal_criterion is approved, then the conflict will be dealt with by the approver. RudolfRed (talk) 03:20, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@RudolfRed: Thank you! Jasavina (talk) 04:22, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Superman: Legacy movie

Please, approve the Draft:Superman: Legacy draft, the movie is in production 190.21.173.225 (talk) 02:38, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

You may place {{subst:submit}} at the top of the draft to submit it for review. RudolfRed (talk) 03:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Actually, you probbably shouldn't, until the actual filming has started. As the notice on top says: This draft should not be submitted for review or moved to the mainspace until filming has begun, per WP:NFF. The filming start date is currently scheduled for January 2024. Please see the draft for more information. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:12, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Weirdly referenced article

I came across this article: Opinion polling for the 2023 Spanish general election It claims to have hundreds of inline citations, but none of them lead anywhere when tapped, and the reflist is empty. Does anyone know what's going on? Jacob.yudkin (talk) 20:42, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Whatever caused it happened with this edit [7] Not clear what it was yet though! Theroadislong (talk) 21:02, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Jacob.yudkin & Theroadislong! I don't think the problem was that specific edit, more that the size increased past the point Wiki can cope with. Seems like the article is too big, there are over 700 references alone. If you "Edit Source" the whole page, then click "Show Preview" a warning is displayed: Warning: Post-expand include size is too large. Some templates will not be included. I tested by removing a random chunk of the article (in preview only) & the references would show again once its size was reduced. Referring to this & I was able to confirm the article has crossed over the "Post-expand include size" limit. Probably time for someone to split the article up into more manageable chunks, or simplify it? Hope this is of some help in solving the issue. Take care, LooksGreatInATurtleNeck (talk) 23:35, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Jacob.yudkin and Theroadislong: LooksGreatInATurtleNeck seems to be correct in their assessment of the problem. I've added Template:Very long to the top of the article and notified the WikiProjects listed at the top of the article's talk page about the issue. Basically, the article is over heating so to speak because the software is being asked to do more things than it can handle. The only really way around this is to essentially figure out what content to leave in and what content to leave out. Content that is removed can be WP:SPLIT into another article is it's encyclopedically relevant or it can be discarded per WP:NOTEVERYTHING. Lots of the recent expansion shas been the result of enthusiastic and well-meaning users who probably haven't noticed any problems because they're editing one section at a time where everything seems to work fine. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
The limits are more what Wikipedia is willing to cope with, rather than what its able to. If I replace {{reflist}} with <references />, I can see that parsing breaks down at around citation 657 of 713, which is in #Voting preferences. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

The Sword Interviews Unblocked - Request

Hello, I posted this in another area but I'm not sure it was the right place. I'm hoping someone can help. I'm looking to whitelist two interview links:

  • Link requested to be whitelisted: https://www.thesword.com/wakefield-poole-interview-part-2-on-his-masterpiece-bijou-and-his-30-years-of-celibacy.html

I am requesting that this interview on thesword.com – WAKEFIELD POOLE INTERVIEW PART 2: ON HIS MASTERPIECE, ‘BIJOU,’ AND HIS 30 YEARS OF CELIBACY – be unblocked so that I can use it on Wakefield Poole's Wikipedia page.

  • Link requested to be whitelisted: https://www.thesword.com/talking-with-legendary-night-at-the-adonis-editor-bob-alvarez.html

As well, I'm requesting that this interview on thesword.com - TALKING WITH LEGENDARY ‘NIGHT AT THE ADONIS’ EDITOR BOB ALVAREZ - be unblocked so that I can use it on the Hand In Hand Films Wikipedia page. Digitalkidd (talk) 08:18, 23 July 2023 (UTC)digitalkidd

Interviews are not reliable sources neither are blacklisted websites. Theroadislong (talk) 10:56, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
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.. Shantavira|feed me 12:18, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

How to request the rename of category?

How to submit a request of renaming any specific category, as i have seen that Category:Hashemite people, is not named in it's correct way, Because the term "Hashemite" is only used for the House of Jordan, while, other people who belongs to the Bani Hashim clan should better known as "Hashimids". AlidPedian (talk) 12:17, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

The place to raise this is on the category talk page: Category talk:Hashemite people. Please include a reliable source for your assertion. Shantavira|feed me 12:23, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Confused email

I received an email from Wikipedia that confused my user name with my email address. How do I correct? E3barr (talk) 02:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand. You need to elaborate. Surely if you received the email, your email address must have been correct. Shantavira|feed me 10:52, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@E3barr All Wikipedia emails are addressed to you as a named user. Thus what you see in the "To" field of the email will be E3barr but the underlying email address will be correct. This is entirely normal. The first line of the body of the email will normally say "Hi E3barr". Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:28, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

how many licks

does it take to get to the bottom of a tootsie pop? CSROME5893 (talk) 06:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Perennial Saturday-morning-commercial favourite, yes; Teahouse material, not quite. You might wish to try your luck with that at WP:Reference desk/Entertainment. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 07:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Here are some data. Deor (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

How to create a page

I want to create a page for a playback singer from india Wiki.ragesh (talk) 13:37, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Wiki.ragesh.
Please have a read of Help:Your first article which gives an overview of how to create an article on Wikipedia (we prefer to call them 'articles', instead of 'pages').
Please note that the singer you want to create an article for must meet the Wikipedia:Notability (music) threshold - if they do not meet the criteria set out in that link then they won't be able to have an article at this time.
Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 13:49, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

How do we add languages to a wikipedia article that has been published?

Hello, How do we add languages to a wikipedia article that has been published? I researched this and I am confused as to how the Languages tab works on the upper right corner and how languages are added. I'd appreciate you pointing me to the right direction so that I can add translations to the pages I have created. Thank you! Songuitar333 (talk) 01:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

@Songuitar333: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. You'll have to go to the Wikipedia for that different language. We are at en.wikipedia.org now, for example the Chinese Wikipedia is at zh.wikipedia.org. If you know the language, go ahead, but machine translations (such as Google Translate) are very poor, and may not make sense to some readers. JML1148 (talk | contribs) 10:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@Songuitar333 Do you mean that you want to record the fact that an article in one language is equivalent to another article in a different language (and hence have the new one included in the list of languages at upper right)? This is handled in Wikidata, which you can easily edit by using the "Edit interlanguage links" menu option you'll see on the right in the default Vector 22 skin. Other advice about translations are at WP:TRANSLATE and WP:TRANSLATEUS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Topic ban

I've been Topic banned from India and Pakistan related articles but can I add paraphrased text to an article citing a source that mentions many countries, perhaps even India or Pakistan (but not mention India or Pakistan in the paraphrased text)?-1Firang (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Which article? Shantavira|feed me 10:59, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@1Firang: Insofar as the subject overlaps India or Pakistan, no. That is what the "broadly construed" part of your topic ban means. It appears you've been attempting to write things about rape in the context of Islamic law, and doing so in articles about every applicable country except for Pakistan. That violates the spirit of your topic ban. You have been asked to find other topics you can work on here. ~Anachronist (talk) 11:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay, thanks!-1Firang (talk) 14:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Donald Covert

7-23-2023 THIS PAGE IF YOU CAN FIND IT WAS MISTAKEDLY DELETED BY ACCIDENT AND IT HAD BEEN PUIBLISHED FOR YEARS IN THE WIKIPEDIA. HERE IS A COPY-PASTE OF THE CONTANT. I DO NOT KNOW HOW TO FIND THE DELETED PAGE IN THE WIKIPEDIA. CAN YOU RE PUBLISH IT, OR HOW DO I GO ABOUT UPDATING IT AND GETTING IT PUBLISHED IN THE WIKIPEDIA? THANK YOU.

Donald Covert From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is being considered for deletion in accordance with Wikipedia's deletion policy. Please share your thoughts on the matter at this article's entry on the Articles for deletion page. Feel free to improve the article, but the article must not be blanked, and this notice must not be removed, until the discussion is closed. For more information, particularly on merging or moving the article during the discussion, read the guide to deletion.

This biography of a living person needs additional citations for verification. Please help by adding reliable sources. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libelous or harmful. (August 2010) (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Donald Covert (28 May 1957) is an American conductor born in West Palm Beach, Florida. He graduated in 1984 (The Swarovsky Diploma in Conducting) from the Hochschule fur Musik in Vienna, Austria where he studied with Otmar Suitner. He also studied Conducting at The Mozarteum of Salzburg, and Juilliard School (N.Y.C. with Sixten Ehrling), with Nadia Boulanger in Paris, and with Franco Ferrara in Italy. He has conducted with the Netherlands Promenade Orchestra, Norwegian Chamber Orchestra, Zurich Symphony Orchestra, Hungarian Symphony Orchestra [3], and has served as Music Director of the Tampa Bay Opera. References[edit] Jump up^ Jump up^ [1] Jump up^ [2] Jump up^

Template:Persondata Categories: Living people American conductors (music) 1957 births DONALD COVERT 14:24, 23 July 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dcovert999 (talk • contribs)

The article was deleted more than a decade ago following a deletion discussion. It was not a mistake or an accident - the article subject does not meet Wikipedia's minimum requirements for inclusion, which you can find at WP:N. There isn't any way to republish this. - MrOllie (talk) 14:42, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Dcovert999: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The page you are referring to was not deleted by accident. Please see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Donald Covert which discussed the reason for its deletion. I note that in 2018 it was briefly undeleted so that you could obtain a copy of its contents. I don't necessarily quite agree with what User:MrOllie said in their reply just now:.
It has been over 10 years since it was deleted, and maybe now there have been additional sources that have written about you that would help us decide that you might, indeed, now meet our WP:NBIO or WP:NMUSIC notability criteria, when you did not do so before based upon the sources in the article. If so (and using those new sources as evidence to support you) you could submit a new draft at Articles for Creation. However, you would need to be upfront about properly declaring your conflict of interest, the guidelines for which are to be found HERE. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:51, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Furthermore, if you are Donald Covert it is essential that you familiarize yourself with our autobiography policy.Shantavira|feed me 16:43, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Title of article

I think I was able to post my draft article on Ira S. Shapiro, but the title that appears for the article is "User:Ellicottsimple". How do I change the title? I've read everything I can on doing that, but it doesn't work for me. For example, there is no "move" that appears at the top of my page. Question: How do I change the name of my posted article so it is accurate? Thank you.

Ellicottsimple (talk) 18:41, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Your user page User:Ellicottsimple is intended for you to write about yourself, in the context of your activities as a Wikipedia editor. Instead, you have written a draft of an article there. It would have been better at User:Ellicottsimple/sandbox, User:Ellicottsimple/Ira S. Shapiro, or Draft/Ira S. Shapiro. If you want it moved, just ask here, someone can do it for you. As for the draft itself – you need to read Help:Referencing for beginners.   Maproom (talk) 19:26, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

harding ,il

i have a book my neighbor wrote about the history of harding, il, she is long gone and so is the publisher, would like to add it for more history,i do not want to get in trouble with coping some elses work 207.113.239.158 (talk) 16:41, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. Wikipedia has lots of articles about US places called Harding (see that link) but not about one in Illinois, as far as I can see. If you have not previously created a Wikipedia article, you will find there is a pretty steep learning curve but if you are keen to create a draft, please use the WP:AfC process and read WP:YFA for general advice. You must paraphrase in your own words what is written in the book so as to avoid copyright problems, citing the book as the source. You may get some pointers from other similar articles, such as Harding Township, New Jersey. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:12, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
The article is Harding, Illinois. Shantavira|feed me 18:30, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@Michael D. Turnbull, @Shantavira I have now added Harding, Illinois to the list at Harding. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:29, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

How do I fix this

I accidently blanked this page. Then, I reverted but now its all still missing. How can I fix this? Page:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:Spaceflight_assessment El Wikipedian (talk) 17:49, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

The template is correct. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Update: User has been indefinitely blocked as a sockpuppet. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:13, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

I've had no difficulty contacting Cullen328 with questions in the past. His new talk page states to click on "New Section". I honestly do not see such a link at the top of his page. Can you tell me what I am missing? Thanks Oldsilenus (talk) 20:26, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Oldsilenus, You can just use the 'add topic' button. If that doesn't work, then press 'edit source' and add a new section manually. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. This is what I have done in the past. Just the new instructions made things confusing! Oldsilenus (talk) 21:26, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@Oldsilenus You inadvertently linked to a non-existent article on 'Cullen328' and not to User:Cullen328. I think we all used to have a tab called 'New Section' on our talk pages, but these relatively recently changed their title to 'Add Topic' some while ago. But as Sungodtemple says, it means the same thing. I'm sure Jim might like to think about rewording his talk page notice if it's causing confusion. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:10, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Oldsilenus, this is the result of a recent change in the default software skin from Vector 2010 to Vector 2022. I prefer the old skin to the new one, and still use the 2010 version. I have added clarifying language to my talk page. Feel free to add a message there, and thanks for pointing out the issue. Cullen328 (talk) 21:31, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
You're very welcome. My immediate question was answered in Wikipedia:Tea House . I'm sure that there will be more. Thank you for your past help and patience! Oldsilenus (talk) 21:36, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
No I was on the correct page, but thanks. User:SunGodTemple told me to use the procedure that I had been previously using. Unfortunately I do not do much editing. I did e-mail User:Cullen328 about this and perhaps he will edit his page Oldsilenus (talk) 21:33, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft-copyvio dilemma

At the moment, I'm wondering how to handle Draft:Pleasantview (novel) (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs), created by one GxR18 (talk · contribs) back in early January and about to face G13. Pleasantview is actually within my regional/topical interests, as it happens to be a 2021 novel by Trinidadian author Celeste Mohammed; what we've found at ProQuest via WP:Library is promising by NBOOK standards. In its current state, it's tagged as a copyvio of this book guide, which I 70% doubt meets WP:RS according to its URL. Therefore lies the question: Should I tag it with {{copyvio}} and send it to WP:Copyright problems soon enough, or should I wait until G13 has passed to start anew and not cause a fuss? (Paging long-time TT contributor @Guettarda: One of the first I met on WP back in 2005, he might give us a bit of opinion just in case.) --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 11:14, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

Slgrandson, I have deleted the "Characters" section, as a copy of part of the content of marmaladeandmustardseed.com/bookguidesblog/pleasantview. I searched within the latter for a number of distinctive strings that appear in the draft, but found none. Which other parts of the draft plagiarize? Copyright-violating text must be removed, and older versions including such text deleted, as quickly as possible. (Probably by somebody other than me, as I'm getting sleepy.) Once that's done, one can proceed to consider the text that remains, the reliability of the sources cited, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 12:04, 21 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hoary I've now done a WP:REVDEL on all the earlier revisions. Sleep well! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:30, 21 July 2023 (UTC)

[Deep breath] Slgrandson, marmaladeandmustardseed.com's page about Pleasantview is undated. The Wayback Machine only scraped it on a single day: 18 Feb '23. It then described the character Sunil as: "Consuela’s boyfriend convicted of stealing industrial tools, which he had done to make money to by Consuela back". Today (22 Jul '23), it says "Consuela’s boyfriend convicted of stealing industrial tools, which he had done to make money to by Consuela back" (unchanged).

GxR18 added the list of characters on 4 Jan '23, saying of Sunil: "Consuela’s boyfriend convicted of stealing industrial tools, which he had done to make money to by Consuela back" (precisely the same as marmaladeandmustardseed.com).

By 17 Jan '23 (I haven't bothered to check exactly when), this had become "Consuela’s boyfriend, escapes prison to save Consuela, ends up being shot by Mr. Jagroop in the prologue".

It's possible that marmaladeandmustardseed.com's page (i) dates from (or was augmented in) early January, in part plagiarizing material from the draft. But of course drafts can't be found via Google or other standards-compliant general-purpose search engines.

It's also possible that the draft plagiarized the character list within marmaladeandmustardseed.com's page. I find this a lot more likely. (GxR18 can't comment, as they're indefinitely blocked -- for a copyright matter, but one concerning an image, not text.)

Nick Moyes kindly deleted the versions of the draft that included the (presumably) plagiarized material. Except that my admitted sleepiness may have been contagious: he only deleted the 49 most recent offending versions, not the earlier ones. (A few minutes ago, I deleted 56 earlier versions.)

It was Stuartyeates who attached the copyvio template to the top. That was five months ago, but perhaps he'd care to say here whether the problem was limited to the character list. (If it wasn't, then it still isn't: deletion of the character list aside, the draft is unchanged since that time.)

Moving from the question of copyright violation to that of reliability, marmaladeandmustardseed.com is by Kate. Kate who? We're not told. There's no indication that the website qualifies as a reliable source. -- Hoary (talk) 00:03, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

  • Stuartyeates, Slgrandson, you both brought up the matter of copyright violation. I believe that I've already put an inordinate amount of time into a start at sorting the matter out. Now, could one of you please see if the draft still violates copyright? If it does, please describe where/how (details aren't necessary); I'll then remove the material, remove the template, and do some more revdelling. If it doesn't, please say so, and remove the template. Thank you. -- Hoary (talk) 01:39, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Bibliography for Books Published in Two Countries

I am interested in updating the Vesna Goldsworthy page. Ms. Goldsworthy lives in the UK. Her publications are often first printed in the UK, and later reissued in the US with a different publisher. Do I use the original UK information or the later US information? US spelling is always used on Wikipedia, e.g. "color" not "colour". I have never been able to find a UK Wikipedia version with a US search engine. Thanks. Oldsilenus (talk) 20:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Oldsilenus. Firstly, US spelling is not always used. In fact an article about a British subject must use British English. See WP:ENGVAR for further guidance. There is no UK (or US) Wikipedia, because Wikipedia is divided only by languages, not countries. I'd prefer to list the original/first editions, whether UK or US. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:21, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks very much.Oldsilenus (talk) 20:27, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Oldsilenus, the article currently lists five books. Providing publication info about both US and British publication wouldn't be a major chore, could be helpful for readers, and would be unlikely to confuse or irritate readers. So that's what I'd do. -- Hoary (talk) 22:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Mahatma Gandhi (again)

Again raising the issue. My edit, which the other users defined as good faith, was removed without a clear summary. Again the page is now protected. As I was asked, I started a discussion in the talk page, but no one is responding.

This is absolute misuse of power in Wikipedia. One can't just remove stuff as per his own consent. I know discussion should be made in the talk page, but no response over there.

Calling for a quick intervention from a veteran editor.

জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 16:29, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

FYI
(Repeating what I said on the Teahouse Talk Page, which was the wrong place for the issue to be raised)
The article is on the watchlist of over 2,500 editors. You should give them some time to respond on the Talk Page. A week is a typical period: your comment is only a day or so old and I note that editing on the article is currently very active, so plenty of people will have noticed your comment. One has already been blocked after replying! Your suggestion is very generic: what exactly would you wish to add to the article? There is a template {{Edit_fully-protected}} that can be used to make precise proposals that will be reviewed by admins.
Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:19, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Also, don't bring content disputes to this page. And remember, there are no deadlines on Wikipedia. You will just have to wait for responses. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:13, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Ruth Ann Daily of the Post-Gazete.

I would like to know if this journalist ever lived and went to school in Donora,PA? Thank you! Bill Bodnar 2607:FB91:23:CB7F:A869:33B0:951B:15A9 (talk) 23:12, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. The Teahouse is a place where we help users who are having difficulty understanding how to edit Wikipedia. We are not here to answer general questions. You may wish to do your own research via a search engine or a library, or maybe even ask at the WP:REFDESK if you can't manage that yourself. Thank you. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

hello world

Dragons and scorpions ≈≈≈≈≈≈≈ Kriztmark7771 (talk) 00:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Kriztmark7771: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! Could you please be more specific on what you need assistance with? If you want to know more about dragons and scorpions, you can read our articles about them. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 00:29, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Where does the controversy section go in a video game article?

I'm writing about a video game with many sources (20 or so), and it has been involved in a controversy. I know for a fact that it's not supposed to go in the lead section. Does the controversy section go at the bottom of an article? Thanks, TarantulaTM (speak with me) (my legacy) 18:05, 23 July 2023 (UTC).

Yes, controversy sections usually go at the end of an article, unless there is another section to which it is particularly relevant. Shantavira|feed me 18:34, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, actually the lead section is supposed to be a short summary of the whole article. So, any controversy can be mentioned in the lead provided it is described in the body of the article and is sufficiently notable. Ruslik_Zero 18:40, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
There usually isn't a need for a controversy section in video game articles, and they risk making the article non-neutral. Instead of considering whether an aspect is "controversial", you can just put it in the appropriate section in the article. All of the controversial and non-controversial information about development can go in the "development" section, and all of the controversial and non-controversial information about reception can go in a "reception" section. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 20:21, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
For context, the game was removed from Steam, a video game marketplace, after several reported copyright violations. So I'm guessing this goes in the "development" section, like you said. TarantulaTM (speak with me) (my legacy) 00:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Update Rush Limbaugh Page on ESPN controversy

I wanted to update the Rush Limbaugh page with respect to the ESPN controversy. I understand there are added protections on the page. This controversy has been added to the ESPM Sunday Countdown Page (by antlers editor), so the information has already been vetted.

Can someone add this information to the Rush Limbaugh page? ac (talk) 01:50, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

MarkRybczyk, I think that by "This controversy has been added to the ESPM Sunday Countdown Page" you mean Sunday NFL Countdown#Controversy. Anyway, please make the suggestion on Talk:Rush Limbaugh. -- Hoary (talk) 02:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Secondary-ness of the Cornell Daily Sun source w/ respect to Cornell University

This issue concerns Draft:Cornell Jeb E. Brooks School of Public Policy - Wikipedia, which I authored. In my original draft, I relied heavily on internal documents of Cornell University's administration as sources, which I have now removed because Theroadislong pointed out their primary-ness was insufficient to show my article met WP:GNG. I have now, instead, used secondary sources from a local newspaper, the Cornell Daily Sun. However, I am not sure if the Cornell Daily Sun is considered secondary enough because it still hires editors from Cornell, even though it is independently owned.

In terms of meeting WP:GNG, I'm a little bit confused. I've seen a mixed bag of sources of varying degrees of secondary-ness. Some, like Cornell Ann S. Bowers College of Computing and Information Science - Wikipedia have been approved with sources that mostly come from school-affiliated newspapers, other drafts such as Draft:Akshara International School Wakad, Pune - Wikipedia have been denied.

What do you guys think? Adeqyateky (talk) 02:08, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Adeqyateky I think you need a mixture of primary and secondary, as certain things can only be proven with primary sources.
For example, filming locations in my city Bradford the 5th biggest city in England by population, the 6th biggest city in England by area, the UK's 4th City of Culture and the world's first UNESCO City of Film.
The MSM ignore my city (apart from when it comes to crime, poverty, religion etc), especially when it comes to things like Bradford's filming locations, actors, singers, rappers and entertainment in general, as they focus too much on cities which they incorrectly assume are bigger, even when Bradford has more filming locations than they do, or is the main location of a production.
For most Bradford filmed productions, you find no mention Bradford in the mainstream newspapers, and in the rare cases you do, they will briefly mention just 1 or 2 locations out of 5 to 10 locations.
Therefore the only ways to prove locations were used for filming, is with sources who were most likely involved in the filming itself like the 5+ local newspapers, the tourism office, the council, and the film office, along with the regional news sources and film office...
However you'd be better off asking me, the eagle-eyed location spotter, as even they only mention around a maximum of 5 locations in productions which have used at least 10.
Most of my city's filming locations are not on IMDB or Wikipedia, but in my head, as I haven't got around to updating the 1000s of productions (with tens of thousands of missing cast, crew, companies etc) and locations I know of yet. Danstarr69 (talk) 03:48, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Danstarr69, if I may continue the digression: I am but a subsidiary-stream medium, but for what I'm worth I haven't ignored your city. Four years ago I created the article Nudrat Afza; perhaps, using reliable sources, you can improve on it. -- Hoary (talk) 09:13, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Hoary I'm too busy updating IMDB on a daily basis. Where 10% of my time is spent updating Bradford and Yorkshire related stuff, and 90% of my time is spent updating random stuff I've come across along the way. In the last month I've updated productions filmed in or by people from London, Cork, Belfast, Conwy, Oxford, Sheffield, Leeds, Los Angeles, Mumbai plus many more I've no doubt forgotten. Right now I'm updating a Bollywood film which was mainly filmed in Yorkshire (specifically Bradford, Harrogate and York). Practically every single credit needs correcting or is missing. Some are in the wrong department entirely, a lot need name attributes adding as their names don't match the spellings on-screen, most have the wrong job titles, and practically all of them need a subtitle specifying things like the department within a department and/or place they were working in ie "camera operator: Mumbai" or "camera operator: second unit". Plus as with every production I update, there's countless duplicate profiles which need merging, although Indian productions always have way more than usual. I've added over a 100 companies to that single production so far, yet there's still 3 minutes worth of credits left to check, which is where most of the companies will be at the end of the credits. Then I'll have no go through the 1000s credits again once they're all correct, deleting any obviously false ones, and adding uncredited to the uncredited ones which are likely to be legitimate. Danstarr69 (talk) 13:04, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
Got it, Danstarr69. (I hadn't realized that your interests were so strongly filmic -- if that's the right word for "films", which I imagine these days are "shot" onto memory cards.) Best of luck with your perhaps Sisyphean task. -- Hoary (talk) 22:45, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Hoary it'd be much easier if filmmakers/companies added every single credit themselves, and the cast/crew themselves corrected any minor name differences, rather than leaving it to normal people like me, especially ones who can't be bothered to search for the correct profile, so create multiple duplicate profiles.
It's over 36 hours since I said "There's still 3 minutes worth of credits left to check."
Now I've still got just over 2 minutes worth of credits left to check, even though I've added 100s more credits, largely because I've spent a lot of time merging 100s of profiles.
Most of the duplicate profiles seem to be for people who work directly for the production company themselves, so they should be easy for contributors to find, as the same films and TV shows keep popping up again and again.
The company has produced a minimum of 102 films and TV shows since 2001, yet most of the duplicate profiles have been made in the last 5 years, as they contain films/TV shows from 2018 onwards.
I've just decided to take a break to update another Bradford Bollywood film with fewer credits, which I started over 18 months ago (when my computer decided to wipe itself when clicking play on a Vimeo video), and I quickly remembered why I stopped.
A woman from Leeds in it, has 2 separate roles, with 2 separate names (both first and second names), both of which she uses in real life, along with a third name. So I stopped to add her aliases, and social media profiles.
I had a look through her acting specific social media profile to find other credits, most of which are missing from her profile, not that she has many (she has 5, possibly 6 film/TV credits, with the others seemingly theatre type stuff).
I've just updated a short film which she listed (that was already on my massive to do list), and had the unspecific filming location of Yorkshire on IMDB. However her profile specified that it was filmed in Shipley Glen, so I'll be specifying the location too. The director (who only has 3 IMDB production credits, 1 of which I added a couple of years ago) has at least 2 other films missing from IMDB, so I'll be adding those eventually.
Also on her profile was a Leeds based acting school she attended, which I stumbled across a couple of years ago before my computer broke. I've checked out their Youtube channel and found some more Yorkshire based films, which were also on my to do list. How many films are there? I've no idea as there's 100s of acting rehearsal type videos, however there's at least 8 short films (one of which I know for certain was filmed in Bradford, by a company who mainly seem to do productions in the North-East), and 1 short web-series.
You can see how I'm constantly going from one thing to another. Danstarr69 (talk) 03:14, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Adeqyateky Whilst admitting I have not looked at each citation in detail, my immediate reaction is that this draft would not meet our WP:NCORP criteria for notability unless you can find something other than local secondary source coverage. So I think User:Theroadislong was right to decline it at this point in time.
This is simply a department of a university with coverage about it in the local media. At best, in its current state, I would expect a brief mention in the main article about the university, plus a redirect from the draft's title. I note there is a similar article on Cornell Institute for Public Affairs. I have just tagged this for Notability and being written like an Advertisement. I may submit it for a Deletion Discussion if I return in a few months and don't see any improvement to it which demonstrates its notability as a stand alone degree program being covered in anything other than local or insider media. I hope this feedback helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:02, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Submitting Draft for Review

Hello. May I have assistance with submitting a draft article for review? Thank you. Amaramoore (talk) 00:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Amaramoore: Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! I assume this sandbox is your draft. I put an AfC template at the top, and you can just press the "submit" button, and submit it for review.
But if I'm being honest, the article in this state will probably not be approved. You need more reliable sources. Generally, Medium and Instagram are not reliable sources. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 01:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I will look for more reliable sources. Amaramoore (talk) 03:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Wrongfully Deleted (or Not)?

