Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1204

Archive 1200

←

Archive 1202

Archive 1203

Archive 1204

Archive 1205

Archive 1206

→

Archive 1210

HEAR ME OUT!

User has been blocked because WP:NOTHERE.

Hello everyone! Hope you guys are all fine! I am really not. I was and still am in a vulnerable and fragile situation following some developments in my personal life. That didn't stop some "editors" and other lobby servants ( be it political, ideological and/or academic) from knowingly and deliberately attacking me. Yes, I have been a victim of targeted (cyber)bullying and harassment. I have been through a lot in my life but this is way too much for way too long. Considering to take action even. Some examples: - Have strangers come to me to deliver (codified) messages; - Being constantly observed and followed; - Having my social media hacked; - Slandering and invading my privacy online and anonymously namely via Wikipedia, referring to me in the most unpleasant terms (at least show your faces!) - @Jon Kolbert was kind enough to even block one of my IPs as a favour to someone - apologies private relay use, sockpuppetry and god-knows-what-else, ah!, and "my privacy is more important than yours"; These are just some examples and by now I know most people behind this. @Grumpylawnchair , @Shadow345110 , @The Capitalist forever and others surely know what I am talking about. Before you ask : Yes, I do have issues, however these are factual. So, please, could some kind soul help me sort this out and all the others come forward and explain WTH was it going through your heads? Best regards, Chickafile Chickafile (talk) 20:30, 24 October 2023 (UTC) I have barely finished reading this but would recommend immediately striking or removing your threat of legal action to avoid a block. See WP:No legal threats. Tollens (talk) 20:32, 24 October 2023 (UTC) I'm sorry you are having a bad experience. But the place to bring issues of other editors' behaviour is WP:ANI. Please read the material at the top of that page carefully before posting. ColinFine (talk) 20:38, 24 October 2023 (UTC) @Chickafile I apologise if I upset you in someway, I'm just a bit confused on what I apparently did. I assure you that I meant no harm. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 21:39, 24 October 2023 (UTC) How do you dare, really? If that is not the very definition of gaslighting, I do not know what is. At least show your faces and apologise, cowards. Why is my life so important for you? What gives you the right to do such things? Humanity is really lost. Chickafile (talk) 10:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC) That does it. That kind of attitude will not be tolerated here. You are clearly WP:NOTHERE. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 10:53, 25 October 2023 (UTC) @Chickafile I am also confused in what I did. Shadow345110 (talk)

User talk pages and sandbox

Can you put anything on your user sandbox (nothing offensive of course but just random stuff to put there as editing test)? Also how do you respond to someone on your talk page? Thank you. UniversalAlien (talk) 01:50, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@UniversalAlien: Yes, you can add a lot of stuff to your sandbox. You can also use the WP:SANDBOX, the one that everybody shares. I'd read Wikipedia:Misuse of the sandbox, though. As for replying to someone on your talk page, there should be a little link that says [reply] next to the user's signature, and you can click that and type in a reply there. Cheers! ‍ ‍ Relativity ‍ ‍ 02:00, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, UniversalAlien, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can put a lot of stuff on your user pages (including sandbox), but it most all, or nearly all, be part of creating the encyclopaedia, not for other purposes. See WP:UPYES and WP:UPNO. ColinFine (talk) 11:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

C64 Direct-to-TV got link rot

C64 Direct-to-TV citation 3 has been a victim of link rot and the page no longer exists

it seems that the wordpress blog was wiped and only the example post still exists Natelabs (talk) 00:27, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Natelabs: None of the three references link to Wordpress. Please clarify what you are asking. RudolfRed (talk) 00:56, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

I looked at the references and the 3rd one - Picobay.com - is a dead link, and there's a notice that it's "just another WordPress site." Karenthewriter (talk) 04:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Natelabs: Good catch! I've archived the links with the WP:IABOT (which I would recommend, it's a really useful tool and very straightforward to use!) and marked them as dead so they link to the archived pages now :) Quuxbazbarfoo (talk) 11:28, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Feedback on article about Nepalese lawyer

Hi, just looking for more pointers/feedback on an article on a Nepalese lawyer. Available here. I'd like to get a few different perspectives on it before I submit it to make sure it's complaint with wiki's policies. Would appreciate any help, thank you sm! Researcher1206 (talk) 11:55, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Joaquin Alejandrino Natividad

My draft on Joaquin Alejandrino Natividad was declined. The reason was: This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified.

I have used as references books that were published in the Philippines. These books are in the libraries of the Philippine National Library and the library of the National Historical Commission of the Philippines. How can I get these references recognized?

Thank you for reviewing my article. I hope you can guide me so that it will be published by Wikipedia. Rosepolicarpio (talk) 11:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Rosepolicarpio, it seems like the issue is not the quality of the references, but rather the tone and quantity. Do you have any questions about the comments your reviewer left? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 12:14, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Rosepolicarpio: I can't speak for the four reviewers who declined this before me, but my issues with it were that there was a lot of unreferenced content, with entire sections without a citation. Even if this person has long since died and doesn't come under our WP:BLP rules, we still need to be able to verify the information.

Also, while offline sources are acceptable, they need to be cited with enough details (see WP:OFFLINE) to allow the reader to reliably identify them for verification purposes. I don't think that was (is) the case with at least some of the sources here.

The draft was also written in a narrative tone with somewhat peacocky language. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

This is about Draft:Joaquin Natividad. -- Hoary (talk) 11:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

How to upload a new logo?

Hello, the company I work for has recently changed its logo and I would like to upload the new one on Wikipedia. I tried uploading it through Commons but I'm not sure about the copyright to choose. Do you have any good practices to provide for this use case please? Many thanks in advance! Mathbsnd (talk) 13:17, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mathbsnd. Before trying again to upload the file to Commons, you probably should take a close look at c:Commons:Licensing and c:Commons:Copyright rules by subject matter#Logos because Commons only accepts public domain or otherwise freely licensed content; Commons doesn't accept fair use content of any type per c:Commons:Fair use. So, unless your company's logo is so simple that it wouldn't be considered eligible for copyright protection or your company has released a version of it under one of the free licenses that Commons accepts, you won't be able to upload it to Commons. In such a case, you could