Hello Teahouse Team Members,

Hope this message finds you all well. I’m writing because about a year or so back an article that was written about me and had existed for many years was deleted. The page was not initially created by me but, in full disclosure, I did correct or amended it from time to time over the years to keep the information accurate. When I noticed the page was marked for deletion, I reached out to the editor who marked it as such to ask why, explained who I was and what I just detailed above here for you. My inquiry was met with a snarky response accusing me of creating the page myself, using it for self-promotion, etc. (I was just being honest and didn’t realize at the time that editing a page about me personally, without following proper guidelines, was frowned upon). Soon after, the page was deleted. Ultimately, after doing some research, I’ve come to learn more about what is and is not acceptable in this space and believe that the article that was deleted was not promotional in nature, just a listing of facts and written, I believe, in a fairly neutral tone. I also think that it met notability criteria. As such, I believe the article was wrongly deleted. It also bears mentioning that the rude editor I corresponded with and who I believe deleted the page has since been dismissed from Wikipedia for misconduct. For your reference, the article in question was listed (under my name) as, “Mark Bacino.” I was hoping one of you might be so kind as to take a look to see if the article as is (or an amended version) could be reinstated. I’ve been told that the article could be submitted for “deletion review” but in looking into that process a bit, I’ve found it to be extremely overwhelming for a Wiki novice such as myself and furthermore, since the article was written about me personally, I’m not sure if my submitting a review request would, in itself, be seen as a conflict of interest. As such, I’m at a bit of a loss. Obviously, I would like to see the page (or an amended version need be) reinstated as I believe it was a good resource for those interested in my work, but at the same time I would like it to be done in keeping with the rules and guidelines of Wikipedia. Any help you all could offer would be greatly appreciated. Thank you. QueensEnglish (talk) 08:03, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Marc Bacino article was speedy deleted as unambiguous promotion. I can still view it as an administrator, and I must agree with the deletion. If you want to tell the world about your work, the best place to do that is on social media or a personal website that you own and control. If you truly believe that you meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person(or perhaps the narrower notable creative professional definition) and there is significant coverage of you in independent reliable sources, you are not forbidden from attempting to create and submit a draft about yourself via Articles for Creation- but writing about yourself is highly discouraged. My suggestion is that you go on about your career as if Wikipedia didn't exist, and if you are truly notable as Wikipedia defines it, someone will eventually write a proper article about you.
Be advised that an article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 09:06, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello 331dot,
Thanks for your reply. I appreciate your review of the original article, your feedback and advice. A few other questions - After reviewing the article, do you believe it could be edited in such a way as to remedy its “unambiguous promotion” issues? And if so, how might that be accomplished since only an administrator can currently gain access to the article? Would another administrator have to do that in this case and is there a way to request that someone do that? Please forgive my ignorance in these matters.
Thanks again for all your help! QueensEnglish (talk) 10:35, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@QueensEnglish: The vast majority of contributions and expansions in that article were yours. In effect, it became your own personal autobiography. As the subject of the article, you have a conflict of interest. When you have a conflict of interest with a subject, you are permitted to make minor corrections to spelling, grammar, numbers, etc., you can revert obvious vandalism, and you can add citations to reliable sources that are independent of the subject. For anything more substantive, you should have proposed on the article's talk page for another editor to review. You didn't do that, you expanded the article yourself.
The only venue we have for an editor to write about a subject with a conflict of interest is Wikipedia:Articles for creation (AFC). You are welcome to start there, and submit an article for review and comment. ~Anachronist (talk) 11:57, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@QueensEnglish Anachronist, above, has said exactly what I was going to say to you. You've treated this Wikipedia article as if it were your own personal profile page, and you were virtually the sole contributor to it over the years. If you still feel you meet our essential notability criteria laid out in WP:NBIO or WP:NMUSIC, you need to ensure that you put forward citations to independent, reliable sources that have published details about you and your life in some depth which prove you meet them. Failing that you will be wasting your time making appeals to different venues to reinstate the article. That simply is not going to happen, Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:46, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Nick & @Anachronist
Thank you both for your thoughtful and informative responses, I very much appreciate the guidance and help in understanding the ways and rules of Wikipedia. Something, as Nick has noted, I’ve learned the hard way. Ignorance of the law is never a good defense but in my case it’s what actually occurred. In the time I contributed to or edited the article created about me (by someone I didn’t know), I truly didn’t realize that that was something that was considered illegal in the Wikipedia world. It may be hard to believe for those of you here in the know, but it’s (stupidly on my part) what happened. I guess I felt if I was adding only factual, accurate information to the piece it would be seen as a positive/helpful thing. Obviously, now I see the error of my ways and have done the research here (after the page was removed) to understand a little about the basics of conflict of interest and notability as seen through the Wiki lens.
Nick, re: meeting notability criteria, you had mentioned putting forward citations to prove as such. Since the article has been deleted, how would one do that if I wanted to go that route (not sure I want to, but just asking)?
Also, I don’t know if this helps any, but in reviewing the notability requirements, I could be wrong, but I believe I meet them (I think) on various fronts - My records have been released on indie labels in the US & Japan, both w/ long, 20+ year histories. My music has been featured in television programs. As an audio engineer, I’ve been nominated for two Emmy Awards and as a music journalist I’ve contributed extensively to major publications such as “Guitar World” & many others. Sorry for the long CV here but if there is a way to provide citations for this work and a place in which to do so, I also wanted to check to see if you would consider the above listed “notable” in terms of Wikipedia standards.
Thanks again for your time, generosity and for indulging me. I know this probably all comes across as self-absorbed, but given the high profile of the site, as you know, having a presence on Wikipedia is something important and worth retaining, if possible. QueensEnglish (talk) 17:39, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@QueensEnglish No worries - it's a fair question, and nowadays we're a lot more intolerant of non-notable or promotional articles than we were in our early years. That's mainly because now Wikipedia is seen as much more universally significant than it ever was in its formative years - especially now that Google takes our contents and merges it with other stuff to create information panels of its own about people and things.
Now, I know little about music or details of our WP:NMUSIC notability criteria. You'd have to work through them to see if your work meets or goes beyond those bars. If it doesn't, then the only way would be if there have been detailed and in depth articles written about you, your life and your music in mainstream media.
Remember that everyone one of us had done stuff, created stuff, written stuff during our working lives. What's critical to Wikipedia is evidence that the world at large has noticed that fact... and that others have felt it worthwhile to write about them.
Two or three such articles (not interviews, not private blogs etc) would be needed. Those sources would have to be used as the sole basis for creating content on a Wikipedia page. What you happen to know or believe about yourself is irrelevant - no disrespect, but our policy is never to accept the word of the person who is the subject of a Wikipedia article (they tend to be a tad biased, you see, not to mention that what they might want to say about themselves cannot be verified by someone on the other side of the world.)
Having found those in depth and independent MSM sources, one would use the wizard tool at WP:AFC to draft an article. It would be essential for you to declare your conflict of interest and only to include Verifiable facts that have been published in sources with some degree of editorial control and fact-checking. I hope this helps. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:11, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi Nick,
Thanks for another prompt and helpful reply, I appreciate it! Hope all’s well in your part of the UK. I think I understand what you’re proposing I do if I wanted to do so. Definitely something to think about. I’m not entirely confident that I would be able to create a new article to spec here, as there are so many detailed requirements, especially walking the slippery slope of conflict of interest. I fear I just don’t have the depth of knowledge of the platform required. That said, I will consider it further. In the meantime, I suppose I can always hope someone else, once again, writes an article highlighting my work. Thanks for your kindness! QueensEnglish (talk) 18:39, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm a very new editor (Lurked for a while, finally decided to create an account and start contributing).
I've read some of Wikipedia's policies, and there's a few that spring to mind that might be worth a read (If a more competent editor could add in some courtesy links I'd appreciate it!).
Firstly, an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Once an article is published and accepted, it belongs to Wikipedia (broadly). And one of Wikipedia's aims is to document a 'summary' of information and mainstream viewpoints, based off secondary sources on the topic. As such, if you're ever involved in a controversy, and a reliable secondary source like a newspaper runs a story on the controversy, you can expect that controversy to be commented on in a Wikipedia article about yourself. Not all press is good press.
Secondly, Wikipedia is not for promotion. A 'presence on wikipedia' doesn't confer (to my knowledge) any specific privileges, nor is it likely to lead to a significantly higher amount of people engaging with your work. People who are interested in your work will probably look on other places on the Internet if there isn't a Wikipedia article, and if you're Wikipedia-notable enough to have a Wikipedia article written about you, then word of mouth and mainstream media will probably promote you more than Wikipedia could or would.
Thirdly, Wikipedia's definition of 'Notable' is finicky and different to most uses. There's even subsets of Wikipedia-notability depending on what you're writing about (Entertainers, academics, events, etc). Wikipedia generally only cares about what other people (ie uninvolved and less likely to be biased) have to say about the topic, unless it's trivial information like Birth dates etc. As such, what may make you notable in professional circles does nothing for you unless there's a few uninvolved sources commenting on the your work. I might be notable in my own field, but that means nothing here on Wikipedia (And I'm quite glad of it). PenguinPhone (talk) 18:15, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi PenguinPhone (love the screen name, btw),
Thanks for your feedback, I really appreciate it. You raise some good points and have given me a lot more to consider, especially in terms of the complexity of trying to create an article for myself, given all the COI pitfalls, vs. the actual value or worth of the existence of such an article. Definitely some food for thought there.
Thanks again! QueensEnglish (talk) 18:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi @QueensEnglish, the pages that @PenguinPhone referred to but didn't link to are: WP:ABOUTME, WP:PROMO, WP:N and WP:NMUSIC. You may find it informative to read over those pages. CodeTalker (talk) 00:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, CodeTalker. Much appreciated! QueensEnglish (talk) 04:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

what should i do if I get editwarring?

I get this message?Is there something I need to do on this behalf?17:47, 8 July 2023 Ymblanter talk contribs protected 2023 Manipur violence [Edit=Require autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 17:47, 8 July 2024) autoconfirmed or confirmed access] (expires 17:47, 8 July 2024) (Persistent disruptive editing; requested at WP:RfPP) Jjmgwiki (talk) 04:21, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Jjmgwiki: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1195. That is not directed at you. It's a log of times the page has been protected at which level and for how long. As far as I can tell you're autoconfirmed so you won't have problems editing the article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:13, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Are there free online courses on wiki?

Hi everyone, I’d like to know if I can enroll in any free courses about Wikipedia editing. Is there anything like this available? Shiggernitz (talk) 04:35, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Help:Introduction is like that. -- Hoary (talk) 06:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia Education is an independent (off-wiki) organization that works closely with Wikipedia to bring college students hands-on experience editing Wikipedia, while enrolled in courses in North American universities. Their course has about a dozen training modules and a dozen sets of exercises. You can go through Wikipedia Education's student training modules at Wikipedia:Training/For students. Mathglot (talk) 06:55, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
You can look for YT videos like [8]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:55, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Long pending draft

Dear experts,

I hope this message finds you well. I am a Wikipedia reader from the Chenab Valley region and recently came across a draft page titled Anzer Ayoob, which appears to be about a notable living person who is a prominent journalist in our region. As I was considering starting a draft article about the founder and Chief Editor of The Chenab Times, Anzer Ayoob, I stumbled upon this existing draft, which has been pending approval since February 2023. I believe it contains more than three reliable sources (WP:THREE) that establish notability, and it could be a valuable addition to Wikipedia. However, lacking expertise in Wikipedia editing, I am uncertain about whether it requires any improvements before being accepted. Your professional guidance in assessing the draft for approval would be highly appreciated, and I am eager to contribute to the platform in a meaningful and accurate manner. While checking draft I have added related Wikiprojects including India, Biography, Chenab Valley and Jammu and Kashmir to it. Thank you for your time and assistance. 101.0.50.165 (talk) 11:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. As noted on the draft, "This may take 4 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 4,132 pending submissions waiting for review." There are only a limited number of volunteers who review drafts, so patience is required. 331dot (talk) 11:18, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@331dot Thank you for your response. I understand that the draft has been pending for over four months now. While I don't have an immediate urgency, as an information seeker, I was hopeful to see it published on Wikipedia. I believe contributing to the improvement of drafts can be a valuable learning experience. Hence, I kindly request your guidance on assessing the draft and identifying areas where it might need improvement. Your help in this matter would be greatly appreciated. 101.0.50.165 (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
So what you are asking for is a pre-review review of the draft. Every editor of a draft would like it reviewed and accepted quickly, but if we allow some to "jump the line" we have to let everyone do so, which defeats the process. The reviewer will leave you feedback if they don't accept the draft and if improvement is possible, will allow it to be resubmitted. If you think that the concerns of the previous reviewer have been addressed, the draft is likely to be accepted.
All of that said, I don't see any red flags that stand out at me with a cursory read. 331dot (talk) 11:32, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@331dot Thanks for your words. I would love to improve other articles related to our region till then. 101.0.50.165 (talk) 11:37, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

.debug_info

This has a notability tag. While creation, I have added two references, one from the https://gcc.gnu.org/ (I think authoritative) link itself. Does this deserve this tag. This may not be as used as much as .bss section, but I think it deserves to be an independent page. Wikieditor 2027 (talk) 11:26, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Wikieditor 2027: The source you used (GCC Wiki) is a user-written site that can be updated by anybody. Can you provide a more reliable source?--Gronk Oz (talk) 11:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, WIkieditor 2027. The question (always) is not whether it "deserves" an article, but whether enough independent, reliably published material has been published about it to base an encyclopaedia article on - or, in Wikipedia jargon, whether it is notable. Articles in reputable journals would do it, or sections in books from reputable publishers (and written by somebody who wasn't involved in its development). ColinFine (talk) 12:11, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Rifle Brigade officers records 92.2.210.133 (talk) 13:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

How to improve?

Can someone please give some advice on how to improve Draft: India's Got Talent (season 10) Draft page? Harshvardhan 1427 (talk) 10:15, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Harshvardhan 1427 Isn't the main problem that the first episode is not due to air until 29 July? A fully-formed article in an encyclopaedia needs to await comment in reliable secondary sources independent of the show's producers. Wikipedia is not a breaker of news and there is no rush to publish here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay!
Harshvardhan 1427 (talk) 13:53, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

CSS help

Resolved
 – QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 14:18, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello!

I want to change my global CSS, so that the text on {{XfD relist}} appears as black (because disambiguations are orange for me so that's confusing), but I don't know why it doesn't work. Here's what I tried so far:

CSS code
.xfd_relist span {
	color: unset;
}

Thanks in advance, and sorry for being incompetent with CSS. -- QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 23:14, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi QuickQuokka. You can add !important to override other declarations:
.xfd_relist span {
	color: unset !important;
}
It's controversial for code used by others but it's fine for yourself when you really want that result. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:53, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft Rejected (Draft:Tonle_Bet_Commune)

Hi everyone,

I recently submitted a draft for review (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Tonle_Bet_Commune) but the article got rejected saying that it does not contain reliable sources. However the article clearly references the National Committee for Sub-National Development (NCDD) which maintains the official lst of all administrative divisions in Cambodia. What am I doing wrong? Dcwilkie (talk) 03:50, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dcwilkie. Your draft was declined not rejected. "Declined" means "please improve your draft in response to feedback you have been given, and resubmit". Rejected, on the other hand, means "this topic is inappropriate for a Wikipedia article, so stop trying". Your draft includes only a single primary source. I recommend that you add several independent sources to reliable, published sources that devote significant coverage to this place, and summarize what they say. If you cannot find those sources, then maybe it is better to cover this place in a list article, instead of a freestanding article. Cullen328 (talk) 07:48, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
@Dcwilkie You have re-submitted your draft without adding any more sources of the type Cullen328 mentioned. This will not endear you to the reviewers. As the notice of previous decline says "If you have not resolved the issues listed above, your draft will be declined again and potentially deleted." Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:18, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Not really. I updated the reference to point exactly the official page for this commune on the Governments official website. If an official reference from the a government website isn’t a good enough reference, I don’t know what is Dcwilkie (talk) 02:32, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Dcwilkie, that is, indeed, not good enough. It doesn't meet the criteria outlined above by Cullen328 or below by KatoKungLee. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Dcwilkie - Basically, you want to add information about this from books or various news/newspaper outlets. If it is notable, there should be some. Try Google Books and newspapers.com along with simple Google/Qwant/Yandex searches.KatoKungLee (talk) 16:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

There is no need for archived sources yet

I saw below messages while removing my edits.what does it mean?

11:07, 24 July 2023‎ Kautilya3 talk contribs‎  58,297 bytes −26,675‎  Restored revision 1166824495 by SunDawn (talk): There is no need for archived sources yet Tags: Twinkle Undo Jjmgwiki (talk) 14:15, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

This refers to some redacted edits at 2023 Manipur violence, so it is somewhat academic. If you really want to know, I suggest you ask User:SunDawn. Shantavira|feed me 14:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Manny Ramirez (baseball) minor fix

Hello. Go to above article, scroll down to Postseason statistics line, go to home run column. I cant figure out the exclamation point next to HR, I cant figure out how to delete it. Thanks for your help.Theairportman33531 (talk) 21:01, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, it looks like your additions to the postseasons statistics were reverted in the article, as I could not find said exclamation mark. They were reverted as it did not reflect the WP:Consensus that was set by the baseball Wikiproject not to include statboxes in articles as Wikipedia is not a repository for statistics. Best regards — Prodraxis {talk • contribs} (she/her) 21:39, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Note: The statboxes were put back and are there now. The editor placed it back last night. Can you go to the Postseason statbox and remove the exclamation point next to HR column. I have tried numerous times and failed. Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) 12:07, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Theairportman33531, I believe I fixed it here. There was a paragraph break in the middle of the table's headers for some reason. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

John George Smyth (1815-1869)

It states on page that he and his wife Diana had four daughters. According to records they had 3 daughters and a son William James Smyth was born in Warmfield 1st November 1847. Baptised 2nd January 1848 St Peters Warmfield son of John George and Diana of Heath Hall. William commissioned in the Rifle Brigade Cornet by purchase. promote lieutenant fought in Ashanti War 1873-74 1877 ADC to Major General Smyth at Devonport. Then as far as my research goes he disappears 92.2.210.133 (talk) 13:44, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP user, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Wikipedia relies on reliable published sources for all information. Our article John George Smyth (1815-1869) cites their four daughters to Burke's Peerage. In order to challenge that successfully you will need either to show that Burke's Peerage doesn't make that claim, or to be able to cite a reliably published source that says otherwise - your own unpublished research is unfortunately not enough, because a random reader has no way of verifying.
If you have such a source, you may edit the article directly; but if not, or if you're nervous about editing it, I suggest you bring up the issue, (and briefly describe where you information comes from) on the talk page Talk:John George Smyth (1815-1869). ColinFine (talk) 13:51, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Even if you have a source that confirms existance of a son, that is all that needs to be added, i.e., not the son's name nor his career. An exception would be if there is an existing Wikipedia article about the son, in which case Wikilinking his name would do. David notMD (talk) 14:41, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

Hi, I am a fairly new wikipedia user and I would like to know if the following sources are trustworthy on wikipedia: ZDNet.com and pureinfotech.com. I need this to change content on an article for the citation sources. Myrealnamm (talk) 15:43, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources ZDNet is considered generally reliable for technology-related articles. Shantavira|feed me 15:48, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Myrealnamm ZDnet is now mainly a blog site but uses experts: so, as above, should be fine. Pureinfotech doesn't have an article in Wikipedia and has been used only a few times as a source, as this search shows, so perhaps caution is needed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:54, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Shantavira @Michael D. Turnbull Thank you for your advice. I will use that with the citation sources that I will use. Myrealnamm (talk) 16:00, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Visual editing

Hello, I have question regarding visual editing. I mostly specialize in filmography editing and I noticed a slight problem/change. Whenever I am adding info through source editing and I want to look how it looks through visual editing, It wont let me. I click visual editing button when I am in source editing domain and it doesnt work. I dont know whether this is bug or new update, but after Thursday, it doesnt work. I can look through "preview" but its annoying since I cant fix anything right on spot. So if you have any tips or info, I will be glad. Ps, Im editing on android. Kesseder (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Kesseder, welcome to the Teahouse. I recommend making a report over at WP:VPT, which is our tech forum and the haunt of many experienced techies. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Mahatma Gandhi

An editor removed (reverted) my edit in this article on the ground of criticism, but then how do some other articles contain a separate section (sometimes with a different headline) for it? Incase the editor had problem with the use of that particular word as headline, he should have just altered the heading, rather than reverting the whole stuff.

Again, unbiased info doesn't necessarily signify that only positive facts about the person in question are to mentioned, so what's the problem in including some well sourced stuff? Expecting intervention from a veteran user. জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা (talk) 21:19, 22 July 2023 (UTC)Blocked sock. Aman Kumar Goel (Talk) 17:38, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা. Please read about the bold, revert, discuss process. You made a bold edit, another editor reverted your edit, and now you should discuss it on Talk: Mahatma Gandhi. Please be aware that there is an ongoing disagreement about article content being discussed there right now. Cullen328 (talk) 21:52, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@জয় হিন্দ জয় বাংলা, many older/less-well-maintained articles have criticism sections, but the best practice is to avoid them. For a highly watched, high-quality article like Gandhi's, I would suggest proposing changes at Talk:Mahatma Gandhi first rather than making them directly, particularly given the risk of getting drawn into an edit war. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:49, 22 July 2023 (UTC)

Palikir

When you type "Palikir" into the search bar, before hitting enter, a brief description pops up. This is great except that the description is not as helpful as it could be. The description says, "place in Pohnpei, Federated States of Micronesia". That's true, but it's also the capital of the country! I don't know how to fix it. Maybe on Wikidata? The associated Wikiproject is inactive, so here I am. Any help is appreciated. --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 16:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Cromwellt - What you are seeing is the Short description which appears at the top of the Palikir page in Edit mode. The point of a short description is that is must be short - 40 characters or less (including spaces), or some displays will truncate it at 40 characters - although the existing description is already over 40 characters, so it should be shorter. If you can improve the short description within that limit, please do so. - Arjayay (talk) 17:03, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
I've been Wikipedia:Bold and updated the short description. Qcne (talk) 17:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, @Arjayay and @Qcne. The short description looks better now, though it does seem to still be longer than 40 characters, as Arjayay pointed out. Maybe removing the word "city" would help, though it might not be enough. Not sure what else to do, since "Federated States of Micronesia" is so long. Maybe abbreviating it to either "FSM" or "Micronesia"? --Cromwellt|talk|contribs 18:38, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
 Courtesy link: Palikir
I'm not sure how appropriate it is to shorten the name of the country, but it appears to me that WP:IAR applies here. The country name is simply too long to accurately describe the subject in less than 40 characters. WPscatter t/c 18:43, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

AllMusic reliable?

Is AllMusic considered a reliable source? It seems like it shouldn't be. Went to check on WP:RSP, but couldn't find mention of it. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 19:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

CurryTime7-24 there are over 50 discussions in the RSN archives - but perhaps the simplest summary is at WP:ALLMUSIC which links to RhythmOne in the WP:RSNP table - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 19:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Template linked in 'See also' section

Hello Wikipedians! I was just reading Homo naledi and the articles 'See also' section contains a link to the Template:Human timeline template. I think it looks rather strange and I did see this, and replace it, before. Now I'm wondering if this is actually a Wikipedia guideline or something, but can't find anything. So my question is if putting a link directly to a template into the 'See also' section is the norm? Thanks! RealLifeRobot (talk) 05:53, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @RealLifeRobot, welcome to the Teahouse. MOS:ALSO has the guidance on what goes in a See also section. Template links aren't specifically forbidden, but the MOS does repeatedly say that the section is for linking to articles. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:28, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi also to you! Thanks for the help. That helps me a lot with this question. Also directly 'bookmarked' the MOS for later use. Thanks again! RealLifeRobot (talk) 20:22, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Atributing Hard Copied Images From "Wikipedia"

I would like to print out some images I've come across on "Wikipedia" as art. Some of them require atribution. Is there any documentation outlining the requirements for "visable" atribution?

Since I would most likely be hanging the prints on the wall, I would like to print the atribution on the back of the image. Because the atribution on the photo itself would require me to modify the image, and it would look distract from the image, and look terrible. Replying on Wikipedia:Teahouse - Wikipedia mentioned that since its on the back of the image it wouldn't "not appropriately attribute it, as nobody would be able to see it" ("Actualcpscm"). This argument is problematic because 1) It would mean anyone who has looked at a "Wikipedia" image in full screen mode in breach of terms of service as the atibution wasn't concurantly visable with the image itself. 2) It would mean anyone who has printed a "Wikipedia" image on a multi-paged essay in breach of terms of service if the atribution was placed in a seperate ciations page at the back of the essay. 3) Whats stopping the curious viewer from turning the image over? There is an establised convention of adding relevent information on the back of photographs.

Clarification on "appropriate atribution" would be appreciated.

Thank you. JJGTCA (talk) 20:32, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi JJGTCA. Try taking a look at WP:REUSE and c:COM:REUSE for some more information. I've added that short-cut link to the Wikimedia Commons page because when it comes to images much of information the Commons page contains can also be correspondingly applied to (English) Wikipedia and also because many of the images you find used on Wikipedia are actually hosted on Commons. One other thing to understand is that neither Wikipedia nor Commons is in almost all cases the copyright holder of the content (text and image) it hosts. The Wikimedia Foundation is only the copyright holder of its own "originally" created content. The copyright holders of most of the content you find on a Wikipedia page are those whose work is being hosted or who originally created the content, and it is those persons who you're going to be expected to attribute. In some cases , particularly with respect to images, the attribution requirements laid out the by the copyright holder of the content are quite specific and you will need to comply with them in order for your "reuse" of their content to be considered license compliant. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:27, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

How long does google take to index a new wiki article?

How long does google take to index a new wiki article? Songuitar333 (talk) 03:34, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

@Songuitar333: New articles are marked as no-index for 90 days or until they are reviewed by WP:NPP. After that, it is up to the search engine. RudolfRed (talk) 03:48, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
I just read a report on meta or mw or somewhere that a study had been done about this question in recent years, and the average was about 15 minutes, which is not a surprising result. Mathglot (talk) 00:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Pronoun use

Hi all. Recently I was editing a page of someone who uses she/they pronouns. Throughout the page, this person is referenced as both "she" and "they," sometimes within the same sentence. It looks like this was an intentional edit to include both of her preferred pronouns. On one hand, I understand that logic. But on the other, my understanding of a person's preference for "she/they" pronouns means that either pronoun is acceptable. And I find it far easier to follow along where pronouns are consistent. So it would make more sense to me to keep it consistent and use either she or they throughout. Is there an official stance on this, and, if not, does anyone have any further insight? I'm certainly open to changing my position on this if I am misguided. Thanks! Lydiaellsworth (talk) 18:14, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to the Teahouse! I could have sworn MOS:GENDERID addressed this but it appears not to. There is a note on Demi Lovato on the first pronoun usage that says Lovato uses both she/her and they/them pronouns. This article uses she/her pronouns for consistency. I'm not sure how common that sort of thing is but it seems like a good solution to me. WPscatter t/c 18:41, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
I think that's a good way to handle it too. Thanks! Lydiaellsworth (talk) 19:29, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Just be careful if the gendered pronoun is excluded by the article subject, in which case such a disclaimer isn't useful. The article on Olive Gray is like that, and to me it makes for an awkward read using only Gray's name before the pronoun is explained and then using "they" thereafter, but it is what it is. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Pick the best film stock-to-video conversion(s) of Smile, Darn Ya, Smile!

Duplicate conversation; please comment at the article Talk page instead

There may exist a wrong aspect ratio in some links...

Wikimedia Commons
Internet Archive
  • "Smile, Darn Ya, Smile 1931 Hugh Harman, Rudolf Ising". 1931-07-23 – via Internet Archive.
  • Hugh Harman, Rudolf Ising (1930-09-05). "Smile, Darn Ya, Smile! (1931)" – via Internet Archive.
  • Smile, Darn Ya, Smile! (1931).ia.mp4
  • Smile, Darn Ya, Smile! (1931).mp4
  • Smile, Darn Ya, Smile! (1931, Redrawn and Colorized) 1.mp4
  • Smile, Darn Ya, Smile! (1931, Redrawn and Colorized) 2.mp4
youtube
.... 0mtwb9gd5wx (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@0mtwb9gd5wx, this appears to be something you should be discussing on the talk page, Talk:Smile, Darn Ya, Smile!. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
In fact, I see you've already posted this there. That is the correct place. Why are you also posting it here? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:47, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Closed as a duplicate in order to prevent fragmentation of discussions. Mathglot (talk) 06:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Linking a term

In other articles, should the term "non-Muslim" be linked to the Kafir article if I cite the source used in the Kafir article which says that Kafir means "non-Muslim" too (this is the source cited there)?-1Firang (talk) 03:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

@1Firang: I would suggest not doing unless there's absolutely a really strong encyclopedic reason established via talk page consensus for doing so. Trying to add such links to various articles just for the sake of doing so is likely going to lead to some quick reverts since some might see such an edit as being contentious and not WP:NPOV given that "Kafir" is sometimes translated as "infidel", "pagan", "denier" among other things. You should be very careful adding content about religion to articles which aren't directly related to religion itself, particularly articles about people, because it can lead to strong disagreements between editors, edit warring, and possibly even worse. If stating someone is non-Muslim is really needed, then that term seems more than understandable without needing to link to any other article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:00, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
With context obscured, answers to this question are likely to be less meaningful. In the edit in question, you added a link to Kafir where the source said 'non-Muslims'. As the Kafir article accurately states, the term kāfir is a complex one with multiple interpretations. The source for the core claim states quite clearly that in the Ottoman state a religious position that Muslims could not enslave other Muslims was recognised. (The source also says—but you have not tried to add this—that Muslims clerics in the Ottoman state recognised & legally protected the right of Jewish people & Christians to own enslaved Muslims.) Connecting this to the term kāfir creates a possibility of confusion which is not present in the cited text. As currently written, the article in fact has a more expansive account of who could be enslaved (all non-Muslims) than would the use of the term kāfir (possibly not People of the Book).
But there's more context: For weeks, your edits have focused almost exclusively on articles relating to Islam & sexual violence. Multiple other editors have complained that you have repeatedly misrepresented sources; you have characterised the edits that have been reverted as 'critical of Islam', which gives a pretty clear sense of what it is that you are trying to do here. This has led to your receiving a "final warning" from an Admin with a threat of an indefinite block. Another user warned you here at the Teahouse that your continuing edits were in violation of the spirit of an existing topic ban. What's the point of introducing kāfir when it's not in the original text? As stated above, it doesn't clarify anything. It looks like what it does is introduce a term that has an emotional frisson—as the article Kafir quotes 'the term is [held by some to be] both offensive and perceived as "theologically violent"'. Pathawi (talk) 07:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Eastern Newsbeat wiki page

(courtesy link: Eastern Newsbeat)

Recently someone loaded some "inaccurate fake" information onto a wiki page I manage Eastern Newsbeat. I am trying to find out who did the edits. Any tips? I have deleted that false information as I am currently a member of the organisation and have access to all history. Tricia Ziemer (talk) 03:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm assuming you're looking for the page history, which would be this way. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 04:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Oh, additionally, you should probably be mindful of the conflict of interest guideline, since you do manage the program. LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 04:05, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
The false information was added in 2021 by an editor "Bundyfilmer" who then ceased editing any articles. David notMD (talk) 08:13, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Just a reminder, @Tricia Ziemer, that Wikipedia articles are not owned. See Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Obviously vandalism should be reverted, but it's worth keeping in mind that any valid criticism may be added if it is properly sourced! Qcne (talk) 09:22, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Regarding a new page

I have made a page of a famous Indian Archaeologist Dr. Shivakant Bajpai with proper references and citation but it got declined

Shivam Dubey archaeologist (talk) 09:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It was declined for the reasons given by the reviewer. Do you have a specific question about it? 331dot (talk) 09:46, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Shivam Dubey archaeologist Did you use a LLM such as ChatGPT to create your draft? The "conclusion", in particular, reads like the sort of nonsense they produce, full of WP:PEACOCK wording. I quote: illustrious career as ... has left an indelible mark on the field of archaeology. His unwavering commitment to .... has earned him respect and admiration from all quarters. As a visionary scholar, mentor, and researcher, .... will continue to inspire archaeologists and history enthusiasts for generations to come. This is the complete antithesis of Wikipedia's policy. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:18, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I had rephrased it on Chat GPT, Yes i just saw that thabks and sorry for the same Shivam Dubey archaeologist (talk) 10:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I have removed that part, Shivam Dubey archaeologist (talk) 10:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Have a read of Wikipedia:Manual of Style which explains how to write to the Wikipedia style. The draft is unfortunately still full of inappropriate language and I think really needs to be completely rewritten into a Wikipedia:Neutral point of view. Qcne (talk) 10:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Shivam Dubey archaeologist I'm just checking over your recent edits, and unfortunately you're falling into the trap of Wikipedia:Citation overkill, and you've still left entire sections and statements uncited. That, plus the real issues with the lack of neutrality in the draft, will mean it will certainly be declined if you try and send it for review again.
Have a look at some of these Wikipedia:Good articles that I have taken from Wikipedia:WikiProject Archaeology/Assessment. These articles meet a high standard and if you were going to base your article draft on anything, try and do it from a Good article:
- Larry Geraty
- Ahmad Hasan Dani
- Margaret Ursula Jones
Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 10:36, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank You Shivam Dubey archaeologist (talk) 10:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I removed much of the 'Peacock' wording, but more editing needed. David notMD (talk) 13:01, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Adding a Comment to an Article

I would like to add a few words and formulas to a Wikipedia article on 'Kuroda normal form' This artcle cites one of my papers and i wish to add some information to the subject. My problem is i don't know how to do it. Sincerely, György Révész Professor Emeritus of Computer Science UNC at Charlotte Kinematografia (talk) 14:20, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Kinematografia, and welcome to Wikipedia and to the Teahouse. Thank you for your question on what looks to be a highly technical topic.
Because you could be seen as having a Conflict of Interest for adding content from one of your published papers, and because it can be tricky for a brand new user to update a complex article correctly, I think your best course of action is as follows:
Go to Talk:Kuroda normal form and post your suggestion there, in as clear and as concise a manner as possible. This includes showing precisely what text or formula content you think needs changing, and adding as clearly as possible the precise text or other additions you would like to see added, along with your reasons. You can then leave it to other, more experienced editors to worry about ensuring the correct formatting is used.
However, do please ensure that what you are asking for is relevant to the article and generally accepted by sources other than yourself. Because, as I suspect, the pages will not be watched by many people, you can follow instructions at WP:EDITREQUEST to draw attention of editors to your request. I see you are already drafting something to that effect in your sandbox. But be prepared for minor, highly technical edit requests to be turned down if they cannot be demonstrated clearly and simply to be necessary to the comprehension of the topic. Suggesting that someone goes and reads your book is not going to get content changes made. Your edit request must be as explicit, as clear, and as well-reasoned as you can possibly make it. I hope this helps you a little. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Citing sources template

Hi everyone, very new to this and could do with a bit of help. I'm just going through some of the medium tasks and wanted to get used to adding references. The one on this page has asked me to add references for the "Personnel" section and has a template underneath but I've noticed similar pages don't cite band members.

Should I go ahead and add the citations to each band member? (the source has already been added and used in another section)

Or should the template for citations be removed in this particular scenario?

Thanks in advance for your patience and help. SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 10:16, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it is good practice to add inline citations. Ca talk to me! 07:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for that!
If its the same source for each band member should I just do it as
- Name1 [1]
- Name2 [2]
- Name3 [3] SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 08:04, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Ignore that I meant:
- Name1 [1]
- Name2 [1]
- Name3 [1]
SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 08:04, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@SpicyTofuNoodles: It's best to use the same reference; see Wikipedia:REFNAME for more details on how to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:29, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Moving article during GA review

Dear Teahouse,

I am considering moving Emmanuel Zheng Manuo to Zheng Manuo (currently a redirect page) during the GA review, by my reviewer's suggestion. If I do it, will it affect the GA review page / bots / all the system-ish things? Will the talk page and all other stuff be moved accordingly?

Cheers, TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:55, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Pinging Mike Christie, who maintains the GA bot. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 14:13, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I would suggest not moving the article till the review is over. The bot would probably handle it OK, but it would think the old review had disappeared and a new article and review had appeared, which would mean the timestamps of the nomination and review would be wrong -- not a big deal, but nice to avoid if possible. You'd also have to be careful about moving the review page; it's going to credit the review to whoever does that move. I think the best answer would be to agree with the reviewer that the article will be moved once the GA review has concluded, then let the review finish and let the bot process the page, and then move the page after that. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, Mike! Also thanks for the essential Bot. TheLonelyPather (talk) 15:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

How an image can be not copyrighted?

I am not able to understand which source can be free from copyright Surya7902 (talk) 11:48, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello Surya7902,
I think you might be asking about free content and non-free content. You may see Wikipedia:Free content and Wikipedia:Non-free content for more information. In particular, Wikipedia:Public domain covers Wikipedia's policy about copyright-free works.
I am not an expert on this topic, but I suggest that you also read the following policies:
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 13:04, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Could you breif it a litlle more @TheLonelyPather with an example or sort. It would be helpful. Cheers and thanks for replying Surya7902 (talk) 13:23, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi Surya7902,
It's hard for me to come up with an example. I think a good rule is that anything on Wikimedia Commons is okay to use.
Cheers -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 13:34, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
In case you need it, the link to Wikimedia Commons is https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page. TheLonelyPather (talk) 13:40, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Surya7902. The vast majority of images that you find online or in print are copyrighted, whether or not you see a copyright notice. The details are complex and some lawyers specialize in copyright issues. Here is a basic overview. Copyright has expired on very old works. In the United States and many other countries, copyright protection usually lasts for 95 years. There can be variations by country. Works of employees of the US Federal government doing their jobs are in the public domain, which means copyright free. Freely licensed images such as those found on Wikimedia Commons are still copyrighted, but the legal terms of the license allows them to be reused freely, with the only restriction being attribution. Cullen328 (talk) 16:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

How do you reply to a page editor who has asked a question in his revision remarks? Robert Howell (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Revision reply how to... Robert Howell (talk) 17:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Robert Howell, welcome to the Teahouse. You could either start a discussion on the editor's talk page, or start a discussion on the talk page for the page being edited and ping the other editor to that discussion. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. No, I don't think it warrants discussion, I simply thought I might clarify my reasoning for the edit. The question was rhetorical and somewhat dismissive, written in haste I presume. I'm sure he is busy with other items on his agenda. But thanks again. Robert Howell (talk) 17:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Page resubmission

Hello! Back in 2019, my page was removed because it was not notable. Now that there are articles out there that meet the notability requirements, I have resubmitted the article. (Draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Patriot_Software). What do you think of the new sources meeting these requirements? Thank you in advance for any insight you can provide! Rachelwriting (talk) 15:49, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Rachelwriting. There are 24 references in that article, and I for one am not prepared to go through them all for you. Instead, will you tell us which are the three best, independent and non-insider/business sources talk about that company in detail and in depth, sufficient that it meets these notability criteria for businesses? I'll happily look at those for you.
I would add that the very lengthy quote from PC Mag does not seem necessary. You should consider shortening it, or saying the same thing in your own words, as the quotation does not seem very significant to me.
Please also indicate on your talk page whether you do or do not have a Conflict of Interest in wanting to promote this company. An answer either way is still awaited. Many thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:16, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi Nick, thank you for your suggestions! I've removed the PC Mag paragraph and will resubmit. Yes, I do have a conflict of interest. Do I just include the code here? {{edit COI}} Rachelwriting (talk) 18:04, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Rachelwriting, that is the code you should use on the talk page if you have an edit request. In order to declare your COI, you should instead use one of the methods described in this section. I'd recommend the following method: Edit the source of your user page and type {{UserboxCOI|1=Patriot Software}}, then click "save". Your user page is at User:Rachelwriting. I'd recommend not using the Visual Editor for this, it tends to add unwanted markup. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:13, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help. I will review this section and add it in on my user page. Rachelwriting (talk) 18:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I did a quick scan of some of the references. #1 gives a 404 error, which is not a good start. #2 and #3 are from the subject's own website, so don't count toward notability. #4 is a database entry, so ditto. #5 is a press release, again doesn't count. #6 looks like a press release or interview, doesn't count. #7 is an advertisement. #8 is a patent filed by the subject. #9 is a press release. #10 is a press release I guess, although it's just one sentence. At this point I give up. I agree with Nick, please show us which three of these sources actually contribute to notability. CodeTalker (talk) 16:30, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Refs 11-13 (funding and transaction descriptions) do not contribute to notability. David notMD (talk) 16:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
14, 15, 16, 24 are software reviews.
17, 19, 21, 22 are about the Collapse of Silicon Valley Bank which affected Patriot Software, of those 17 and 21 have a paragraph each about PS, 22 doesn't mention it all, 19 goes into more detail.
23 is a statement by the company CEO.
I cannot access 18 and 20.
I wouldn't get my hopes up. -- Random person no 362478479 (talk) 17:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I believe the sources that most meet the notability guidelines are:
https://www.wired.com/story/silicon-valley-bank-svb-the-weekend-silicon-valley-stared-into-the-abyss/
https://www.payroll.org/news-resources/news/news-detail/2023/03/14/bank-failures-impact-payroll-professionals
https://talkbusiness.net/2021/10/walton-investment-platform-leads-funding-round-for-ohio-software-company/
https://www.reuters.com/article/brief-patriot-software-offers-up-to-20-m-idUSFWN1S80AW Rachelwriting (talk) 18:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Is it better to remove the excess information/sources that don't meet the notability guidelines, or to keep them in for further information on the topic? Rachelwriting (talk) 18:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Rachelwriting For draft articles where notability is in question, less is sometimes more. The padding out with dubious citations just draws attention to the promotional nature of someone's editing. BTW: if the nature of your WP:COI is that Patriot Software are paying you to write this article, you are also obliged to declare who is paying you. Further (not especially well-written instructions) can be found at WP:PAID.
I took a look at your four references. Although there are 19 mentions of Patriot in the Wired article, it's really about SVB, not Patriot, so that's not hugely helpful. (In fact, it could be equally as relevant to a draft article about "Patriot's Mike Wheeler")
The next one is a mere mention
The talkbusiness.net is just an insider business newsletter and is not useful as a independent source
The one after that is the briefest of one-line mentions in a one-line update
So, overall, I fear that without the New York Times running a couple of in-depth article about your client's company, your draft failed WP:NCORP based upon those references and any others you might find. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news. The only solace I can offer is that most businesses in the world would also fail that same test of notability, wherein the world at large has noticed and written about that business in books or MSM. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Are there any Wikipedia pages that are so notable that they have meta Wikipedia pages about themselves?

For example, if the Wikipedia page Turkey itself was notable, then there could be a wikipedia pages called Turkey (Wikipedia article). does any such article exist? Michael7604 (talk) 04:24, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Michael7604 and welcome to the Teahouse.
I'm guessing you're talking about the disambiguation page? Here it is > Turkey (disambiguation) 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 04:49, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
No, I mean like if a Wikipedia article itself was so notable in the media that that page itself had a Wikipedia article about it. Like an article about an article Michael7604 (talk) 04:52, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
I don't think those kinds of articles exist. It's totally unnecessary to have an article about a Wikipedia article. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 04:59, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes: Wikipedia Seigenthaler biography incident is about the article John Seigenthaler; and there may be one or two other examples. -- Hoary (talk) 05:02, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Not to mention Wikipedia's own article on itself (since the very earliest months of the project), as well as separate ones for its foreign-language variants. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 20:06, 20 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, there are quite a few that come to mind in fact. I was just looking at one of them today. You can find them in various places on meta and on Wikipedia. Lilbrownhole (talk) 05:04, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
It's Commons, not Wikipedia, but File:Macaca nigra self-portrait large.jpg has Monkey selfie copyright dispute. Suffusion of Yellow (talk) 05:08, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes: Jar'Edo Wens hoax, as another example. But if anyone is looking at this discussion, thinking "If I create a great hoax, even after it's found out and deleted my feat will live on in Wikipedia history", and salivating, better think again. Living on in history will be very much less likely than a humdrum indefinite block, all for a squalid little incident known to no more than a dozen people. ¶ How about the opposite: a Wikipedia article famed for the right reasons? Unlikely, as Wikipedia is conservative: never perceptive or innovative, always merely regurgitating. -- Hoary (talk) 05:14, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
You may find something interesting in categories like Category:Wikipedia content, Category:Criticism of Wikipedia and Category:Wikipedia controversies. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:51, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
Since it's "pages", we can also include wikipedia topics that have articles, such as ARBCOM's. Nosebagbear (talk) 14:30, 19 July 2023 (UTC)
@Michael7604: There is also Wikipedia:Silly Things/Wikipedia's article on George W. Bush which was an article once until it was brought to AFD. 115.188.159.190 (talk) 10:28, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
@Michael7604 There is also Wikipedia Star Trek Into Darkness controversy about the Wikipedia article Star Trek Into Darkness. :3 F4U (they/it) 23:14, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Advice to improve approval for new article (Draft:Crezl)

Dear Teahouse community,

I am new to the Wikipedia community. I submitted a draft article for a new Korean crossover group called Crezl. An editor for the draft article noted that I had some formatting issues, which I hope has been addressed (removing all formatting and following the "=" section breaks). In addition, he suggested that I come to this community to get advice. Would an experienced editor provide any further suggestions? Thank you in advance for your kind help. Thank you! Echohk (talk) 17:38, 23 July 2023 (UTC)

Echohk, you will need to remove the direct external links from the body of the article. There are several unreferenced paragraphs, and a whole unreferenced section: you will need to remove these if you can't supply references for them. Maproom (talk) 19:00, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much! I removed the external links and added additional citations for the paras you mentioned. Really appreciate your advice. Echohk (talk) 19:25, 23 July 2023 (UTC)
As I found very helpful the previous editor's comments, may I ask for additional feedback from other experienced editors to improve the draft? Also, as I continue to edit the draft, do I need to do anything to "resubmit" for approval? That is, at the top of my current draft, it reads "Review waiting, please be patient." Does this mean I don't need to do anything additional and it will be reviewed in whatever queue? Thanks so much. Echohk (talk) 14:36, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
You submitted the draft for review and it is pending. It is not a queue, but a category in which reviewers pick drafts from to review in no particular order. 331dot (talk) 14:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Got it, thank you for the quick reply! Echohk (talk) 14:40, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
The 13 uses of "namu.wiki." will need to be removed or replaced it is user edited so NOT an independent reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 14:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your review. The referenced content actually comes from the show itself, so can you refer to the episode of the show? I have seen this in other Wiki articles of artists from competition shows. Echohk (talk) 15:06, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
I removed all references to namu wiki and replaced with news articles. Thank you so much. Echohk (talk) 23:53, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

edit 'translation difficulty

Help? There is a Finnish language Wiki article about my maternal grandfather, Jallu Honkonen. For now the only thing I wanted to edit is his Date of Death. It’s January 3 1969, NOT May 3 1969. But I can’t seem to access an editable English version and I myself don’t read/speak Finnish. Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 15:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

@Eldyr88PHy$N: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1195. The Finnish and English Wikipedias are different projects, so it is entirely possible that they may have an article on your grandfather while we don't. As our jurisdictions differ we can't really help you here except suggest you edit the Finnish article and replace toukokuu with tammikuu. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:33, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm happy to edit the fi.wiki article for you, but would need a reliable source for the DOD, as otherwise the edit will likely be reverted. (Which is kind of ironic, given that the DOD currently shown is unreferenced, but that's how these things tend to work.) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Will this be enough (see below)…. Though identified as Jallu Honkonen my grandfather could also be known as John Honkonen or even as John Jallu Honkonen. If this is insufficient I might be able to access the actual obituary from either the Fitchburg Sentinel or Worcester Telegram (both of Massachusetts) but that might take awhile.
(Redacted) Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 19:45, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Please don't share personal info of your relatives... LilianaUwU (talk / contributions) 00:19, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
In principle I might choose to agree with you. However I don’t see this as information sharing about a relative but as a correction to the historical record. Since the original article is from the Finnish wiki site, perhaps the author(s) will appreciate the update. Besides as the man died at the age of 83 in 1969 (2023-1969=54. 54+83=137)….. Frankly I don’t think he’ll mind the update. Eldyr88PHy$N (talk) 03:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Location of publication, Place of publication (continued)

I've only just noticed Mathglot replied to what I said 20 July at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1195#Location_of_publication,_Place_of_publication. I still don't understand the difference between Location and Place. Mcljlm (talk) 23:00, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

Mcljlm, ColinFine explained (i) that if you use only one among "publication-place", "location" and "place", then you can use any, because all will behave the same way; and (ii) what will happen if you use both "publication-place" and either one of "location" and "place". This assumes that you're not using the "Visual Editor". For details, see Template:Cite book/doc#Publisher. -- Hoary (talk) 00:29, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
In creating citations I only use Visual Editor.
Since "Alias: location" is at the end of the Template's "place" paragraph the difference is even less clear, especially as "publication-place, place, or location", "publication-place and place or location" and "place or location is shown before the title prefixed with "written at" and publication-place" appear in the following paragraph. Mcljlm (talk) 03:26, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

U.S. President ledes

Hey, is there something documenting why every U.S. president article starts with the words President McPresident (birth – death) was an American politician who served as the [N]th president of the United States ? - (emphasis on the inclusion of the words "American politician")

I swtg this was something I saw being debated as redundant at one point, but I don't have the faintest clue where I saw that... :3 F4U (they/it) 23:08, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Freedom4U, it is indeed strange to think of some of these people as having "served" as anything. More like "was a [list previous occupations] and politician, who lorded it over as the [N]th president of the United States". -- Hoary (talk) 00:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm trying to wonder why "President McPresident (birth – death) was the [N]th president of the United States" isn't used; there's gotta be some kind of consensus somewhere, but I can't find it/figure out what it might be based off of. :3 F4U (they/it) 00:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Got it, Freedom4U. I imagine that this would have been argued over in those articles about prezzes most argued over. So I suggest going to Talk:Donald Trump/Archive index and using several likely search terms to look through it. If you get nowhere, then ask on Talk:Donald Trump. Bend over backwards in your display of neutrality: make it clear that you have no beef with the current wording, but say that its patterning surely can't be a mere coincidence and you'd like to be pointed to where the relevant discussion took place. -- Hoary (talk) 03:15, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Well actually, the reason I came here was because it was rephrased at Richard Nixon (an article on my watchlist; by the original FAC nominator) and I can't quite understand why the original phrasing was there in the first place. :3 F4U (they/it) 03:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
My guess is that for presidents still alive, the construction avoids the awkwardness of referring to a living person in past tense. For deceased presidents, I'm guessing it's to keep the wording of the first sentence consistent across the POTUS articles. Just my guess. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
The formulation "American politician" is entirely consistent with the consensus that the lead sentence of a biography should indicate the subject's citizenship and main claim of notability, which is usually their occupation(s). So, Dwight Eisenhower is described as an American military officer and statesman in his lead sentence, and similarly, Ulysses S. Grant is described as an American military officer and politician. Ronald Reagan is described as a an American politician and actor and William Howard Taft is described as the 27th president of the United States (1909–1913) and the tenth chief justice of the United States (1921–1930), the only person to have held both offices. Jimmy Carter is described as an American politician and humanitarian due his 42 years of charitable work after leaving office, but his seven years as a naval officer is not mentioned in the lead sentence because he is not notable as a military officer. The talented and versatile Thomas Jefferson is described as an American statesman, diplomat, lawyer, architect, philosopher, and Founding Father. So, Wikipedia editors have (in my opinion) done a good job summarizing the careers of these presidents in a few words in the lead sentence. As for "served as", referring to elected officials as public servants is a well-established part of American political vocabulary. I consider it far more neutral than "lorded it over", despite my respect for Hoary. Cullen328 (talk) 04:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

How would I create a template whose text and images change depending on the time of the year?

I am interested in using this for a talk page banner, but don't know how to create it. LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 01:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi User:LOOKSQUARE - An image rotation example is at Portal:Catholic Church, right column, News section has an image that changes monthly.
At Portal:Catholic Church/News, click on "Edit" to look at wikicode for CURRENTMONTHNAME. Click on "Subpages" to see how there is an image for each month. Same concept can be applied for Talk page banner. Good luck. JoeNMLC (talk) 01:36, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
There is CURRENTWEEK magicword if you would like 52/53 instead. Also Wikipedia:Tip of the day where there are 366 tips rotation, although setting up those may be too complicated. JoeNMLC (talk) 01:49, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks! I used the CURRENTMONTHNAME one. 10:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk LOOKSQUARE (👤️·🗨️) talk 10:23, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
 Done - Happy that works for you. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 11:12, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Translation and references

Hi everyone,

I'm currently working on building up this page and I noticed there was a French version of the page. I will try to put things in my own words after translating but with regards to the references is it okay to use the same references from the French page on the English page? What is the best practices when translating info and using the same references? I don't want to accidentally plagiarize or anything.

Thanks in advance! SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 11:12, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi SpicyTofuNoodles I think all these points are covered in Wikipedia:Translation and Help:Translation - If you have any questions having read these please come back and ask - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 11:42, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
This is excellent! Exactly what I was looking for!
Just to confirm this is what I add to edit box before I publish the changes:
(a) "Content in this edit is translated from the existing French Wikipedia article at fr:Exact name of French article; see its history for attribution."
and additionally I can add:
(b) {Translated page|fr|Exact name of the French article}}on the target article's talk page ({{Translated page}}
Is part (a) added to the edit box every time a translation is made and added to the page?
Thank you :) SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 12:27, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Probably theoretically we should add part (a) to all individual edits that are translations, but practically it would make a very messy edit-history, and it would be difficult to combine it with other information about the edits - and no one is going to want to translate a long article in one single edit. I therefore tend to start with a statement of what I'm translating, and indicate that the immediate future edits will be translations too. Sometimes, I use edit summaries such as "Continuing translation from German wikipedia (later life)" to indicate that I've moved on to a new section on "later life" but this is still all one translation. If anyone is reading the article's history, they will have the actual original source named a few lines further down. The governing principle is that anyone reading the English version should be able to work out where you got the text from, so the work of the original French editor is acknowledged. Elemimele (talk) 12:21, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Infobox help needed

Hello again, Teahouse! I recently decided to edit Ron Swanson in order to maintain its GA status. However, I've come across a problem with the appearance part of the infobox.

What I was trying to do was add the dates of the first and last appearances of the character using the respective fields. However, when I added them, it didn't show up. An example of what should've shown up could be seen in Rosa Diaz. For now, an editor has added the date next to the first and last appearance fields, which is okay, but I still wonder why the fields didn't show up in the first place.

Also, since I'm already here, what do you think about the Template:Libertarianism in the United States sidebar being included in the article? Yes, the character is listed in the infobox, but I don't know if it's necessary to put it there.

Please ping me if you respond, because I might forget to check back. Thanks! Spinixster (chat!) 13:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

@Spinixster:The dates only work with the first_major /first_minor fields the Ron Swanson template is using first and last - X201 (talk) 13:45, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@X201 I have added those before, but it still didn't work. Spinixster (chat!) 13:49, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@Spinixster, I just tried it and it seemed to work - is the result what you were looking for (diff)? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 13:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, that's what I was trying to do. I guess I messed up where I should've put it XD Spinixster (chat!) 13:57, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Article Too long

Hi,

I feel like the article for Russia is too long, as compared to China's article. Since I cannot edit Russia's article and add the template message, can someone do that? Myrealnamm (talk) 21:06, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

@Myrealnamm the place to bring this up is at Talk:Russia. But you'll probably want to give something more specific than "too long". What parts are too long? Tell the editors there, and see what they say. -- asilvering (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I'll add: the article is only a bit too long, by the "normal" standard of 10k words. For a huge topic like Russia, that doesn't seem off the mark to me. -- asilvering (talk) 21:09, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
I would also note that China is significantly longer than Russia, coming at over 15k words, which is outside the upper limit of what we want for articles. :3 F4U (they/it) 23:11, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Freedom4U It just looked like it was about the same length according to the scroll bar. By the way, how do you see the word count for a page? Myrealnamm (talk) 14:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@Myrealnamm I use the DYK check tool! (Documentation/Instructions) :3 F4U (they/it) 14:44, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Referencing special issue of newspaper without number

Heya, folks. I want to add a newspaper to an article as a reference, but the issue doesn't have a specific number. When I put it into the cite news template, it shows up as "No. [issue name]", which is not what I want. Is there anyway to get around this? For reference, this is the source I want to add:

  • {{Cite news |date=8 December 1999 |work=[[Áššu]] |issue=Fáddá: Girjjiit |page=7 |title=Ođđa girjjit/Nye bøker |trans-title=New Books |language=Northern Sami, Norwegian Bokmål}}

Which displays as: [template removed to prevent page from being added to tracking category]

ArcticSeeress, you've specified the issue identifier as "Fáddá: Girjjiit" (I don't know what that means, and Google translate doesn't tell me). If you don't have a number or name that would identify the issue, just don't specify the issue; the date should be enough to do the job. Maproom (talk) 12:52, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I cannot remove the issue because they released another one on the same date. The name of the issue translates to "Theme: Books". I want to remove the No. text that's appended before it because there isn't any number to provide in the first place. ArcticSeeress (talk) 13:07, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
You've used "Cite news". Are you citing a news source? If a newspaper publishes two versions on the same day, they're often called something like "early edition" or "late edition". Maproom (talk) 14:34, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
On that template |issue= and |number= are aliases. They are expecting a number and only a number, that's why it adds No. to the entry. You'll have to find another way around the problem. - X201 (talk) 14:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
The "edition" parameter seems to be the most fit in that case, so I think I'll use that. ArcticSeeress (talk) 15:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

This is my first contribution. Is it OK to put the following article through PEER REVIEW?

Please see my Sandbox draft: User:Hikaru Kato/sandbox

Hikaru Kato (talk) 07:09, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

@Hikaru Kato Welcome to the Teahouse. I have removed your draft text from your question, and linked instead to your sandbox where you drafted this article. For drafts, it would be more normal to submit through Articles for Creation if you wanted feedback. Peer review is really intended for existing articles, not drafts. It's not looking at all bad for your first effort, to be honest. Minor clean-up is needed to remove unnecessary capital letters, especially in headings which should be in sentence case (i.e. no capital letters after the first word in the heading.) The Safety section has no references to support the statements, and I think each section has been given too many sub-headings, bearing in mind most statements are just one or two sentences. The word 'purification' is wikilinked to a disambiguation page, and elsewhere I might expect to have seen a few more wikilinks. But all in all, this looks to be a very competent start. I've not checked the references, but this looks to be ready for mainspace. Nick Moyes (talk) 07:33, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes Thank you very much for taking the time to review my draft submission on cyclodextran and for your valuable feedback. I appreciate your guidance, especially as this is my first attempt at contributing to Wikipedia.
I understand the corrections needed, particularly with regard to the use of capital letters, the number of sub-headings, and the lack of references in the Safety section. I will make the necessary adjustments based on your suggestions. I also noted your comments about the need for more wikilinks and the error with the link to the 'purification' page.
I am grateful for your positive feedback and your belief that my draft seems ready for mainspace. However, I will take your suggestions into account and revise my draft before resubmitting it through Articles for Creation.
Once again, thank you for your assistance and support. Hikaru Kato (talk) 08:02, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
I have made a few edits to your draft Draft:Cyclodextran please submit for review and I will be happy to accept. Theroadislong (talk) 08:42, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Theroadislong Thank you very much for the edits you've made to my draft of Cyclodextran. I greatly appreciate your time and effort. I will go through the changes you have suggested and submit the updated version for review. Your willingness to accept it thereafter is very reassuring. I am grateful for your support in this process. Hikaru Kato (talk) 09:34, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Hikaru Kato Although Theroadislong is a very experienced editor and reviewer, I dispute whether the draft as it now exists should be accepted. There are many statements of fact that are not referenced. It is possible that the existing references would also support the unreferenced content. David notMD (talk) 11:08, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
It could be accepted but with tags for reference improvement, it would easily pass an WP:AFD which is the criteria for accepting a draft. Theroadislong (talk) 11:11, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
Agreed. Consider submitting to AfC. Under normal circumstances there is a period of days to weeks (sometimes months) between submittal and review, which could be used to improve referencing, but it appears that here, Theroadislong is willing to provide a fast review. leaving you to consider improving refs after it is approved. David notMD (talk) 11:24, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hikaru Kato A recent article which has useful references is doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2022.120315. In my opinion, too many of your references are to Kobayashi's work and a broader perspective would be useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:14, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
@David notMD @Theroadislong @Mike Turnbll I appreciate your feedback. I am committed to improving the references in my article draft as much as possible. In particular, in response to Mike Turnbull's suggestion, I am planning to diversify my references to include not only Kobayashi's work but also other reliable sources. Additionally, I will consider using new reference materials like doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2022.120315 to further enhance my article.
Following David notMD's advice, I intend to submit my article to Articles for Creation (AfC). I plan to continue improving references during the time between submission and review. If Theroadislong is willing, I would appreciate a swift review. Hikaru Kato (talk) 00:38, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@David notMD @Theroadislong @Mike Turnbll Thank you again for your valuable feedback. I wanted to share some additional information that might be relevant to this discussion. I am an employee of Nissin Sugar Co., Ltd., the company which markets the CI-Dextran mix, the product discussed in my draft article.
Given this context, I understand the importance of maintaining neutrality in my contributions and avoiding any conflicts of interest. Therefore, I seek your advice on how to best acknowledge my professional affiliation in the article. Should I mention my employment within the article, or would it be more appropriate to disclose this information in the article's talk page? Also, in light of this disclosure, are there any specific parts of my draft that you think should be revised to better ensure neutrality and adherence to Wikipedia's guidelines?
Your guidance on this matter would be greatly appreciated. Hikaru Kato (talk) 01:02, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hikaru Kato: The article isn't about you, so you don't need to mention your affiliation anywhere. As long as you submit the article for review and the reviewer accepts it and publishes it, it's fine, and thereafter you should refrain from editing it. If you want to mention your affiliation anywhere, consider putting a {{connected contributor (paid)}} tag on the article's talk page. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:25, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Anachronist Thank you very much for your helpful guidance and clear explanation. I will follow your advice and submit my article for review without mentioning my affiliation within it. Additionally, I will place a connected contributor (paid) tag on the article's talk page to disclose my professional affiliation with Nissin Sugar Co., Ltd. After the article has been accepted and published, I will refrain from making further edits. Once again, I sincerely appreciate your assistance in this matter. Hikaru Kato (talk) 02:58, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
@Hikaru Kato: After it is published, you may still influence the content by making proposing changes on the article talk page. You can make minor corrections to spelling, grammar, dates, names, etc. directly in the article. You can add additional citations to reliable sources independent of the company. But for anything more substantive, it's best to propose a change on the talk page. You can use the {{request edit}} template to cause your request to be listed on a category page that is monitored by some editors. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hikaru Kato The statement on your User page should be amended to be clear that you are an employee of Nissin Sugar Co, which markets the CI-Dextran mix. Given your paid connection (see WP:PAID) I recommend you improve referencing before submitting the draft to AfC, as that is allowed. Once a draft becomes an article, you are not to make further edits. HOWEVER, there is a path for contributions. You are permitted to propose changes on the Talk page of the article. An unaffiliated editor would review your proposed changes and either implement or deny. Wikipedia:Simple conflict of interest edit request explains how. Doing that 'flags' your edit request to attract attention to volunteer editors who help with this task. May take weeks before acted on.David notMD (talk) 07:54, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Once an article is approved it is not available to Google or other search engines until either reviewed by New Pages Patrol (WP:NPP) or 90 days pass without a NPP review. David notMD (talk) 07:56, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

tpa revoked

does revoking talk page access prevent users from editing their own talk pages or from accessing them entirely cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 14:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san: it only prevents them from editing their own talkpage, they can still read it. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:27, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
oh, okay
thanks cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 14:29, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Just for the sake of clarity, neither admins nor to my knowledge anyone else has anything that would ever let them prevent someone from reading Wikipedia, or any part of it. Blocks, protection, etc., can only prevent editing. (Now, when entire countries choose to block it, that's different, but well, that's of course out of our hands.) Seraphimblade Talk to me 19:10, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
honestly, that makes sense
i hear banning ips from accessing things is really really not easy
being at least way more than my technologically inexperienced brain can handle cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Need help in adding inputs on a existing page

Need help in adding inputs on a existing page and also editing on a particular page. Ronny 2014 (talk) 20:18, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ronny 2014. Please read Help:Introduction, and feel free to ask more specific questions. Cullen328 (talk) 20:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft delince dummynation

Why was it delince Coltshark (talk) 20:49, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Coltshark, welcome to the Teahouse. Draft:Dummynation was declined because it has no sources which demonstrate that this video game is notable - for instance, reviews by professional critics on respected gaming websites. You've cited nothing except the official website and a couple of platforms where it's being sold. Please see WP:42 to get an idea of what's required. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:55, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Inadvertent Page Creation

I was attempting to archive my talk page using an ex-administrator's instructions. T misinterpreted them and created an incorrectly named talk page. How can I either undo this or make the current talk page archived? See my talk page. Thanks Oldsilenus (talk) 20:16, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

I saw your talk page but still don't know which "incorrectly named talk page" (INTP) you're talking about. Anyway, if you're the only editor of the INTP, then blank it (remove all its content). Deletion should then be straightforward. -- Hoary (talk) 21:46, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
I have moved your archive pages to the right place. You may also refer to Help:Archiving a talk page as a guide for any further archiving of your talk page. NmWTfs85lXusaybq (talk) 21:53, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Is the Kids Online Safety Act notable enough to be on Wikipedia?

There has been some coverage by some well known sources such as NPR, CNBC, and The Washington Post. Would that be enough coverage to be a sole Wikipedia page? EnbyPie08 (talk) 21:51, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello again, EnbyPie09. Reliability of sources is just one of three criteria: is the coverage independent, and is it in significant depth? Please see WP:42. ColinFine (talk) 22:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
These sources all cover the KOSA independently, and possibly cover the bill in significant depth:
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/17/business/dealbook/children-online-safety-bill.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/05/02/updated-kids-online-safety-act-aims-to-fix-unintended-consequences.html
https://www.wtnh.com/news/connecticut/new-haven/sen-richard-blumenthal-plans-to-reintroduce-kids-online-safety-act/
https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2022/02/16/kids-online-safety-act-unveiled-blackburn-blumenthal/
https://fairplayforkids.org/kosa-lgbtq-kids-protection/
https://techcrunch.com/2022/02/16/senators-propose-the-kids-online-safety-act-after-facebook-haugen-leaks/
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/two-us-senators-set-introduce-kids-online-safety-act-2022-02-16/
https://cdt.org/insights/senate-commerce-should-reject-bills-jeopardizing-online-safety-for-kids-and-adults/
https://www.wxpr.org/community/2023-05-08/childrens-advocates-applaud-kids-online-safety-act
EnbyPie08 (talk) 22:48, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
EnbyPie08, among nine that "possibly cover the bill in significant depth", perhaps you can nominate three that do cover it in significant depth. -- Hoary (talk) 23:25, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Sure! EnbyPie08 (talk) 23:26, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hate group founders

What is the constructive method of updating an entry about public personalities to reflect their joint founding of a hate group?

I've been told adding hate group founder to their description is not constructive and considered vandalism.

Does the hate groups record need to be edited to reflect that they are a hate group instead of the lesser description as a non-profit that oppose anti-racism and promotes bigotry before the founders can be described as hate group founders? 69.159.90.53 (talk) 15:39, 24 July 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. Wikipedia articles are entirely based on reliable sources which can be verified by our readers. We can only call someone a "hate group founder" (or anything else) if that's what the source we cite calls them. Please read WP:BLP. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:58, 24 July 2023 (UTC)
the group they founded is a hate group, they actively fight anti-racism and CRT and some imaginary trans agenda, it's all available on the hate groups wikipedia page. Does the page for Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism need to be updated to be called a hate group before they can be listed as founders of that hate group? 69.159.90.53 (talk) 15:31, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
If you can find reliable sources which describe the Foundation Against Intolerance and Racism as a hate group, then you can make an edit request to get such a description added to that article. If you then have reliable sources describing X, Y and Z as founders of that group, you can add a sourced statement to their articles that they are founders of said group - but adding "hate group founder" without reliable sources explicitly calling them exactly that is likely not going to fly. Policies around biographies of living people are very strict. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:00, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Also, their involvement may or may not be something that belongs in the lead, depending on how much their notability is tied to the organization. It may only warrant a single sentence somewhere else in their article (and if you argue for including it in the lead, it will still need follow-up later in the article - leads are summaries of the articles). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you thats very helpful, the original person who took issue with it was very trolly 69.159.90.53 (talk) 04:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Found an article with some problems

Occupational health psychology has a problem under the section on person-environment fit, so I wrote some ideas for fixing the article on my user page, and they were immediately deleted under U5. I may have misunderstood something, but I thought that's what the user page was for—to place some writing until it was ready to publish on the main page. Could you please advise? 3daymonk (talk) 02:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

No, 3daymonk, the user page is where you optionally say something (non-promotional) about yourself as contributor. I've moved the deleted content to User:3daymonk/sandbox; you're welcome to work on it there. (However, you'd better bone up on how to create links: you'll be happy to learn that linking is very easy.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:33, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, quick question regarding redirect

Hello mentors!

I recently drafted an article about a South Korean company named RIDI Corporation (Draft:Ridi), and it seems like there is a redirect. My approach will be changing the title of the article to RIDI Corporation instead of RIDI, and have the note stating "This page is about the Korean company." in the article. Would that be appropriate? Wiki119988 (talk) 04:21, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@Wiki119988: Yes. It would be with something like {{About|the place in Nepal|the Korean company|RIDI corporation}}, which would produce
This page is about the place in Nepal. For the Korean company, see RIDI corporation.
--QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 05:08, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Wiki119968. Since you're using the WP:AFC mechanism, you don't have to worry about this: when your draft is accepted, the accepting reviewer will sort out disambiguation, existing redirects etc. ColinFine (talk) 09:33, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

How do I get back to the tutorial?

I am new and lost. Seem to have lost the new user tutorial somewhere..... Sillyfrog27 (talk) 03:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Sillyfrog27, I hope that one of the various pages listed in Help:Contents will sound familiar. -- Hoary (talk) 04:36, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@Sillyfrog27: You were doing Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Adventure. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:19, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, I need help with my wiki wirting

I was hoping someone here could help understand what i am doing wrong for the wiki articles. Jarrett M Pruitt (talk) 01:09, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Jarrett M Pruitt, I quote: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). (And a number of the words/phrases within that are, on your talk page, linked to explanations.) Please start by linking -- here, in this thread -- to three published, reliable, secondary sources about Valeria Andrade that are independent of her. -- Hoary (talk) 01:23, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Also, you need to disclose the conflict of interest, especially if you are being paid per the Terms of Use (see here for non-paid and here if you are being paid). 2NumForIce (speak|edits) 01:27, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Jarrett M Pruitt. One draft you wrote, Draft:Dr. Steven Fishman DDS, is overtly promotional and fails to make any plausible claim that this particular dentist is a notable person. When you set aside all of the praise that you wrote, he seems to be just another dentist. Unacceptable terminology includes deeply committed and illustrious career and imbibed the essence of delivering top-notch dental care while understanding the significance of fostering mutual respect and trust with patients and relentless pursuit of perfection and symbolizes the zenith of adult oral care. This is supposed to be a neutrally written encyclopedia article, not a nomination for dentistry sainthood. Cullen328 (talk) 01:34, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
To be clear, promotional writing is forbidden on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 01:37, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
I revised the Andrade draft to have proper sections, but there is nothing to indicate she is notable as a referee or social media. David notMD (talk) 10:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Notability

is a company being widely reported by many medias as a result of several incidents notable? The company in question is BIGMOTOR and a page for it exists in JP wikipedia.(AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 12:09, 27 July 2023 (UTC))

The company AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 12:12, 27 July 2023 (UTC)


AlphaBetaGammsh, do these media discuss the company in depth? (Please see WP:GNG.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Well, if I were to make an entire article about the incident I would have enough sources from multiple media’s without the need of original research AlphaBetaGammsh (talk) 12:18, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
For each of the sources, you need to ask, 1) is it reliable (has it been published by an organisation with a reputation for fact-checking and editorial control)? 2) it is independent (is it freely written by somebody unconnected with the subject, or is it actually just what the subject says in an interview or press release? Also, was it commissioned or published by the subject)? 3) does each source contain significant coverage of the subject? (or is it routine information about appointments, parnership deals, financing)? ColinFine (talk) 13:28, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Liminal (company) article improvement help required

Hi, I have created Liminal (company) article & it is been tagged as multiple issues. Being an Wikipedian, I still feel that lot of improvement required from my side. Please help in this article so that I can contribute as per the reliable sources. VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 11:24, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

VKG1985, whenever I read an article like Liminal (company), with a lot of information about fund-raising rounds and nothing about products, I suspect a WeWork-style scam. Maproom (talk) 13:46, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Seems it lacks depth of coverage, also I really do not see the notability here. Lectonar (talk) 14:00, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Declined article for improvement

Good day All,

I submitted a draft article for review: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Prince_Aigbogun_Omeike.

However, I just found out that it has been declined on the grounds that it does not meet your criteria on:

·        Written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopaedia

·        Neutral point of view

·        Refer to a range of independent, reliable published sources.

·        Avoid peacock terms.

However, the article is not written in bad or poor English, the article cites various published sources, there is no personal interest stated in it. There maybe room to improve it for use of peacock terms. Which I will do shortly. Please can you help me by suggesting  how I could improve it for the first three points I have made.

I look forward to receiving your kind help in this matter. Thank you very much for you anticipated help. Imanluk (talk) 16:47, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Imanluk. The biggest problem that I see with your draft is that your references are about the Benin Massacre and the Benin Expedition of 1897, which happened before Prince Aigbogun Omeike was born. In order to publish a Wikipedia biography of Prince Aigbogun Omeike, you need to provide references to reliable, published, independent sources that devote significant coverage to Prince Aigbogun Omeike himself, not to events that happened before he was born. Without such references, the draft fails the core content policy of Verifiability. There are other problems with the draft, but the lack of acceptable references showing notability of this person is the most significant problem. Cullen328 (talk) 17:08, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Dear Cullen,
Good day.
I very much appreciate your feedback and pinpointing the main issue for me. Thank you very much.
So I can address the other issues with the article as you mentioned above, before I resubmit, can you please give me examples with possible solutions.
Thank you in advance for your help.
Kindest regards. Imanluk (talk) 16:14, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
should i butt in? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 18:58, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@Cog-san, if you have something helpful and relevant to add (which wasn't already covered by Cullen328), there's no need to ask. Just do. If you have something not helpful and relevant to add, there's no need to ask. Just don't. 😉 199.208.172.35 (talk) 19:39, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
in that case, leeroy jenkins or something
i think the main points for the article being declined would be
  • formal tone: words like "accomplished" and "outstanding" are pretty much opinions. the only really viable way to use them is "[sauce] describes [subject] as '[adjective(s)]'", and that requires a source
  • neutral point of view: refer to the previous line, really, but i think being a bit drier with descriptions would do just fine
  • deprived of sauce: as cullen said, passing mentions in sources about other things aren't really enough to establish notability. if a source actually goes on detail about him and isn't biased (such as blindly praising or insulting someone based on things that might not actually be true), it's cool and good
  • peacock terms: mostly also applies to the tone and npov, but by mos:honorifics, it's usually a good idea to go easy on them. a good way to handle it would be "aigbogun (...) was the prince of the royal palace of the oba of benin and its royal blacksmith", and then go by last name basis for the rest of the article. if he's better known by his first name, common name rules might apply, but i'm not actually entirely sure
  • and the mysterious 5rd problem......... missing commas and double spaces. i can deal with that myself. exciting!!
cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 20:42, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Cog-san, when you write "sauce", I believe that you mean "source". -- Hoary (talk) 01:29, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
did i really just make this same mistake again cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 01:53, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Leeroy Jenkins brought back memories from gaming days. David notMD (talk) 10:46, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Dear Cog-san,
Your feedback is most helpful. Thank you very much for it. I will edit the article with your suggestions for improvement.
A great many thanks for your time and feedback. I look forward to my article published soon.
Kind regards. Imanluk (talk) 16:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Twitter Reference Bot

I've noticed a Twitter reference bot tonight, which had converted a poorly added reference, into a reference which wasn't much better.

It added the Tweet itself, even though the content of the Tweet was irrelevant, as it was only there to prove a man appeared on a show.

Should Twitter references contain all the text in the Tweets themselves, whether they're relevant or not?

Or should they just name the simple stuff like the Tweeter, the Date of the Tweet, and maybe some of the Text of the Tweet, not all of it, like we do with normal references?

I'm wondering because I'm going to be adding one in a bit, which contains a couple of quotes from 2 people, and a sentence explaining what those quotes are about. The topic itself is again irrelevant, as it's only being used to prove a man appeared in a later episode of a show, and I think the quotes themselves don't need to be in the reference title. Danstarr69 (talk) 23:40, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

If the wording of the tweet doesn't help the purpose of citing the tweet, then of course it shouldn't be included. But why bring this up here, rather than in the talk page of the bot or its owner? -- Hoary (talk) 23:45, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Hoary because I'm going to be adding a reference properly, unlike the person who added a poorly added Tweet, and the bot which converted that Tweet.
Therefore I wondered whether...
We're supposed to add all the text in the Tweet as a Title like the bot does
Or whether to keep the Title short and simple. Danstarr69 (talk) 23:57, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Video claimed as non existent.

What could have happened to the video that I was watching Trump talk and I heard and I was looking at the video when he said the words, " I have done more for Christians than Jesus Christ!" it is being reported that he did not say that, but I was looking at his speech when he said it but for some reason it is being said that he did not say that, but I heard him. Because at the time I said out loud, I know he did not just say that." What could have happened to that particular video? I know I am not crazy, and I hear & see very well, and it floated around on T V for a small amount of time and now everyone is saying it does not exist. Could there be a "Catch and Kill" like what happen with the sex tape of stormy? He did say it and he also said he was "The chosen one!" It is confusing that someone can see and hear something then it is put out that it did not happen when I heard it with my own ears and saw the video with my own eyes. 75.39.145.58 (talk) 21:22, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. This is the Wikipedia Teahouse where we help people needing advice on editing Wikipedia. We cannot answer for the rest of life's mysteries, I'm afraid. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Did you see this video on Wikipedia? If not, then your question cannot be answered here. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:03, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
It was Donald Trump Jr. and the quote was a bit different. Details here. Such questions are better suited to the Reference desks. Cullen328 (talk) 22:35, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@Cullen328: Thanks, that page links to another video that has Trump actually saying this (audio only): https://www.indy100.com/politics/donald-trump-claimed-christianity-religion-interview-b1931871 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Anachronist (talk • contribs) 00:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Dark mode

does Wikipedia have a dark mode? 2607:F280:3021:4900:50E3:2714:8CC5:E7D1 (talk) 03:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1195. You can learn more at Wikipedia:Dark mode. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:13, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft Declined: Draft:Concept space

Hello everyone,

I am new to the Wikipedia community, and my article Draft:Concept space has been declined twice. The draft was declined the first time as it was not adequately supported by reliable sources and read more like an essay than an encyclopedia article. I made the following changes to try and fix the issues:

  1. I verified which references that directly talk about concept space are peer reviewed. All of them actually are peer reviewed:
    1. Proceedings of the Canadian Engineering Education Association (CEEA)
    2. Advances in Engineering Education
    3. AIPU
  2. I added a secondary source of a scientific paper that presents concept space in its literature review. It presents the ability of Concept Space to connect prior knowledge: prasetya2020
  3. I added in the history section that the term “extended concept map” has been used in earlier literature (such as in foley2018).
  4. The reference to “Chase et al., 1973” was intended to support the part about chunking. I think the reference might not have been obvious enough, so I focused on the subject of chunking and used a more obvious reference: thalmann2019. I did not elaborate more on chunking though, because the wikipedia page for it is very good I think.
  5. I changed the title “Foundations and principles” to “Characteristics of Concept Space”, because I could not find a reference that tells that they are “the 4 principles”, but I think that the references are good to support that they are 4 important characteristics of concept space.
  6. I removed a few phrases that I think were not verifiable enough, and I attached references in more places to make it easier to track the sources.

But the second version of my article was still declined, the reviewer said the issues were not fixed. I would need help to know what I can do to fix those issues, or any guidelines on how to improve it. Thank you! LunaHP1234 (talk) 17:35, 25 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @LunaHP1234, the problem the reviewers had is that you appear to have done what wikipedia calls "original research". What wikipedians tend to want to see is that everything in the article refers back to a source that has said basically that same thing. So for your #5 for example, what many editors want to see is a source that straight up says "these are the four important characteristics of concept space: blah, blah, blah, and blah." Given that most wikipedia editors are not topic experts, this is understandable but frequently frustrating. I'll have a deeper look in a minute and see if I can give any specific suggestions. -- asilvering (talk) 21:15, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Sigh. I'm really sorry this was your AfC experience, the topic is probably notable and this article is mostly fine. I'll write you some in-article comments and I'll be happy to accept it after some tinkering, with one caveat: is there anyone other than David Foley and his collaborators currently using the term "concept space"? It looks like this may actually be "too soon" - as in, the concept qua "concept space" isn't notable yet. -- asilvering (talk) 21:28, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
Hey! Thank you for answering my questions. I think you might be right that it's "too soon"... I'm working on finding some more sources that use the term "concept space". In the case where I can't find any other authors or sources that use this exact term, is there a way for me to wait for some more recent publications to be published without having my draft deleted after 6 months? I think I read somewhere that a declined draft will be deleted after 6 months of inactivity. Thanks! LunaHP1234 (talk) 21:15, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@LunaHP1234 a draft will only be deleted six months after it is last edited, so provided that you check in on it every so often, it won't be deleted. But you can also move it to a subpage of your userspace, and there it will stay indefinitely, provided it doesn't break any of the rules at WP:USER. -- asilvering (talk) 00:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
I've tried to understand what "concept space" means, and formed the view that it's just a meaningless phrase used only by David Foley. I didn't see the phrase in any of the sources I have access to, except those written by Foley. But I did read the article Conceptual blending, and was struck by its criticism section, which basically says that conceptual blending isn't a testable hypothesis. (It's not even clear that it's a hypothesis at all.) "Concept space" seems to go even further in that direction. Ok. A hypothesis can be worthless, a phrase can be meaningless, and still be notable enough for a Wikipedia article. But not if no-one has used the phrase except its originator. Maproom (talk) 12:04, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi! I took the time to write an article because I am aware of Concept Space being used in a growing number of colleges and universities, and I think wikipedia is the best resource for anyone looking for a synthetic definition. As @asilvering highlights, it might be “too soon”, as the term has only been coined in 2020 by Foley et al. I will certainly keep looking for secondary sources using the term. Meanwhile, can I still let friends and teachers use the link to the draft, or should I take the article somewhere outside wikipedia? Or should I make the article start with a disclaimer about the novelty of the term? LunaHP1234 (talk) 19:25, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@LunaHP1234 Starting with a disclaimer about its novelty won't help, since its novelty is what would prevent it from being an accepted Wikipedia article - they're supposed to be about topics that are already notable, not ones that are gaining notability. It's perfectly fine to share a link to your draft, though I caution you that one of the things that Wikipedia is Not is "free web hosting". I don't think you fall afoul of that one because you have created this draft in good faith and are trying to show that the topic is notable. That is however just my personal opinion. -- asilvering (talk) 04:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

How do I propose revisions for deletion?

The 2007 Alderney UFO sighting article was blanked by JPS after being put up for deletion: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=2007_Alderney_UFO_sighting&diff=prev&oldid=1154592178

It was then rewritten from scratch during the deletion discussion. The current article's primary author, UndercoverClassicist, had no hand in the earlier versions.

Prior to blanking the article had issues with:

  • Potential copyright violations
  • Unverified statements about living people
  • Unverified statements attributed to living people

I think that Wikipedia's policy is that the article's history prior to blanking needs to be deleted. I took a look at BLP and copyright guidelines but I don't see a situation that quite matches this. What is the appropriate way to propose all revisions prior to blanking for deletion? Rjjiii (talk) 03:15, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

@Rjjiii you can only request revdel directly for copyvio. There's a really handy script for it: User:Enterprisey/cv-revdel.js. Otherwise, see WP:REVDELREQUEST for instructions. -- asilvering (talk) 04:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Alright, I used the script. The advice starting on Wikipedia:Revision deletion is very confusing. Thanks, Rjjiii (talk) 05:13, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Style question

Moved from c:Commons:Help Desk#Style question

Hello!

I am currently trying to pimp up my userpage, and so far it's pretty good. However, I have a few problems:

  1. How do I change the link colors? They don't contrast well.
  2. How do I change the style for the headings? !important does absolutely nothing. I just made headings with spans for now. Figured it out. It's not a very pretty solution.
  3. How do I change to the default background on my Babel shell
  4. How do I make the Babel shell float on the right with the Minerva Neue skin?
  5. How do I change the color of bullet points?

Thanks in advance, --QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 03:25, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

Pinging User:Levi_OP, he knows this stuff --QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 03:25, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Moved cus wiki markup is wiki markup, doesn't matter if it's on Commons or here. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 19:33, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
While I am not super technical and I am not sure if you have tried this, but I believe that you can use HTML to style user pages. ✶Mitch199811✶ 22:22, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@Mitch199811: Yeah that's exactly what I'm asking about. It's probably possible, I'm just too incompetent with it. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 01:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
For #5 you can just use <li style="color: <insert bullet colour here>; list-style-image: none;"><span style="color: <insert text colour here>;">text here</span></li> for each of the list items. The bullets WILL look a bit different though from an unstyled one (due to the list-style-image: none;). OutsideNormality (talk) 04:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@QuickQuokka: I posted some examples of custom bullets in an unbulleted list below. This is the cleanest solution I know of for a user page here. Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 05:14, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Using Template:Unbulleted list with the unicode bullet (•) and an html span:

  • • first item
  • • second item
  • • third item

Using a random character:

  • ⁕ first item
  • ⁕ second item
  • ⁕ third item

Using random characters:

  • ☀️ first item
  • 🪐 second item
  • 🌙 third item

Regards, Rjjiii (talk) 04:34, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

@Rjjiii:  Resolved, thanks.

Next step after revert war

I have run into two biased editors who are removing sourced content and their objections can be seen here. What is the next step I can take to restore the sourced content?-1Firang (talk) 12:53, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

1Firang There is no revert war. The last human edit was 2 days ago, and before that another week. What there is is a dispute. You have to approach the topic neutrally, and if you think of the editors as biased, you won't get anywhere. WP:Third opinion, WP:Dispute resolution may be appropriate. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 13:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@1Firang: forgive me if I've got this wrong, but that's probably a topic area you should be staying away from? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:34, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@1Firang: From what I see on your talk page, you are subject to a topic ban from all articles and discussions related to India or Pakistan, broadly construed (wikilinks removed). You really should step away from this and find another topic to edit. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:42, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Sourced content was removed which is why I started the discussiom on the talk page of that article.-1Firang (talk) 13:47, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@1Firang have you misunderstood the meaning of "topic ban"? -- asilvering (talk) 04:25, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
WP:TBAN says, "..... if an editor is banned from the topic "weather", this editor is forbidden from editing not only the article Weather, but also everything else that has to do with weather" which means I can't edit anything related to India or Pakistan (which is what I've been topic banned from), even if it is a subsection and cannot edit anything related to Pakistan under Islam related articles, that is all. Have I missed anything more?-1Firang (talk) 06:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Topic list

Is it not possible any longer to add a list of topics at the beginning of each article, ie, after the Intro and before the first sub-topic? BombaiyyaMag (talk) 08:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

BombaiyyaMag, I don't know what you might be referring to, unless it's the list of contents. And the list of contents isn't something you add: instead, it's generated and positioned automatically. (You can alter its appearance, move it, or suppress it, but such changes are rarely helpful.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, yes, content list. There used to be a box earlier. I am not trying to 'add' it, but I want to add the content box template to a page. Thanks in advance for your help. BombaiyyaMag (talk) 09:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@BombaiyyaMag As @Hoary stated, the contents box is added automatically once there are (I think) three or more sub-headings in an article. It doesn't use a template - it's not needed, though there is a command you can insert to prevent a table of contents appearing. I realise that is the opposite of what you want.
Last year we had a change of default 'skin' called Vector 2022 which repositioned the Table of Contents from just under the lead paragraph to the far left hand side of the screen in desktop view. It sounds like you're remembering the old layout and wishing to have it back again? You can switch back by clicking 'Switch to old view' which you will find in the 'main menu' - also positioned on the far left side of the page, immediately above the Contents table.
Does that help, or have I misunderstood what you are trying to achieve? Nick Moyes (talk) 09:43, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Ah, thanks, @Nick Moyes, I found the Contents Box on the left side! I'll try switching back to the old view if I want. Thank you so much. BombaiyyaMag (talk) 10:01, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@BombaiyyaMag I'm glad about that. To be honest, the position of the Contents table is the only thing I don't really like about the new skin. The user links at the top right of the page take a bit of getting used to (as all new things do), but I find them much clearer and more logical. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:31, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree with that. The positioning of the contents box needs to improve for certain while retaining all the other clarity that the new layout provides. BombaiyyaMag (talk) 10:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Using Late Night with David Letterman freeze frame as an image for a page

I've done some recent contributions to the Barbara Blackburn page and I'm nervous that I may violate the copyright guidelines as I want to upload an image of Barbara Blackburn on the aformentioned show in an episode, but I'm still unsure if it would be fair use or not. EnbyPie08 (talk) 21:11, 26 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello EnbyPie08. Please study the non-free content criteria. In order to upload and use a non-free image, you must ensure that the use satisfies every one of those criteria. I'm dubious that a shot from a talk show will meet #8, but you may be able to argue the case. ColinFine (talk) 21:22, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! EnbyPie08 (It's appeared that I cannot upload images yet, I'll just wait) (talk) 21:30, 26 July 2023 (UTC)
@EnbyPie08 A Google image search gives several possible photographs of Blackburn. As she is deceased, uploading a suitable low-resolution image should be straightforward if you follow the guidelines at WP:NONFREE to upload to en:Wikipedia. You can take a look at one of my uploads File:Olga Kennard in 2015.jpg to see how the resulting file page will look. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Multiple citations

It is standard format in journals to have, for instance, [1-3,6] but WP only seems to have [1][2][3][6]. (WP:BUNDLING does not apply if the citations as used elsewhere separately.) Is there a way to do this? Ldm1954 (talk) 11:15, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

This would not be possible or desirable, because each citation needs to link back to the text it supports. Shantavira|feed me 12:43, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Let me gently point out that what I asked about is standard in Endnote, Bibtex, journals etc. WP is an outlier. (Please don't shoot the messenger.) Ldm1954 (talk) 14:23, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Ldm1954 Are you referring to page numbers within a single cited source? This is easily accomplished with the template {{rp}}, which takes any text as its parameter. Thus {{rp|1-3,6}} gives : 1–3, 6  when placed after a standard citation such as {{cite book}} or {{cite journal}}. If you mean that you have six separate citations and want to cite the first three plus the last one in support of a statement, I don't see any great benefit in linking 1-3 and it could lead to problems because Wikipedia articles are dynamic and someone adding a new citation between 2 and 3 in the text of the article today would make current citation 3 become citation 4, rendering the 1-3 reference inaccurate. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
It is exactly the second which I want, i.e. 4 references (not 4 & 5 in this example). Other codes such as Endnote (which I use) do the dynamic reoridering and the condensing. Ldm1954 (talk) 16:15, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I guess the reason this can't be done here is because some articles have many hundreds of citations and checking what reordering would be needed would be too processor-intensive. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
The condensed version also has the weakness that if the reference is quoted as [1-3,6] then you can't immediately click on "2" and be taken to that reference. The Wikipedia approach is quite logical for a very online environment. Elemimele (talk) 17:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

How do I find 'reliable sources'

Here's the article I need help with: User:Deadstay/sandbox

I've been trying to find reliable sources for a wikipedia article I'm working on, and I cannot seem to find any sources. Can I have an explanation and some examples of some reliable sources. Thank you.

Deadstay (talk) 11:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

If you cannot find any sources, then I am afraid Boom Arena cannot have a Wikipedia article at this time. Sources are key to Wikipedia, as Wikipedia articles are simply supposed to paraphrase what a reliable source says about a topic. This is so that the topic can be verified by readers. Wikipedia doesn't exist just to promote something new. Have a read of Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability which explains this in more detail. Qcne (talk) 11:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Alright, thanks. Deadstay (talk) 11:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I've checked but I found nothing either. Nothing on Google or Newspapers.com Timur9008 (talk) 11:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
To echo the other two commentators: It looks like there aren't reliable sources yet for this game, which means that it's not an appropriate topic for a Wikipedia page right now. I want to emphasise yet & right now: Wikipedia lags behind the real world because phenomena need to be covered in reliable sources first. This game became big (apparently) in late June. It hasn't been covered by any press I can find, yet. If it continues to be big, it's likely to get press coverage, & then may become notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia page.
More generally, you may find these two pages useful: WP:RS explains what constitutes a reliable source, & may be helpful for you in thinking thru whether or not you've found one; Help:Find sources gives some direct guidance on… finding sources. (While it's a more direct fit with your question, I think the latter page might actually be less useful.) Pathawi (talk) 11:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
So, I've done some research, and tried to find some sources, and managed to find a few. I'm not too sure if they are fully reliable or not. Deadstay (talk) 14:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Deadstay,
Thanks for your effort. To answer your question, you should compare the sources you found with Wikipedia:Reliable sources. It is helpful to ask yourself if your sources are independent. Wikipedia does not accept sources that are sponsored content. Cheers, --TheLonelyPather (talk) 18:20, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I'm having one of those pedantic moments...

At Fenwick (department store) we declare that Mr Fenwick "...bought and renovated a doctor's house for £181 and 4 shillings at 5 Northumberland Street". This feels very odd to me, the sudden change of notation half-way through a price. It's a bit like writing "£12 and fourteen pence" though not quite so extreme. Do we have an approved format for writing sums in old UK currency? I'd have thought this ought to be £181/4/- or £181-4-0 or something similar, if we're using symbols, or "181 pounds and 4 shillings" if we're using words. But do general readers understand £181/4/0 format anyway, or is old money now so old that no one would know? Am I just worrying about something so trivial I should go out and find a life instead? Elemimele (talk) 19:54, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

@Elemimele: I am definitely not an expert on pre-decimalization currency in the UK, so I don't really know, but you may want to read MOS:$. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 20:59, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
I was at college when pounds shillings and pence were abandoned. "£181 and 4 shillings" seems natural. "£181/4/-" is totally weird – the solidus "/" denotes shillings, and should follow the number of shillings. "£181-4-0" is comprehensible. Maproom (talk) 22:04, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
I directly disagree with Maproom. £181/4/- was the normal way to express that sum. The solidus divides pounds from shillings and shillings from pence. The form with hyphens is comprehensible, but non-standard. ColinFine (talk) 22:20, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
I completely agree with Maproom, as I also was in the UK during decimalisation. The pounds and shillings was the standard usage, sometimes pence. Nobody used the "/", and I would have got a reprimand if I had used it. It should be noted that the price is older English, and that should be the basis. (Half a crown, florins etc are also appropriate, as is quid etc.) Ldm1954 (talk) 12:13, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I second ColinFine. -- Hoary (talk) 22:36, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Elemimele, if we put aside the question of precisely which grapheme to use for the last character, then "£181/4/-" looks good to me, if somewhat informal. But I don't see why persons less hoary than myself would understand it. Four shillings was/is four twentieths of a pound, so "£181.2" should be good; but such a representation would risk (i) being misunderstood as itself a misunderstanding of £181 plus just two shillings and (ii) being "corrected" to this lower figure; and therefore I can't recommend it. Though I've mislaid my copy of Hart's Rules, the Internet Archive comes through. On page 3 of the 39th edition: "Print £44. 1s. 4d., but £44 1s. 4d. in tabular matter" (so the only difference is whether or not there's a dot after the figure for pounds). The reason for italicizing appears to be based on the pedantic notion that "s" and "d" weren't, in 20th-century British use, pretty much arbitrary symbols but instead were abbreviations of what were still unassimilated Latin words, and that unassimilated loanwords and their abbreviated forms require italicizing. (If you're thinking that this is a bit nutty, then I agree.) The IA also has other editions of Hart's Rules, which for all I know may give contrary advice. -- Hoary (talk) 22:34, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
@Elemimele I would either go with what the source states, which is what is in the article, or go with @Hoary's £x Ys. Zd. Unfortunately what nobody seems to have noticed is that the whole couple of sentences appears to be a copyright violation, and should be removed! See https://www.fenwick.co.uk/our-story.html. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:48, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Drat, I shouldn't have asked, now it'll have to go, or get expressed more paraphrasically. I see the original source wrote it exactly as it is in the article, though I much prefer Hoary's format, which has the advantage of making it clear it's referring to old pounds. I have a busy morning; I'll try to re-write some history without direct copy-vio this evening. Thank you all for the advice. Elemimele (talk) 05:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
According to MOS:SIC the wording of the quoted text must be faithfully reproduced Shantavira|feed me 08:26, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Shantavira Whilst I agree with that statement, it's not really relevant here because this wasn't a quoted statement, but a copyvio of a single sentence which could easily have been written in a different way. Nick Moyes (talk) 09:34, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I'd also point out that this is the sort of situation for which {{efn}} was created. DS (talk) 14:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you all. I've done a re-write of that paragraph in hopes that my summary is sufficiently different to the original text that it's not a copyright problem. I've used Hoary's format as it combines authenticity, ease-of-reading, and makes it clear it's old money (if anyone thinks an end-note is necessary, please feel free to add). When I looked at the sources, one of them said absolutely nothing about historical Fenwick's at all (I removed it), and one of the others disagreed about the date Fenwick opened his first shop, so I've included both. Elemimele (talk) 16:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Elemimele You put the "s" before the 6, rather than after it. I've fixed it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:02, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
P.S. The source says 4 shillings, so was the 6 a typo? Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I apologise, it's been a long day. Thank you for proof-reading. Elemimele (talk) 19:24, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

How does the Main Page update?

Hi, I was curious and I checked the history of the Main Page and I saw the last edit was 5 October 2022. But if the last edit was in 2022, how does the Main Page get updated? Waterard water?(talk | contribs) 06:17, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Waterard, and welcome to the Teahouse! There are many different pages that are transcluded onto the Main Page - these pages are the ones that are updated. For example, the Today's Featured Article box comes from Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 28, 2023 (the Main Page uses parser functions to determine the correct date, I've provided today's). Much of the styling of the page is done manually using HTML and CSS. Tollens (talk) 06:27, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Waterard: See also Wikipedia:Main Page history. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Algol68

In the Wikipedia article with the above title, there is a description of Algol68R, the product of the Royal Radar Establishment, which notes that "Among the changes in 68-R was the requirement for all variables to be declared before their first use" and claims that "... this change also had the side-effect of demanding the PROCs be declared twice, once as a declaration of the types, and then again as the body of code." In the late 1970s, I used Algol68R to a certain extent and knew that this was necessary if the PROC was recursive but thought that it was not necessary if was not. If I was correct in that belief, I would like the article to be corrected, but I am no longer capable of doing this myself. Please will someone else take on this task 2A02:8012:8F10:0:B0FD:D53F:17A0:39AF (talk) 21:37, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello. The most appropriate place to bring this up is on the talk page Talk:ALGOL 68. However, please note that all information in a Wikipedia article should come from a published source. Information from your personal knowledge (or my personal knowledge) is not acceptable unless it is backed up by a published source, because a reader has no way of verifying it. ColinFine (talk) 21:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I wanted to add a minor edit to the wikipedia page about the Korean movie Ode to my Father. The actress Kim Sun-young appears in a cameo in this movie. She's quite a well known Korean actress, so I wanted to add her to the cast list. On this page, the cast list appears in a table. When I click to edit the table, it takes me to the source editor, not the visual editor. I managed to add her name to the table, and I noticed that many other well known actors had the symbols [[ ]] around their names. So I did that for Kim Sun-young, which did add a link, but now it linked the disambiguation page. I can't figure out how to choose the link I want in a table using source editor. And I can't figure out how to switch to the visual editor. Can anyone help? Thank you. SilverCatGold (talk) 18:18, 27 July 2023 (UTC)

I've fixed the link at Ode_to_My_Father#Cast. (I used the source editor.) Maproom (talk) 18:37, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, Maproom. Can you point me to where I can learn to use the source editor more effectively? SilverCatGold (talk) 02:16, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm sorry, SilverCatGold, I can't. I started using the source editor sixteen years ago, and have slowly learned through experience. It helped that I already knew how to write html. I hope someone else here can help. Maproom (talk) 07:29, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@SilverCatGold There are basic tutorials for both editors at Help:Introduction. A simple summary of "tricks" that are easy to use in the source editor is at H:Cheatsheet. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
SilverCatGold the visual editing/source editing button is the pencil symbol next to the publish button (which also includes the review your changes button).
You can learn by copying stuff, pasting it, then switching back and forth from visual editor to source editor to see what it looks like, just like I did.
There's 2 main types of simple tables:
  • One where the columns are made by exclamation points going from left to right
  • One where the columns are made by exclamation points going from top to bottom
Both work in exactly the same way, as they use these line symbols "|" for the rows, and the lines with a dash "|-" to close them.
Count the lines to find the box you're looking for, and add/edit links/references there.
An easier way is to make a internal link/reference outside of the box away from text so you can find it easy, switch to source mode, cut the internal link/reference, and paste it in the table that way.
You can change the wording of internal links which use 2 [[symbols on each end of the text, by adding a | symbol to the right of the article text, and writing the new text to the right of the | symbol.
You can do the same with external link which use just 1 [ symbol, by leaving a gap after the link, adding a | symbol, and writing the name of the website plus whatever else needs adding like a persons name. Danstarr69 (talk) 22:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

I can't see the table of contents for any articles or talk pages. Have they been abolished?

Maybe something is wrong my settings? Polar Apposite (talk) 21:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. The new Wikipedia layout places the TOC in a drop down menu located adjacent to the article title, on the left. 331dot (talk) 22:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
You can change back to the old layout in your account preferences (the old layout is called "Vector 2010". 331dot (talk) 22:12, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks, I found the drop down menu. I never would have found it without being told. I think it should not be the default.
I couldn't find "Vector 2010" nor any layout preferences. How do I find that? Polar Apposite (talk) 23:43, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I found the Vector thingy. Now I can see the TOC when I load a page. Thank you so much. Polar Apposite (talk) 23:47, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Higher quality version of a public domain single cover uploaded in Wikipedia

Hey! Is it okay if I can upload a higher quality version of this: File:Luiz Ejlli - Me ty.jpg ? GrafiXal (talk) 06:58, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, GrafiXal. If an image is truly in the public domain, then is is always OK to upload a higher quality version of the image. Cullen328 (talk) 07:03, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Does it have to be in public domain in general; or does it have to be in United States? The image itself is automatically considered public domain in US due to it consisting of simply text (and a watermark logo LOL) as far as I know. GrafiXal (talk) 07:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
GrafiXal, we read: "This image is believed to be non-free or possibly non-free in its home country." Which, if I understand right, is Albania. Is it in the PD in Albania as well as in the US? Albania isn't mentioned within commons:Commons:Threshold of originality and the notion of threshold of originality isn't obviously mentioned within commons:Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Albania. So I have no reason to think that it's in the PD there. If you want to pursue this matter, you should do so at Commons. -- Hoary (talk) 07:45, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Yes, it is Albania. I am not really familiar with the Albanian laws regarding copyright and public domain, despite that I am an native Albanian, so I am not sure if it is or not. Does its status of copyright/public domain in Albania affect the right of the English Wikipedia hosting a higher version of this cover? GrafiXal (talk) 09:21, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
No, Wikipedia can host images in whatever quality if they are public domain in the United States. Wikipedia's uploads are often low quality due to copyright concerns, but here there are none. If you have a higher quality version available, feel free to replace it. ArcticSeeress (talk) 20:54, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@ArcticSeeress Oh, okay! Thank you! :) GrafiXal (talk) 06:52, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

speedly deletion of my draft

Someone tagged my draft as criteria speedly deletion (G 11) in which I was making a page for a new celebrity and I had also taken that permission and they had approved me and I I was also writing after asking him, but did not know why my draft has been removed, it has been done by tag @YesI'mOnFire and has been removed by @Explicit. Pradeepkoli (talk) 11:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Pradeepkoli. Your draft was speedily deleted as it only existed to promote Nainika Anasuru. This is not permitted on Wikipedia. All articles about people must meet the Wikipedia:Notability (people) threshold, through finding multiple reliable independent sources. If you cannot find multiple, reliable, and independent sources then I am afraid that Nainika would not meet the notability threshold at this time and therefore cannot have a Wikipedia article. Remember that Wikipedia is not a place for any type of self-promotion or advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia: not an advertising platform, directory, or a way to promote a subject.
Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 11:56, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
In addition to what Qcne said, Pradeepkoli, please note the following:
  1. The subject's approval is completely irrelevant to Wikipedia. If there are suitable reliable sources then there can be an article even if the subject does not want this. Conversely, if there are not suitable sources, then there cannot be an article, even if the subject wants one.
  2. 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.
  3. If I'm reading you correctly, you say that Anasuru approved your writing the draft. This implies that you have a conflict of interest. If you are intending to continue working on an article about them, you need to make your relationship with them clear.
  4. You refer to them as a "new celebrity". This makes it likely that it is WP:TOOSOON.
ColinFine (talk) 16:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Instragram, IMDb, etc. are not reliable source references. Same for published interviews. David notMD (talk) 21:44, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Can you please help me to understand wikipedia and how to write a article and which kind of sources will approved on wikipedia. Pradeepkoli (talk) 09:34, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Please read the following carefully. It's important to understand that writing a new Wikipedia article is one of the hardest tasks a new editor can do.
- Help:Your first article
- Help:Referencing for beginners
- Wikipedia:Notability
- Wikipedia:Verifiability
Hope that helps. Qcne (talk) 09:43, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

profile upload

hi, how can i upload my profile information here on wikipedia? Surenderjaglan14 (talk) 11:14, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Every sentence you add should cite a reliable source as per WP:RS or else the whole page can be deleted if ypu upload your profile without doing so.-1Firang (talk) 11:21, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Actually there are no profiles on Wikipedia. We have articles about notable people. Theroadislong (talk) 11:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@1Firang: I assume he's talking about his user page QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 11:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@Surenderjaglan14: Hello! I assume you're talking about your user page. I see it was deleted due to being promotional.
Wikipedia is not a place for advertising or promotion. QuickQuokka [⁠talk • contribs] 11:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi @Surenderjaglan14.
Please note that we don't have "Profiles" on Wikipedia. Articles about living people must pass the Wikipedia:Notability (people) threshold. If you do not pass this threshold (it is likely you don't, as the requirements are quite strict!) then you cannot have a Wikipedia article at this time.
Remember, Wikipedia is not a place for any type of self-promotion or advertisement. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia: not an advertising platform, directory, or a way to promote a subject. Wikipedia is not a social media site like Facebook, Instagram, or LinkedIn.
You can however add some basic information to your Wikipedia User Page, see: Wikipedia:User pages.
Hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 11:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Surenderjaglan14, an auto-hagiography appeared on your user page. I have just now deleted it as a flagrant (if hardly successful) attempt at promotion. Don't think of uploading anything at all similar anywhere else. If you want to tell the world how wonderful you are, do so on your own website, not Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 11:30, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Sandbox help

It's my first time editing on enwiki after being blocked for a year and a half so I am very rusty with guidelines and wording, can somebody help me with my sandbox page before I move it to mainspace? It's a copy of an article I created on simplewiki, so it needs some wikifying. Thank you! Lallint 00:16, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Lallint it already exists here Bradley Winslow.
Just cut and paste all the missing stuff, into the article which already exists. Danstarr69 (talk) 01:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
The sandbox page was written in Simple English though, it needs to be converted into the standard english enwiki uses Lallint 12:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
If that is the case then you have to do that yourself with the help of resources such as dictionary. Once you have done your part (changing words from simple English to standard English), another editor will come and fix other areas they deem fit. Volten001 ☎ 13:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay. Lallint 13:10, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Blocked on Wikisource

I know I'm asking in the wrong place but I'm hoping someone here also edits there. I have tried like six times to post a question to the help board on Wikisource. They have some kind of bot that flags my post as harmful for having a spam link and blocks my account before I can even post. How do you guys get through? What is the secret? Has this bot recently broken? I emailed an admin, they unblocked me. And the moment I went back their main help forum: auto-blocked. Rjjiii (talk) 07:55, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@Rjjiii: Your edits seem like they have been caught by the edit filter, but I cannot view the edits in question or the exact rules of the filter as it is private. You can view the log here - I would recommend looking at s:Wikisource:Administrators'_noticeboard#Odd_unblock_request as it appears to be related to your issue and making a new section on that noticeboard (and pinging the administrator who resolved the section linked above), or contacting a Wikisource administrator or edit filter editor directly. Tollens (talk) 09:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@Tollens: thanks. They have repaired the bot and all is well. Rjjiii (talk) 15:18, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Format for Dispute Resolution noticeboard use

I am trying to initiate a dispute resolution here but it says "this page requires javascript to use the form tool" and does not let me do anything more. How do I initiate a Dispute resolution on that particular noticeboard? Is there a ready format I can use?-1Firang (talk) 09:30, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@EnigmaMcmxc, Robert McClenon, Buckshot06, JML1148, and Darker Dreams: Can you help?-1Firang (talk) 11:58, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
There's a button near the top, just where it breaks to two column text, that says "request dispute resolution," then takes you through a few pages to fill out the information for the request. If that isn't working for you, I don't know how the system is set up to help with technical troubleshooting. Darker Dreams (talk) 12:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi @1Firang,
You must have JavaScript enabled on your browser, it's usually enabled by default but you might have changed it. The process depends on which browser you're using. On Google Chrome, see the hamburger menu on the top right corner, settings, privacy and security, JavaScript, and either enable "Sites can use JavaScript" or whitelist Wikipedia specifically. NotAGenious (talk) 12:43, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@Darker Dreams and NotAGenious: It did not work when using my mobile but it finally worked when I used a laptop. Thanks!-1Firang (talk) 12:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
The case has been opened at DRN. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:51, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

First article creation Gsequencer libre audio software

Hi all, I just created an article in my sandbox.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Joel2001k/Gsequencer

Would be great to obtain feedback and if possible assistance to put it into main space. Do you think "Advanced Gtk+ Sequencer" is suitable for wikipedia?

Joel2001k (talk) 15:29, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Joel2001k: would I be right in assuming that you are the developer of this product? If so, please see the message about conflicts of interest (COI) which I've just posted on your talk page.
You need to demonstrate that this product is notable, before an article on it can be accepted. Please see WP:GNG for the general notability guideline which applies to most topics. TL;DNR = you need to cite multiple secondary sources which are independent and reliable, and which cover the product in significant extent. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:41, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
And, having found the sources which DoubleGrazing refers to, you will need to forget everything you know about the product, and write an article based only on what those sources say. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 15:48, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
For more specific issues I see:
  • You should add a lead section.
  • Try to make inline citations. For help making them, you can switch to the VisualEditor or read wp:REF.
  • Your sources might be user generated or made my you. I could not find any authors mentioned but I might just be overlooking it. Also, while not necessarily an issue, other than archive.org, I did not recognize the other two sources.
I also couldn't find anymore sources related to the project. While probably a bit hurtful to hear, you might want to drop the draft for now. ✶Mitch199811✶ 17:10, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

What can I have on userpages?

I’m MintTea01, and I started editing few articles. I can use the sandbox. However, I created my user page with small introduction. I’m sure if you can add further detail on your user page too, but what things of feature can I really have on my user page? And what things of information are not allowed or forbidden on my user page? Can any userboxes be inserted? Thanks for replying. MintTea01 (talk) 08:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. You may read about what is acceptable(and not) user page content at WP:USERPAGE. 331dot (talk) 08:11, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello @MintTea01 and welcome to the Teahouse!
Yes! You can add any userboxes that you like on your userpage. Adding very private information on your userpage such as your address is highly discouraged and is forbidden. For more information, please see WP:UP. Regards. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 08:18, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Layah50: I don't beleive adding person information (e.g. your address) to your user page is forbidden per se (except perhaps in the case of minors) as long as its your personal information, but care needs to be taken because Wikipedia is part of the real world and there's no way for Wikipedia to prevent others from using such information in appropriately. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:33, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I 100% agree with @331dot.
Wikipedia is accessed by many people and you never know who looks at your userpage. Very personal information must be kept to yourself and should never be shared online. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 08:55, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree 100% with 331dot too, but there's a difference between something being "highly discouraged" and "forbidden" by Wikipedia policy. The former is correct per Wikipedia policy, whereas the latter isn't. If something is "highly discouraged", it's not necessarily forbidden. If something is "forbidden", then it's more than just "highly discouraged". -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Layah50 Why adding very private information is highly discouraged? Also, why editing only in your userspace is not allowed and unencyclopediac? Asides from private info, what things I can not add to my user page after reading the policy of userspace? MintTea01 (talk) 08:35, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
You should treat Wikipedia as if you were standing on a public street or other public area. If you would not post your address and phone number on a public street, you should not post it on Wikipedia. Anyone anywhere in the world can see it and use it for inappropriate purposes. 331dot (talk) 08:38, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Your user page is a place for you to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor or user; it isn't a place to post anything and everything about yourself like a social media style page would be. If it's not related to Wikipedia, it probably shouldn't be on your user page. 331dot (talk) 08:39, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I would note that most of your user page as it is now is fine, although people wishing to talk to you should do so on your user talk page, not your user page. 331dot (talk) 08:41, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Oh wow, I read the reply and know what not to post. MintTea01 (talk) 08:43, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@331dot @Layah50 @Marchjuly Can I have unlimited userboxes on my user page similar to most of the editors? How can I make a most creative userpage to meet userpage hall of fame? Can it be excessively detailed? MintTea01 (talk) 09:22, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
MintTea01, I hope that your main reason for being here is to help construct an encyclopedia. If it is, then you'll find more pressing things to do here than adding gimmickry and prettiness to your user page. -- Hoary (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Alright, I might do so. MintTea01 (talk) 09:48, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@MintTea01 One other small suggestion from me is not to add userboxes that mislead. I don't see any evidence of you working on producing Wikibooks (a defunct project now), so you are more likely to be believed and trusted if you only put userboxes there that are factually correct. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:49, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
Your primary goal here should be to contribute to this encyclopedia, not to have the best user page on Wikipedia. I am not aware of any restrictions on the number of userboxes. 331dot (talk) 09:30, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@MintTea01, Yes. You can add as many userboxes as you like. However, please be sure that you are here to build an encyclopedia.
  • Please note that if you do not contribute to any Wikipedia articles and are working on your userpage for a long period of time, you'll likely be blocked for WP:NOTHERE. Regards.
🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 09:40, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@MintTea01: Despite what's posted above, you're only going to be blocked for NOTHERE behavior if you start doing something that's causing some serious problems. Spending most of your time editing your user page isn't ideal, but it only really becomes something blockable when you repeatedly violate WP:UPNO or WP:NOT despite being warned not to do so. My suggestion to you is to first read WP:CONTRIBUTE, figure what kinds of edits interest you, and then just go about doing them. If you make mistakes along the way, then that's OK as long as you learn something from then. Put you're user page on hold until you have a few months of editing under belt. If you do that, creating an acceptable user page should just happen naturally and you should have lots of Wikipedia related information to add to it. For what it's worth, some experienced users editing for years have never bothered to create a user page; they just keep editing articles and try to make them better a little bit at a time. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Marchjuly Ok, but I need to find edits that interest me a bit further. MintTea01 (talk) 18:57, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Marchjuly @Layah50 One more thing, should I link my userpage to social media profiles and the personal homepage? Is this allowed too? MintTea01 (talk) 00:15, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@MintTea01: I'm now beginning to wonder whether you're even bothering to read the replies you've received so far because the answer to this question has basically already been given. As myself and others have posted above, you're allowed to put some personal information on your user page as long as it's done so in accordance with WP:UPYES; however, the information you put on your user page is pretty much there for the entire world to see and possibly reuse in some way. All I can suggest is that you carefully take another look at WP:REALWORLD first before adding any such information to your user page because there can be some real world risks in doing so. Right now, people only know you as "MintTea01" from what you've posted on Wikipedia so far, but more people are probably going to be able to figure out your "secret identity" if you give them clues by making more information about yourself public. There's are lots of people in the world are really good in figuring out who someone really is just from their social media posts, and some of these people often try to use that information in inappropriate ways. What you reveal about your true self online is pretty much there forever and someone will always be able to find it if they look hard enough. So, you and only you can decide if adding such information is really worth the risk of any problems it might someday cause. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:24, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
I understand that. I’m going to decide in the future. MintTea01 (talk) 19:42, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Unreferenced biographical content added by IPs

Hi. The problem I’m having is, there are IP users who keep adding unsourced information to the page Coco Lee, the biography of a person who died recently (from new to old):

[9] [10] [11] [12] [13] [14] [15] [16]

All sources said the couple had planned to but didn’t really sign the divorce paper before she died, but the user just won’t listen. I have been following 1RR. Another user and I have explained in our edit summaries, posted on the user’s talk pages, and even added a hidden note in the article to remind him, but those are just useless:

[17]

[18]

[19]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Coco_Lee&action=history

It’s probably the same user, and the IP used in the first problematic edit is 82.18.103.22, which seems to be his real IP. There seems to be other disruptive edits that were made by that IP, but that user blanked the talk page to hide that: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk%3A82.18.103.22&diff=1089963153&oldid=1089417252

What can we do? Please advice. Thanks :) --Dustfreeworld (talk) 20:02, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

@Dustfreeworld Welcome to the Teahouse. An administrator has just semi-protected that page for a month to prevent further vandalism. In future, the best thing you can do is revert each bad edit, warn the IP editor (or attempt to explain what they're doing wrong on their user talk page.) Then, if after successive warnings (including any recent ones they have deleted from their talk page), they continue to disrupt a page, you can report them to WP:AIV. If multiple IP users are disrupting a page (but not just one single one), then you can request page protect at WP:RFPP. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
That’s great. Thank you so much for the prompt action and detailed reply! --Dustfreeworld (talk) 21:25, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Dates in biography of Yvonne de Gaulle, French person

Obviously, everybody knows who she is, but the problem I'm having, is a sudden doubt as to how I should write dates in her article. I have so far converted dates of the form "9 November 1970" into "November 9th, 1970" - but I suddenly began wondering about the difference between US and European/UK styles of such things, and being a foreigner to all relevant countries and languages, I figured out that I had better consult my cowriters while the havoc I have wrought remains within reasonable limits. So, of the doubtful alternatives (here including the forms "9 11 1970", "9 November 1970", "November 9, 1970", etc.), which are to be used in this and similar articles ? ("Similar" being a European subject matter, and a mainly British version language in the article...) Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 15:53, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Autokefal Dialytiker, welcome to the Teahouse. General guidance is at MOS:DATETIES. The strongest national ties here seem to be to France (not an English-speaking country), in which case we move to retaining the existing format. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:05, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I would also like to note that assuming that there were no other conflicts between dmy or mdy, 9 November 1970 would be preferred to adding the version you changed it to. ✶Mitch199811✶ 20:50, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
I see that Charles de Gaulle has a tag at the top {{Use dmy dates}}, while the one on his wife doesn't have any such template. It seems logical to use the same style in both articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:09, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
And the "-th" is never appropriate or necessary. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:49, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

I want to chat with John Allen Bradley

I want to chat with John Allen Bradley Beautifulascanbe1950 (talk) 22:04, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

i would like to chat with John Allen Bradley. Beautifulascanbe1950 (talk) 22:05, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello. This place is to ask questions about using Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 22:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft Declined: Lack of reliable source and language and style

Good day everyone,i will need our guidance please. I submitted my article on a musical icon in Nigeria that has supported many musicians, institutions and youths, although behind the scene he is very renowned but he's not often in the spotlight. As a result, to celebrate his 3 decades of contribution to the culture I and my team thought of creating a biography of him. The problem is that there are not so much publication out there.

Here are the reasons for declining my request for approval :

This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. This submission does not appear to be written in the formal tone expected of an encyclopedia article. Entries should be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources. Please rewrite your submission in a more encyclopedic format. Please make sure to avoid peacock terms that promote the subject.

Can I please be guided to know how to correct my mistakes? I am open to corrections and guidance. Here is the article :

Draft:Edward Sunday Omotola Dorcas (talk) 23:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Language like "Edward's mum had a great influence on his musical journey" is just marketing language. The text should be very dry, without embellishments. There are many unsourced passages.
If you are associated with this musician, please read conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 23:38, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
To state, this is my first attempt at writing a biography on wiki, I'm open to the corrections provided. Omotola Dorcas (talk) 23:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
You need to remove inline external links. If those things you linked aren't notable enough to have their own Wikipedia article, either don't link them at all or omit them. The article is not neutral. It is also unclear what inclusion criteria of WP:MUSICBIO the subject meets, or whether the awards he received are notable. As a minor issue, Wikipedia uses sentence case in headings, not title case (see MOS:HEADINGS). ~Anachronist (talk) 23:56, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Oh, thank you. This is noted. It will help with the edit Omotola Dorcas (talk) 23:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
In addition to what @331dot said, you have some issues with referencing: the Early Life, Education, and most of Career are completely unreferenced. Every single statement in your draft should be referenced, and the reference should be from an independent, reliable, secondary source. This is so that anyone reading your draft can verify that what you have written is true. See Wikipedia:Verifiability for more information. This is one of the fundamental pillars of Wikipedia and without good referencing your article will never get accepted.
However, your statement "The problem is that there are not so much publication out there" is actually a warning that Edward might not actually qualify for a Wikipedia article. If you /can't/ find good sources then Edward might simply not pass the Wikipedia:Notability (people) threshold at this time. Notability is one of the other fundamental pillars of Wikipedia: if Edward doesn't meet the notability criteria (and people usually meet the criteria by there being at least three strong, independent, reliable, secondary sources that discuss the person in detail or offer analysis / interpretation), then Edward cannot have an article at this time.
Finally I think your statement "to celebrate his 3 decades of contribution to the culture I and my team thought of creating a biography of him" is potentially contrary to the purpose of Wikipedia. One of the other fundamental principles is that Wikipedia articles cannot promote a subject, see Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Wikipedia articles should exist purely to summarise what those aforementioned strong, independent, reliable, secondary sources say about a subject. Wikipedia isn't LinkedIn or another social media platform, and isn't a personal webpage to advertise the subject.
I know my feedback is probably discouraging: writing a new article is one of the hardest things you can do on Wikipedia as we have all these stringent rules and requirements, and new editors often fall into the trap of writing an article Wikipedia:BACKWARDS.
I hope that helps, Qcne (talk) 01:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
wow, this is insightful. Thank you. There are a few publications especially from National platforms, my fear is repetition referencing articles that communicate similar information about an entity or event.
I appreciate your unbiased view point Omotola Dorcas (talk) 01:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Interview as source

I haven't been able to find a precise answer on this. If there is a military or war veteran that has information that is germane to an article, can I interview them in person and use it as a citable source? If so, is a Youtube video an acceptable format? Thornfield Hall (talk) 04:09, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Thornfield Hall. The answer to your question as asked is "no, definitely not". That would be a violation of No original research, which is one of Wikipedia's three core content policies. On the other hand, if you write an article based in part on your interview, and have it published in something like a respected, peer-reviewed journal of military history, then that journal article could be used as a reliable source. Cullen328 (talk) 04:23, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Letter from prosecutor's office

I am in a situation I don't know how to deal with. On the article Warren Forest, an IP user is trying to redact a woman's name because they claim they have a letter from a prosecutor's office telling them not to use that name [20]. I don't think we accept requests like that, but I'm not sure if I should bring it to the article's talk page, the IP's talk page, or to an admin. I don't want to edit war, and I don't want to handle this as a new user if someone more important is supposed to handle something like this. Thanks. Closhund/talk/ 06:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

@Closhund: You're right to be cautious, and I recommend that you don't restore it (at least until more people have reviewed it). You're also right that we don't usually pay much attention to letters sent to other people, however, on the surface it does seem to be valid point. It's highly unusual to name people like this. Without delving into the merits too deeply, my advice would be to post at WP:BLPN where some highly experienced editors hang out. -- zzuuzz (talk) 06:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Ok, I found a similar situation in the WP:BLPN archive. I'll just correct the grammar, leave the name out, and read more about BLP. Thanks. Closhund/talk/ 06:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Question about marriage template

If the subject of the article (who the template is on the page of) dies before their spouse, but the spouse died shortly after, would I not use "end=d."? What's the best way to deal with this situation? PARAKANYAA (talk) 06:32, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @PARAKANYAA: per the template instructions, "If the marriage ended because of the death of the article's subject, do not provide a reason". The d parameter is only used "if the marriage ended on the spouse's death". I don't think it matters how soon after the subject's death their spouse died. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:50, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks. Somehow I looked over that lol, maybe I read too fast PARAKANYAA (talk) 07:53, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Question Re: Page up for deletion and credible sources.

There is a page up for deletion Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Pastor that I am trying to get corrected. As explained on Wikipedia, RS is short for reliable sources, information about which is detailed at Wikipedia:Reliable sources. The editor cites issues with that article is that it does not currently meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, that are independent of the subject. I am puzzled because the page reference sources list major News Publications notably The Las Vegas Review Journal (I believe the longest and largest daily newspaper in circulation since 1909 in Las Vegas) as well as The Las Vegas Sun. I assumed these would be sufficient to be deemed credible? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thomas_Pastor MFoskett (talk) 17:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

The best place place to address this is Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thomas Pastor. Please read the comments on that page and address them. Shantavira|feed me 17:57, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@MFoskett Whilst a deletion discussion is ongoing, you are free to find new and better sources and to add them to the article. If you do that, it may help to mention what you've added on the deletion discussion page to highlight any significant improvements since it was first nominated. I've saved quite a few articles that way. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:10, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
The article is not written in an encyclopedic manner. Why do you keep repeating Pastor's given name when it isn't necessary to eliminate ambiguity? Why are there so many words capitalized? Please read MOS:JOBTITLE.
I agree that the R-J and Sun are reliable sources. The question is notability. This is a weird situation in which two local newspapers with national reach are reporting on a local phenomenon in their capacity as local newspapers. It's comparable to multiple reports by The New York Times on some greengrocer in Soho: yeah, it's the NYT, but notability would be in doubt if the subject was in Lawrence, Kansas or Cullman, Alabama. It would be far better to demonstrate notability if you can find a non-Las Vegas-based reference. - Julietdeltalima (talk) 21:59, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, this helps a lot! MFoskett (talk) 12:29, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you, this helps my understanding. MFoskett (talk) 12:30, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

pgae deletion

why my wickipedia page has been deleted Mauryamanish123 (talk) 10:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

Every sentence you add should cite a reliable source as per WP:RS or else the whole page can be deleted.-1Firang (talk) 11:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Mauryamanish123,
Thanks for coming to the Teahouse. I assume you are talking about the speedy deletion of your sandbox. Your talk page notes that the sandbox is deleted because "the page appears to be advertising which only promotes or publicises someone or something."
To quote from Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not: "Wikipedia is not a place to promote things or publish your thoughts, and is not a website for personal communication, a freely licensed media repository, or a censored publication."
In particular, you should not use Wikipedia to promote about yourself or some other person/group, not even on your sandbox page.
If you are curious about what you are allowed to have on your user page, please see WP:UPYES. Please note that your user pages are not a personal homepage and they do not belong to you (see WP:UOWN).
Please be aware of these policies!
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 13:17, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Mauryamanish123, I am an administrator and was able to read your deleted draft, which was overtly promotional and utterly unacceptable for this encyclopedia. For example, you wrote With a deep appreciation for India's cultural heritage and its rich tradition of sweets, Manish founded Shree Ram Sweets, a renowned sweet shop known for its wide range of delectable Indian sweets. The brand has become synonymous with quality and innovation, taking the age-old tradition of Indian sweets to new heights. That is followed by many other promotional statements written in an unacceptable tone. That type of language belongs (perhaps) on the company's website, but definitely not in a neutrally written encyclopedia article. Please be aware that promotional activity of any type is not permitted on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 03:42, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
They have now recreated the declined draft as another blatantly promotional page, ignoring the advice given above. I don't think that they are going to get the point. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 12:34, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Help I keep getting an annoying mesaage

I keep getting this, why:As an anti-abuse measure, you are limited from performing this action too many times in a short space of time, and you have exceeded this limit. Please try again in a few minutes. If you are attempting to run a bot or semi-automated script, please read and understand our bot policy, then request approval. Users who run unauthorized bot scripts may lose their editing privileges. TheTopRocketFan (talk) 13:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Red X User blocked User:TheTopRocketFan blocked as a sockpuppet of User:El Wikipedian. OutsideNormality (talk) 15:22, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Finding articles that are missing images

Is there a way to search for articles that lack images? Like if I wanted to find all the articles related to a particular topic or geographical area that don't have images is there a way to do that? Thanks. Adamant1 (talk) 14:27, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

@Adamant1, I don't know the answer to your exact query, but see Category:Wikipedia requested photographs and its subcategories for articles where users have flagged up a lack of photographs. —Kusma (talk) 15:04, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
See also Special:Nearby. Shantavira|feed me 15:47, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Chukuka S. Enwemeka

Dear friends, and Colleagues,

I am the Executive Director of the Nigeria Physiotherapy Network. I am leading a project to showcase distinguished and eminent Physiotherapists (physical therapists) of Nigerian ancestry who have life-long achievements and contributions to the field. I am currently working on the Wiki biography of Dr. Chukuka Sam Enwemeka, and the article draft have been rejected two times because despite what I would have considered significantly improvement based on initial rejection reasons of and providing additional independent references, and proper referencing formatting.

Kindly review, and help give me more specific recommendations. I have added additional refences, even after the second draft rejection.

Kindly advise: Draft:Chukuka S. Enwemeka

Sincerely,

WsdomCI Wisdomci (talk) 03:41, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Wisdomci. Your draft has been declined, not rejected. This is an important distinction because a rejected draft cannot be resubmitted, but you can substantively improve a declined draft, and then resubmit it. There are many problems with your draft. For example, seasoned is inappropriate, because it is a promotional word lacking substantive meaning in this context. Similarly, you cannot call him one of the foremost authorities or say that he pioneered something, unless you provide references to reliable, independent sources that use similar language. The section "Board Appointments And Other Positions Held" is unreferenced, and therefore a violation of the core content policy Verifiability. Either reference this section properly or remove it. The section "Resignation as Provost, San Diego State University" is written in an argumentative, defensive tone, relying on something written by the subject of the article to refute the email claims. This violates the Neutral point of view, another core content policy. Please explain your relationship with Chukuka S. Enwemeka. Cullen328 (talk) 04:12, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Wisdomci, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please remember that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 18:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

teddy bears North American bear co. Chigago illanoise

a teddy bear sacs fifth ave 2601:205:8201:74F0:C41C:7900:6855:264D (talk) 00:01, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

If you have a question about using Wikipedia, please phrase it more intelligibly. -- Hoary (talk) 00:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Sorting

Is there a way to make a table that is able to be sorted in a non-alphabetical way, instead a specified order? For example a list that when sorted goes:

Rank Name
Empire Austria
Kingdom France
Kingdom Prussia
Principality Orange

WikiWilliard (talk) 20:53, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

WikiWilliard, Help:Sortable tables suggests to me that yes it can, thanks to data-sort-value. But I've never tried this and confess to a lack of appetite for trying it now. Another editor may well step up to give you a better-informed response. -- Hoary (talk) 22:35, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
@WikiWilliard: Empire, Kingdom, Principality are already in alphabetical order´but suppose we want to sort Duchy after all of them. You can invent a data-sort-value which places it as wanted, e.g. data-sort-value="Q" | Duchy. The sortkey is not seen by readers so it doesn't have to be meaningful. Another option is to give numbered sortkeys to all values, e.g. data-sort-value="1" | Empire to data-sort-value="4" | Duchy. It's more work and makes no difference to readers but in some cases it may simpler to follow for other editors who work on the table. You have to give a sortkey in each cell which shouldn't sort as its content. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:11, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
@WikiWilliard I created List of species and habitats of principal importance in England which contains a single species list of a mixture of taxonomic groups, but is not sorted alphabetically. I used Excel to edit the data according to the reliable source, then converted it into a wiki format, and then enabled sorting on all the fields. Now, I could have included a 'sort order' number which would have enabled the table to return to its non alphabetically-sorted order, but decided just to let the user refresh the page if they want to see the data in its original arrangement. I'm not sure if this is helpful to you, but it does shows one simple way of presenting data which can then be sorted, but which can't be 'unsorted' without reloading the page. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
If you click the same sort arrow three times then the table returns to the original order. If there were rowspans then they are not restored. If there are sortbottom rows then they remain at the bottom. Reload is the only way to completely return all tables. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Should I need to starting editing?

I know that some pages is semi-protected, can I help you get starting? Ares123893 (talk) 00:16, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Ares123893, yes, some are semi-protected. No, you can't help me edit them, thanks. Or are you asking me to help you? Individual users don't need to start editing; they can websurf elsewhere, or of course they can turn off their phones and computers and enjoy the "real world". -- Hoary (talk) 00:22, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
"real world" being in quotes implies it's not actually real /j
...jokes aside, if you mean you'd like help editing, I recommend you start with pages not at semi protection (and especially not ones at extended confirmed protection, ones with a blue lock) unless you're doing something like fixing obvious typos, as these are usually more controversial or harder to navigate. if you'd like some ideas on which pages to edit, check out some easy tasks to do at the task center or your editor homepage. you can edit semi-protected pages already, but for extended-protected ones you may create an edit request: check out Edit request to see how you can make one. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

How to keep track of article lists/projects you want to work on

What tools do people here usually use to easily access the articles they are interested in editing? I am thinking of someone who may have particular editing interests that may be relevant to special pages, WikiProject article lists, etc. There doesn't seem to be a way to easily follow or create a link for yourself if you wanted to regularly check, say, WP:DEORPHAN. I find myself having to re-locate all the to-do pages for projects I am interested in, which is time-wasting. La Ovo (talk) 23:46, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

@La Ovo: I use my watchlist most frequently to monitor the subjects that I'm interested in, or have interested me in the past. See Wikipedia:Watchlist. You can also maintain a section of links on your user page User:La Ovo (which is currently not being used for anything in your case). ~Anachronist (talk) 00:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
apart from the watchlist, one can also use their sandbox to store things like this. I inserted User:AnomieBOT/SPERTable and EPERTable in my sandbox as a template as well a small list of pages I will work on when I actually feel like adding content (mostly to distinguish them between the noise of my watchlist being 99% user talks, teahouse, helpdesk, and the aformentioned SPER and EPERTable). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 01:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
User talk:La Ovo - In addition to the ideas above, another option may to add a subpage of a user page. For example, at User:JoeNMLC/Article cleanup, I have setup wikitables to track articles for Proposed deletion and AfD that I am working on or have worked on in the past. These are easy to setup and maintain as I track changes. Hope this helps. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 02:40, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

List of all Wikipedia pages?

How do I find a list of all pages on Wikipedia? AlphaRex1984 (talk) 04:41, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, AlphaRex1984, and welcome to the Teahouse! A list of all pages by namespace is available at Special:AllPages. Tollens (talk) 04:46, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
tyvm AlphaRex1984 (talk) 04:48, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Unable to save my draft

Hi i was creating a wikipedia article page and when I was saving for the draft the draft button was missing. How can I save the draft article or who can help me to creat a Wikipedia article page? Thank you! Sterry777 (talk) 17:15, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Whatever you created was deleted as unambiguous advertising or promotion. You should use the WP:AFC process for creating new articlesTheroadislong (talk) 17:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Theroadislong, I don't see any deleted contributions by the OP. -- Hoary (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
My mistake Hoary I was looking at this Sterry Ks. deleted in 2020. Theroadislong (talk) 07:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Sterry777, when you draft something, you won't be given the option "Save as draft", "Save provisionally", "Save for myself only", or similar. You'll just have the option to "Publish changes" (or of course "Show preview" or "Show changes"). In some situations, "Publish changes" means "Save as a regular article (one that will be indexed by Google, etc)"; but in others, "Publish changes" means no more than "Save (so that anyone can find this, if they know where to look for it)". -- Hoary (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Sources and general advice on new article

Hi there, I have created a new article, currently awaiting approval. I logged in to add recent 'news' and noticed there was a warning sign that says: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · NYT · TWL

I am autistic so I would really appreciate any help here. I find it extremely anxiety-inducing and challenging when I am trying to understand a new website/process. I can 'Find sources', but what does that look like when manifested into the article? There's a button for citations, that's very straight forward, but the instruction to add sources is a little vague for my neurodivergent brain. I hope someone cam help. I spent many days and hours creating this article. I have great respect for the Wikipedia community, although it's felt a little cold in terms of asking for help so far. I'd really appreciate anyone who might be able to help me complete my draft article. need some assistance. Here's hoping. Mx 23M23 (talk) 09:50, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

I have reviewed and accepted your draft here Super Connected, The "find sources" tag wasn't a warning it was helpful advice about where one might find sources, you didn't need it though because your draft was VERY well sourced. Well done! Theroadislong (talk) 10:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you very much! 23M23 (talk) 17:51, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
To reiterate what @Theroadislong said, this is genuinely an excellent attempt at a first article, well done. I've gone ahead and added it to the category Category:2023 albums and removed the 'no categories' tag. If you want to add more categories, you can do that via the article options. Qcne (talk) 10:08, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you so much. Still getting used to navigating this message thread and missed your message earlier. Really appreciate your feedback and help! 23M23 (talk) 17:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
I'll add to the compliments. Very nicely done. 331dot (talk) 10:51, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Well done; and because it's substantial, you shouldn't be surprised or at all upset to learn that it does have little flaws. (If told that something I've written has little flaws, I'm happy. It more often has major flaws.) The article says: "[...] and includes a thrilling vocal cameo from Stephen Fry". (i) If you examine the sentence you'll see that the subject of "includes" has got lost. (ii) Without quotation marks, "thrilling" seems to be the opinion of Wikipedia. It mustn't be. You need something like "and includes what [name of music critic] has called a 'thrilling' vocal cameo from Stephen Fry". But these are minor. Good work! -- Hoary (talk) 11:54, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
@23M23 And I'll add to the complimentary words and suggest this new article of yours is an absolutely ideal candidate for WP:DYK - the 'Did You Know...?' spot on the main page of Wikipedia. If successful, it can result in an article getting tens of thousands of views in just a 12 hour period. But, in my experience, understanding how to lodge that first 'DYK' nomination is actually harder (and more stressful!) than creating an article in the first place! But it's worth it.
There is a time limit of just 7 days to make a DYK submission from the point an article is accepted into the main part of Wikipedia (i.e. from today). Every DYK submission needs a 'hook' and I can see that Stephen Fry's involvement and Apple banning the album is spot on for an interesting 'Did You Know...?' Good luck if you decide to go for it! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:58, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Nick, that's very kind of you. It may be challenging for me to do that, but if i can, I will try. If I do try, I make be back for some tips! Thank you! 23M23 (talk) 16:59, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
I agree with @Hoary, it seems the Super Connected The Film section is written like an advertisement. Other than that, the article is really good and interesting! Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 17:27, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
My apoligies, I missed this. Will look at it asap. Thank you 23M23 (talk) 17:38, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi Nick, I made the submission for DYK but I forgot to add an image. Does this make a difference? I have added the image to the main article now though. I tried to make the DYK again but it said it had already been submitted... 23M23 (talk) 08:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

What do we mean by 'encyclopedic context'?

This is not a pressing issue, but a non-substantive (I think!) tangent to an editorial issue I was working on this morning: WP:SALLEAD begins with the following sentence:

A stand-alone list should begin with a lead section that summarizes its content, provides any necessary background information, gives encyclopedic context, links to other relevant articles, and makes direct statements about the criteria by which members of the list were selected, unless inclusion criteria are unambiguously clear from the article title. (bold added)

In this context, what do you take 'encyclopedic context' to mean? I've searched for the phrase in other guidelines, where it seems to be used a little differently to mean something like: 'Place the paraphrased material in the context of Wikipedia as an encyclopædic project, in contrast to the context of the information in the sourced text.' Here, dealing with a list of article names from within Wikipedia, it seems to mean something a little different. Is this phrase clear to any of you? Much thanks. Pathawi (talk) 08:06, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Does WP:TONE help? Shantavira|feed me 08:20, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Maybe… That would make sense to me if what the guideline said were 'should be written for an encyclopedic context', but here the lead should 'give encyclopedic context'. (I'm really sorry: I'm not trying to be difficult!) Pathawi (talk) 08:25, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Pathawi. "Encyclopedic" means written in full compliance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines, especially its core content policies of Verifiability, the Neutral point of view, and No original research. Cullen328 (talk) 08:30, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Pathawi: if you were to create a list of notable red-haired dentists, it would need to start with an explanation of why red-haired dentists is a "thing". I think that is part of what WP:SALLEAD is saying. Maproom (talk) 09:47, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Review the Article

Hi, I would sincerely like to ask for the review by wikipedia editors on this article named Wibool Piyawattanametha. As I have COI tag, I no longer want to edit further. However, I have worked on some of the citation needed statements and tried to add more reliable secondary sources. Could anyone review this article and remove the poorly citated statements and unreliable sources?

I have previously encountered "This article is written like a resume" tag. So, now the necessary edits and citations are being added. I would appreciate if you could have a look at the article and remove those tags and remove the sentences which have failed to achieve wikipedia's policy.

Many Thanks! Aayushma Sharma (talk) 08:05, 31 July 2023 (UTC) "Al

Just one point, Aayushma Sharma. "Alumni" is only a plural form, I believe. (A singular male is an "alumnus".) -- Hoary (talk) 08:27, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Aayushma Sharma, it's not clear to me that Piyawattanametha satisfies Wikipedia's standard of notability. I've checked the first five sources cited, and none of those help to establish notability. Which three of the other sources, in your opinion, do most to establish notability? Maproom (talk) 09:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Please do not remove citation-related maintenance templates from the article without resolving the issues they highlight, Aayushma Sharma. In this edit, you removed a note that the source cited for the claim about the subject's BSc doesn't verify it and the tag highlighting the need for a citation for his postgraduate degrees. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Keep an eye on article

Hey

I'm at work so can't focus on this properly. Can someone keep an eye on List of IOC country codes. I'm on 2-reverts and can't see anything constructive from the IP (blanking, unexplained mass changes etc). Ta. doktorb wordsdeeds 09:47, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

 Done. The IP address vandalizing that article has been blocked for a month and everything has returned to normal. I've also added the article to my watchlist temporary if the IP user decides to evade the block. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 10:15, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks :) doktorb wordsdeeds 12:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

afc declined

d Filmymusafir (talk) 22:57, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Filmymusafir,
Could you go into more details what you want us to answer? ✶Mitch199811✶ 23:26, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
 Courtesy link: Draft:Patson Pereira  あやかなあ?  (talk) 23:28, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
@Filmymusafir Your submission has not been reviewed yet, so it hasn't been declined. Happy editing!  あやかなあ?  (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Filmymusafir, Draft:Patson Pereira has been submitted for review. One very obvious problem is the extraordinary number of words capitalized for no obvious reason. You might start by converting to lowercase. -- Hoary (talk) 23:40, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
I just declined it. Most of the citations were to Wikipedia. Notability wasn't clearly established. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:30, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello Filmymusafir. You start your draft article by stating Patson Pereira was born 13 August, 1992 but then, in the Early years section, you write he was born in 1971. You can only give one birth date, and there needs to be a reliable reference for that date. I suggest you take your time, find more good references, and rewrite your draft, followed by proofreading it to make sure there are no mistakes before resubmitting it for review. You may find it helpful to read Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. Best wishes on improving your draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 01:13, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
You should delete the paragraph that starts with "He has worked as Sound Engineer..." as that removes all the attempts to use Wikipedia articles as references. David notMD (talk) 08:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello, thank you for your suggestion. i have just converted to lowercase. Also the year 1971 was a type error, which has been fixed. i have given all the references. added apple music, spotify, wynk music links to support the craft of the artist. kindly suggest any other changes and help me in publishing the page. Filmymusafir (talk) 14:11, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
hi @Filmymusafir! for a start, a lot of the citations are still pointing to Wikipedia and seem to be intended as internal links instead of references (and even if you did, you can't use those as references anyway as people above have said). you may link to them by enclosing their names with square brackets like this: [[London]] which makes London. once you fix those, it's best to check out the notability criteria for music and find some reliable sources that feature and focus on your subject (you may start by doing a quick google news search for them), since as of now none of the sources are focused on them specifically (instead on other things they've worked on where they get a passing mention). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 14:24, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Providing references

I have had a draft rejected because, understandably, it did not have references but how DO I provide a reference for where someone went to primary school or did their first degree, apart from personal knowledge? Mfsstshr (talk) 14:33, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mfsstshr,
You may want to read WP:BACKWARD. In short, if you do not have a source that says some information, then do not add it. You also might be able to break WP:PRIMARY as that seems like basic enough information (though I would go for option 1). ✶Mitch199811✶ 14:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
@Mfsstshr, assuming this is about a WP:BLP (and if it isn't), you may have to conclude that for WP-purposes, you can't. Stuff like "where someone went to primary school" can maybe be "fixed" with a WP:ABOUTSELF source, but note that such sources do not help the case for WP:N. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

get drafted

normally, images in a draft aren't something you should worry about uploading until after (translation: if) it gets accepted

but is there any real problem with adding an image that fits and is already available elsewhere (like a picture of two marketable plushies that previously only existed in the article about one of them)? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 16:19, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Cog-san: if an image is on Wikimedia Commons, there should be no problem in using it in a draft. If it's on en:Wikipedia, it probably shouldn't be used in a draft. Can you give us a link to the image you want to use? Maproom (talk) 16:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
it's just a general question, for whenever this happens
thanks cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 16:45, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Can you ban this user or block him from editing?

The User talk:2.99.114.44 is threatening me. He told me to "kys" which means "kill yourself". Can you ban this user or can you block him from editing? He might be a troll. Flag Creator (talk) 15:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Done EvergreenFir (talk) 15:31, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you! If he continues to do this to me, I will inform you. Ok? And also, he tells that he's Ernest Khalimov, also known as "Gigachad". He even claims he's the super administrator of Wikimedia. Flag Creator (talk) 15:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
@Flag Creator, in the future, WP:AIV may be the place to go in such situations. WP has quite a lot of specific noticeboards for specific issues. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:17, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Who to ask for IP block exemption?

I get IP blocked every once in a while and can't edit to even ask for an exemption. My attempt to decipher IP block exemption didn't provide any result.(It was denied for some reason, which you can see on my talk page) How can I get this protection? Greatder (talk) 10:19, 28 July 2023 (UTC)

@Greatder, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not really familiar with this process but, if you read WP:IPEC, you will see a subheading (How to request) towards the bottom of that section stating:
Request IP address block exemption through the Unblock Ticket Request System. You must ask from your registered account. Requests posted to the user talk page of the IP address will be automatically declined. Administrators granting this right may sometimes need to consult a CheckUser to confirm the problem, or may wish to obtain further review by posting the request onto an administrative list or page for discussion if unfamiliar with the case.
I hope that following those instructions may help address your problem. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:42, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes Do you know of a willing CheckUser? I was told by the admin that denied my request to talk to a CheckUser which I either I cannot find or the one's I contact aren't active. Greatder (talk) 11:06, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Greatder Re-reading your talk page and the link I gave you, I still feel you need to follow the procedure there and click 'Submit an unblock request', then it's up to an administrator to seek input from a checkuser. I know @331dot suggested you contact a CU, but it looks to me like the UTRS volunteer should be doing that on your behalf. The unblock form allows you to explain in detail your reasons for your request. But I repeat: I know very little at all about the mechanics of this process. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:33, 28 July 2023 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: @331dot: I don't understand why a checkuser needs to be involved. If an editor appears trustworthy, a net asset to Wikipedia, has a clean record, and is reasonably well established, then I have no problem granting IP block exemption, as I have done multiple times in the past. In this case, the editor has a clean block log, no serious warnings on the talk page except for a 3RR notice, and has met double the requirements for being extended confirmed. I would trust this editor with IP block exemption and would have granted it if 331dot hadn't declined the request. Is there any reason why I shouldn't grant it? ~Anachronist (talk) 02:51, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
I was simply directing them, not weighing in on the merits of their request. I've occasionally given out short term IPBEs but it was my understanding a checkuser needs to look at longer term ones. Greatder was also asing for a "global" one which I take to mean one valid across all Wikimedia projects, which seems above my pay grade to grant.
Looking at WP:IPBE it looks like the need for a checkuser depends on the reason, under "used to bypass an IP range block" it says "Administrators granting this right may sometimes need to consult a CheckUser to confirm the problem, or may wish to obtain further review by posting the request onto an administrative list or page for discussion if unfamiliar with the case" but under "used for anonymous proxy editing" it says the requester needs to "Email the checkuser VRT team at checkuser-en-wp@wikipedia.org ensuring your email includes your username, or contact a CheckUser directly, explaining why you need to edit via anonymous proxies." 331dot (talk) 08:07, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@331dot So, what do I need to prove my merit? I have been able to get IP block exemption on bn.wikipedia.com thanks to @RiazACU. If you require a recommendation. Greatder (talk) 10:50, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
I was simply trying to remove the middleman from the process and hook you up directly and thought I was abiding by policy, but if people are saying I can do this myself I don't have a problem with it. It's not about your merit. 331dot (talk) 11:45, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@Greatder: The reason for a checkuser to be involved is probably because a checkuser can see what IP addresses you are using and have used in the past, while regular administrators like me cannot. This is relevant if you have a history of operating behind proxy IP addresses. Is that the case? Do you have a reason to use proxies? (Some people do if they are living in countries with tight internet control.)
Clearly you aren't blocked now, so it's possible that your service provider temporarily assigned you a blocked address or you attempted to access Wikipedia from someplace that's blocked. ~Anachronist (talk) 13:00, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
@Anachronist The reason is sometimes my mobile provider gets me blocked by Wikipedia and being behind a NAT. I also sometimes use Tor, though I cannot use it for editing Wikipedia. The Bangladesh government is going down the internet freedom ranking, so having a future-proof Tor accessibility would be helpful too, I guess. Greatder (talk) 13:36, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Ugh. I can't imagine editing Wikipedia on a mobile device. I tried it and found it an unpleasant experience. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:54, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Mobile data on laptop, though. Also, new editing tools at bn.wikipedia.com is very promising for the future of mobile editing. Thanks to both of you again! Greatder (talk) 03:19, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Sorry if off topic but maybe for try Wikipedia:Appealing a block Cwater1 (talk) 23:01, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks @Cwater1! But, after discussion with Anachronist and 331dot, I have received a global IP block exemption. Thanks, though. : ) Greatder (talk) 04:27, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Thought I could help. Cwater1 (talk) 20:42, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

External Links - OK sometimes?

Inline External LInks

I am getting conflicting feedback re: external links. The Wikipedia Help pages provides examples of appropriate uses, but other editors have quite adamantly told me to never use inline links. I believe they should be used sparingly, based on my research of this site, but they are not forbidden. For example, a company should link to its corporate website: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking. Please chime in but provide links to Help pages that support your view Crystallake69 (talk) 16:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

The page you linked to is mostly concerned with internal links, i.e. to Wikipedia articles. External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article. Please read Wikipedia:External links. Shantavira|feed me 17:12, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I'm pulling the first sentence from that page: "Wikipedia articles may include external links, links to web pages outside Wikipedia."And the page goes on to provide examples of value-driven links that are allowed.
Are others reading this infering the same thing? It's quite clear to this reader, but then I get so much pushback from others? Crystallake69 (talk) 21:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
@Crystallake69, yes, and the second sentence says "External links normally should not be placed in the body of an article." The body of the article is the text. External links normally go after the text, at the bottom of the page, in an external links section. A single link to an official website can go into an infobox. Other than that there are very few exceptions. Valereee (talk) 22:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
@Crystallake69, it's also about links inline; that is, links to external sites in the text of the article rather than in an external links section (or to the website in an infobox). If you could explain where you're having the discussion with the other editors, we might be able to help more. Valereee (talk) 18:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Okay, so maybe you're referring to this edit? Valereee (talk) 18:29, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Creating your page

Hi,

I really don't know how this all works, but I am losing out on work because I am not identifiable on Wikipedia, which is just crazy! There's so much about me online and on TV, how do I create a wikipedia page? EMILYEVANS88 (talk) 22:39, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

EMILYEVANS88, see WP:YFA. Creating a Wikipedia article about yourself has an almost guaranteed chance of failure, so I would personally wait until an uninvolved volunteer decides to create an article about you. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:51, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
@EMILYEVANS88, in general trying to create an article about yourself is a losing prospect, per WP:AUTOBIO. I'm willing to look into it to see if it's possible.
There are a lot of Emily Evanses out there, so hard for me to check. What we need to see are three sources that each constitute all of the following:
  1. WP:Independent (not affiliated in any way)
  2. WP:Reliable (in general the minimum standard is evidence of editorial oversight)
  3. WP:Significant coverage
Can you bring us three links? Only three, please. Read the information at the links to understand what we're looking for.
Valereee (talk) 22:53, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Valereee.
So if you type in on google, Emily Evans Property. You'll see alot about me, please see below link:
https://www.google.com/search?q=emily+evans+property&rlz=1C5CHFA_enGB756GB756&oq=emily+evans+property&aqs=chrome.0.69i59j35i39j69i59j69i64j69i60l2.4171j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8#ip=1
I don't really understand what constitutes a good source, so added a few more below:
https://www.evansestates.com/press/
https://ktla.com/morning-news/actual-brit-emily-evans-hosts-royal-roundup-challenge/ EMILYEVANS88 (talk) 23:00, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
https://www.somersetcountygazette.co.uk/news/18036629.bridgwater-estate-agent-emily-evans-gets-sneak-peek-britney-spears-hollywood-home/
https://thenegotiator.co.uk/bridgwater-to-britneys-mansion-letting-agent/
https://amazingwonderbirds.com/episodes/episode-109/ EMILYEVANS88 (talk) 23:03, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Wikipedia articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject, who take note of significant coverage of a topic in independent reliable sources and choose to write about it, showing how the topic meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Trying to force the issue yourself doesn't usually work. Wikipedia to be frank is not concerned with how the presence or lack thereof of an article affects someone. This is not social media like LinkedIn. Potential employers should be looking at your resume, not whether or not there is a Wikipedia article about you. 331dot (talk) 00:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
There are good reasons to not want an article here. Any information about you, good or bad, can be in an article about you as long as it appears in an independent reliable source and is not defamatory. Anyone can edit it, not just you. 331dot (talk) 00:09, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Emily, I'm a volunteer. I work on what I want to work on. I offered to help, and I asked you to read the links to try to understand what we were looking for. I asked you for three and no more than three links. Instead you give me six, one of which has three links, only half an hour later, which makes me think you didn't actually try very hard to understand. You're asking me to do work -- for free -- so you don't have to, so you can earn money. Valereee (talk) 00:49, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I’m sorry you feel this way. I’m not at all tech savvy. And realised that I attached links that may have not worked. So added some more to cover them all. I personally don’t think I have the links that suit any criteria.
Also I didn’t realise you were a volunteer. Maybe I best just stay away from Wikipedia. It’s not my area of expertise at all. I give a lot of free advice myself to help people. So appreciate you also willing to help me. But please don’t worry. I need to find time to sit down and understand this all properly. 2603:8000:BD00:26:B048:482:BAF:4906 (talk) 00:55, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
We're all volunteers here, every one of us. Valereee (talk) 00:56, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Well thank you for offering. And sorry that I sent too many! 2603:8000:BD00:26:B048:482:BAF:4906 (talk) 01:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
yeah you cant make a page about yourself, has to be a independent source UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:08, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
@UnregulatedAmphibian: That is incorrect. There's nothing forbidding someone from writing an article about themselves; only that it is strongly discouraged. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:47, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
do you want a fight or something lets throw hands mate UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:47, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I strongly recommend you remain civil. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:52, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
just a joke mate UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 03:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

A Good Article review problem

Chuck Person's Eccojams Vol. 1 is nominated for a GA review. As of August 1st, User:UnregulatedAmphibian has started a review process and added a few comments to the review. The problem is that UA is a brand new account, started August 1st, and as such, is not qualified to be a GA reviewer. I am asking that an Admin reverse the review process and leave UA a note to not attempt any GA reviews until more experienced. I am aware the there are no restrictions on being a GA reviewer other than having registered an account, but feel that the nomination is not being properly serviced. David notMD (talk) 03:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

if there's no restrictions on me leaving a review then why are you posting this? cheers UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 03:22, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
you mention that i'm not qualified to be a GA reviewer, but then state that there's no restrictions on being a GA reviewer, why are you contradicting yourself? just trying to contribute to the community mate UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 03:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
It just seems like you're being a bit harsh to me for trying to involve myself, i get that i joke around a bit and i'm new around here, but i'm just trying to do my part. I've noticed you've also replied to me on a separate matter, therefore showing you took the time out of your day to look through my log. I don't want any confrontation, but i really don't understand why you selected my review out of the millions of other reviews. UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 03:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

User:UnregulatedAmphibian indef blocked as sockpuppet. This still leaves unresolved the inadequate and incomplete GA review of Chuck Person's Eccojams Vol. 1. David notMD (talk) 04:22, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD I G5 deleted the review and reverted so the GA bot will put it back in the queue as it originally was for someone else to review. Courcelles (talk) 04:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

guys wouldnt it be funny if like on april the 1st we all change some information on wikipedia so like everything is slightly wrong

Not a question + User has been blocked as a sockpuppet. ― 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 04:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

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

maybe like change someone important (like bill gates) birthday so its a day ahead of their actual birthday or maybe change what city they were born in or something small that people wouldnt really notice but when you do notice it its like 'ohhh snaaap what a prank' UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

just suggesting UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:13, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
What you are describing is vandalism and should not be encouraged. Weenis McPeenus (talk) 02:14, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
listen here weenis its actually not if we all collectively (jimbo included) agrees
it would be funny UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:15, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
@UnregulatedAmphibian: Wikipedia does allow some jokes for April Fools Day, just not in articles. See Wikipedia:Rules_for_Fools RudolfRed (talk) 02:35, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
ok UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 02:36, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
thanks for clearing it up mate UnregulatedAmphibian (talk) 03:42, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
User has been blocked as a sock. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 04:23, 1 August 2023 (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.

Inquiry about CA.Pradeep Kumar Bhati or Pradeep Bhati page

Hi, 1. I wanted to know the current status of pages with name CA.Pradeep kumar Bhati or Pradeep Bhati on wikipedia? 2. Since how long the page is pending for any approval and the reason of the delay? 3. How this page issue could be resolved and it can be published as earliest? 4. If there are multiple pages than please verfiy and publish the right source page. 5. The information about the Official Spokesperson is available of Samajwadi Party website itself. There are over 50 debates available in different national channels of India. What else you want to check? please see all the links provided and these are all available in consolidation form (official page of Facebook, Instagram, Twitter accounts of the Pradeep Bhati)? CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati (talk) 11:06, 29 July 2023 (UTC)

User:CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati, the current status of both "CA.Pradeep kumar Bhati" and "Pradeep Bhati" is "doesn't exist". Nonexistent pages aren't awaiting approval (or anything else). Are they perhaps drafts? "Draft:CA.Pradeep kumar Bhati" doesn't exist, but "Draft:Pradeep Bhati" does. The current status of the latter seems to be "moribund": it was declined, but since then no attempt has been made to improve it (or resubmit it). As for your fifth question, are you familiar with the requirement for what Wikipedia understands to be "reliable sources"? -- Hoary (talk) 11:23, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Dear CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati,
Thank you for your effort. Besides what User:Hoary has said, I would like to point out that your username is very similar to "CA.Pradeep Kumar Bhati" and "Pradeep Bhati". If you have a conflict of interest, you are expected to disclose it–you may do it on your user page. Please see WP:COI for more information.
It also seems that you are writing about a person related to a political party. If you are paid to create or edit the articles you mentioned, you also must disclose it. Please see WP:PAY for more information.
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 12:01, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
Dear Sir, Username resemble but I am neither paid or directly associated with him. I disclose and reassure that any information uploaded is based on facts and information available in public domain
Thanks CA. Pradeep Kumar Bhati (talk) 02:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Hello CA Pradeep Kumar Bhati.
If your account name closely resembles a living person, and you are not that person (as you disclose in your previous comment), you may be/are likely at risk of violating WP:MISLEADNAME or WP:IMPERSONATE.
You should probably confirm whether you are or aren't that person, as if you aren't said person you risk being blocked. PenguinPhone (talk) 08:53, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Adding new pages

I Opened my Wikipedia account to add pages to few topics that interests me, but I got rejected. Did not know what exactly would count as a solid reference for the topics that I am writing for.

I am writing about Ivy (Machine Learning), it's a new framework that aims to unify AI, something similar to Keras, when I wrote the article, it asked me for reference but was not sure what reference would be accepted for that. Can you point me to some trustworthy resource? A0m0rajab (talk) 16:28, 30 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello A0m0rajab,
Thank you for coming to the teahouse. It is the responsibility of you, the editor, to find reliable sources as references for any article you wish to create. The criteria of a reliable source can be seen here at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:Verifiability. For example, according to Wikipedia:Verifiability, "academic and peer-reviewed publications are usually the most reliable sources on topics such as history, medicine, and science."
I am assuming that you are new to Wikipedia. Please then also see Help:Referencing for beginners.
Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 16:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Hi @A0m0rajab,
Take a look at WP:RS on identifying reliable sources. I'd recommend creating a draft, and at the top of the page, you'll see a box with various tools, including links to find sources, see Template: Find sources. If you can't find reliable secondary sources, you should consider whether the article is WP:NOTAvle enough to have its own article. I'll see if I can find sources for you. NotAGenious (talk) 16:52, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your answers, my main issue is that, I might add a resource and it would be rejected. I will check the links you provided to understand the situation. Thanks. A0m0rajab (talk) 17:02, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
A0m0rajab Draft:Ivy was Declined (not Rejected). Do not resubmit until after you add valid references. Given newness of Ivy, WP:TOOSOON may apply. David notMD (talk) 18:27, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
Thank you for your answer, I will wait then till I add that article. A0m0rajab (talk) 09:32, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

watchlist management

what is a good way to organize your watchlist in order to best use that thing, i don't really know what people use it for or how to organize it so it isnt just a mess Iljhgtn (talk) 23:57, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Iljhgtn, I've never attempted to organize my watchlist, I just check it regularly to see what recent changes have been made to the articles I'm watching -- those that I originally created or did a lot of edits on, and those on a subject that particularly interests me. I use it to see what's happening with favorite articles. Sometimes I notice the person that added information isn't an expert on English grammar, so I'll do a little copyediting to make a sentence easier to understand. Other times I'm just pleased that good referenced information has been added. Some editors may keep track of articles that have been vandalized, or ones that often have a well-intentioned person adding details that aren't referenced. The edits may need to be reverted. I hope this helps you know what a watchlist can be used for. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:31, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Personally, I have two reasons why articles are on my watchlist:
  1. Articles I have a continuing interest in monitoring. These are permanently on the list, because I want to know anything that goes on with them.
  2. Articles I have edited, just because I noticed something I could do to improve them (eg spelling corrections, formatting, referencing), but which I don't have a long-term interest in, I add to my watchlist for a week or a month, just in case someone points out a problem with what I've done.
How much you add to your watchlist will depend on how 'busy' (frequently changed) the articles are, and how many notifications you want to receive each day. -- Verbarson  talkedits 12:04, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Improving draft article on K-crossover music group CREZL

Dear Teahouse community, I have gotten very helpful comments from editors here on my Draft:Crezl. As I continue to improve the draft and wait for approval, may I get some additional feedback from experienced reviewers? Many thanks in advance. Echohk (talk) 14:54, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

@Echohk I can't read any of the citations, owing to my lack of language skills but one immediate issue is that you have included many external links in the body of the article. that's a no-no: WP:ELPOINTS. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:25, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Also, it is standard practice to include the English translation of the titles of your citations, using the |trans-title parameter that's available in {{cite news}}, for example. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:28, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Regarding the translation, this is the very reason I initiated writing a Wiki article. There is a lot of foreign language content, but none in English. I looked at another Wiki page for some guidance (Forestella, which is also a crossover group borne out of the Phantom Singer show, like Crezl). They had predominately Korean language articles and cited in Korean, not a English translation. Could you provide some advice? Thank you so much. Echohk (talk) 12:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks very much for your feedback. I removed the external links in the table. I believe I have now only internal links to other wiki articles in the body of the article. Echohk (talk) 12:35, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Newbie: Hey and thanks in Advance...

Hiya, I'm @Sungyandy and i'm new here - Greetings from Australia!

Thought I'd drop a little hello, I'd appreciate any feedback on recent drafts i've made as i'm always looking for further ways to continue to improve my content and personally I don't feel like i'm close to publishing my first wiki's just yet...


My main focus is uploading public information on notable people and professions as well as any other factual information I compile through my exploration of studies, books and my own profession.


Thanks again, Yandy@ SungYandy (talk) SungYandy (talk) 13:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia! I see that you have a few drafts in the works right now, but I have to say it's recommended that new editors start with editing existing articles first. This is so you get acquainted with Wikipedia's style, referencing, and so on. I definitely recommend reading through WP:YFA and our various help pages on references - in particular, note that most everything on Wikipedia has to be cited to a reliable secondary source. This means that information you gather yourself in your profession is not appropriate to be added to Wikipedia, true as it may be. WPscatter t/c 13:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
SungYandy In the last few days you have started four drafts. I strongly recommend you set aside three and then work on what you think is the strongest one. Only after getting one approved should you then take what you learned about referencing and formatting to address the others. Otherwise, if you go ahead and submit four flawed drafts, you will be wasting reviewers' time. David notMD (talk) 15:15, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Eye-witness information on an article

Hi everyone,

I was looking at the article 2023 Khar bombing and saw there was a 'Reactions' section. I was reading an article on BBC news which contained a detailed eye-witness account of the bombing and there was one section which described the situation. Would an account like this from an eye-witness be suitable for that section or is it typically reserved for notable people who have reacted to the situation?

Thanks in advance SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 13:57, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello SpicyTofuNoodles,
I think you are welcome to add this account to the article, but not in the "Reactions section". By my experience, this section is usually reserved for the views of certain individuals or groups with authority. However, the "Mr Mahir" in the account is just a witness. His views and subsequent actions after the attack wouldn't create a notable impact.
The source itself is considered reliable, since BBC news has published it. I think it will be fine if you cite the source in the body of the article, if you wish to describe the attack in more detail.
I am not a Wikipedia pro, so I hope some other teahouse hosts could chip in on this.
Cheers, --TheLonelyPather (talk) 14:21, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks for the response. I was thinking that section was reserved for notable people or people with authority. There are other news articles from reputable outlets which have accounts from other witnesses too. I've taken a look at some similar articles and not really seen anything about eye witness accounts. The descriptions of the attacks tend to stay neutral and factual and don't include words like "devastating" etc.
Would be good to get a Wikipedia professional's advice on this as these topics are very sensitive in nature. SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 14:40, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
See WP:PRIMARY; this eye witness account is essentially original material that is close to the event, and is written by someone who is directly involved by having witnessed said event. So it offers (only) an insider's view of the event, and I would be very cautious to include it in any article (there might be exceptions of course, viz the Assassination of John F. Kennedy. Lectonar (talk) 15:02, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
@SpicyTofuNoodles The BBC seems to have focused on the "doomsday scenes" aspect of the comments of the eye-witness. This is clearly just an opinion and it seems a phrase that would fail Wikipedia's neutrality policy. Had the witness said something specific like "I saw three male attackers" then that would be more acceptable as article content but still a WP:PRIMARY source. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Thanks Michael, really appreciate the quick and detailed response! I'll keep note of what you said if I decide to make any edits of that nature in the future. SpicyTofuNoodles (talk) 15:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Mass Add Pages to Watchlist

Is there any way (other than manually with much clicking) to add every linked page on a page to my watchlist? Maximilian775 (talk) 14:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not aware of any way to do that. Curious as to the reason you want to do that? 331dot (talk) 15:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Preferences > Watchlist > Edit Raw Watchlist And as per 331dot above. Why? it sounds a bit WP:OWNy - X201 (talk) 16:05, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Hi Maximilian775 although not adding it to your watchlist, a useful alternative is to go to the relevant page, click "related changes", then save that as a favourite so you can bring it up with one click. This has the advantage that when you don't want to follow those links any longer you just delete the related changes link, rather than having to manually unlink them all from the watchlist. - Arjayay (talk) 16:12, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I find Wikipedia a nice diversion from the daily grind, and like keeping abreast of edits to pages within specific domains I'm interested in. I don't think WP:OWN describes any past, current or future behaviors or edits I would engage in -- feel free to look through my history as regards that. Maximilian775 (talk) 16:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I don't see a problem with that, Maximilian775. I use the "related changes" trick to track vandals who attack certain subject areas. It also works with templates, which has the advantage that, if another page is added to the template, it automatically comes up in the related changes. - Arjayay (talk) 16:35, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Fortaleza percentage typo?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortaleza#Politics

In the linked article.

"(26,457% of the total state)"

Is it supposed to be 26.457%?

I was looking up cities near the equator that are at sea level.

75.142.254.3 (talk) 02:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it should be using period instead of a comma per WP:DECIMAL. I fixed it. RudolfRed (talk) 02:44, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Note that the comma is used for this in several European languages, so it may not be a typo, so much as a writer unaware of the conventions in English. ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Harnessing the Dragon's Fume

Over the past half-year or so, I've dedicated my efforts to creating a page called "Draft:Harnessing the Dragon's Fume." My concern relates to meeting the requirements of WP:NBOOKS, where we are expected to have at least two separate book reviews from independent sources. Despite gathering three reviews, I received them all from the same reviewer, albeit on three distinct platforms. Now, I'm unsure if this fulfills the guidelines. Can anyone clarify if it does? RPSkokie (talk) 09:17, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. In my opinion I don't think three reviews from the same reviewer meet the requirement of two separate reviews- which I take to mean the reviews need to be from more than one person. 331dot (talk) 09:20, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Thank you. RPSkokie (talk) 09:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm in agreement with 331dot. You'd certainly be welcome to reference two, or even all three, reviews from the same reviewer, if they make different useful points about the book... but you'd still need to have at least one more from a different reviewer to establish notability. FeRDNYC (talk) 20:00, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Primate cities typo?

"Fortaleza, along with Recife and Salvador, is a considered one of the primate cities of Northeast Region."

Am I missing something? Primate cities? Primary cities?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fortaleza#Politics

75.142.254.3 (talk) 05:51, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Primate city, but usually these kind of issues are better discussed on the article's talk page rather than here NotAGenious (talk) 06:25, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Last sentence of Lead now reads "Fortaleza is one of the three leading cities in the Northeast region together with Recife and Salvador." David notMD (talk) 06:31, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
@David notMD I've changed that section as it didn't sound right. Also I realized that my reply here got taken away by the achieve bot just as I posted it. 🛧Layah50♪🛪 ( 話す? 一緒に飛ぼう！) 06:39, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Hmm, I thought structured discussions were supposed to (at least help) protect against getting edit-conflicted with the archive bot (or any other editor)?
As for the claim that the previous version didn't sound right, beware of simply being thrown by unfamiliar vocabulary. As NotAGenious pointed out with their helpful link, "primate city" is a recognized term, and (crucially) has nothing to do with zoology; the root is the same as in "primary" or "prima donna". It may not have sounded right to you, previously, but hopefully having seen the primate city article, it now sounds right-er? FeRDNYC (talk) 19:57, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
(Also, feel free to, instead of changing the text, link primate city to that article where it first appears in the section. Presumably it wasn't already linked, because it was previously used elsewhere in the article. The rule around here used to be one wikilink per term per article, but that was recently changed to one per section.) FeRDNYC (talk) 20:03, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

How do we design our usernames?

I see some usernames which are kind of designed with emojis, colors, fonts etc. How can I do the same thing to my username? Flag Creator (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

hi @Flag Creator and welcome to the teahouse! that is the signature of a user, which you may decorate with some knowledge of Cascading Style Sheets: see Custom signatures for some guidelines and tips on this. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 15:38, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
I am getting confused. Everytime I do that, it's not working. Can you show an example? Flag Creator (talk) 15:55, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
If you scroll down in Special:Preferences, you will see a section where you can input custom signatures. Make sure to check the "Treat the above as wiki markup." button. If unchecked, your custom signature will appear broken. Ca talk to me! 16:09, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Signatures#Customizing_your_signature for more detailed help. (Oh, never mind, Melecie already linked there. Sorry!) FeRDNYC (talk) 20:18, 1 August 2023 (UTC)

Who is this "The Best Known For IP?"

What happened to him on Wikipedia that made him rage a war for nearly the past decade?

Do we know what he seeks to accomplished by making numerous accounts?

Do we know any details about him IRL like if he worked for Wikimedia?

Is there anything more we can do to stop him?

This rabbit hole goes so far it would take me hours to get a clear picture this. UnironicEditor (talk) 04:04, 31 July 2023 (UTC)

Hello, UnironicEditor. Please read Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP. Cullen328 (talk) 04:13, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
Just because it's worth making this point as clearly as possible: Do we know any details about him IRL like if he worked for Wikimedia? No, we don't (meaning the larger community as a whole), and attempting to uncover such information or making it public would be WP:OUTING, and is a sanction-worthy offense. Even with vandals. FeRDNYC (talk) 20:24, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1195&oldid=1245139057"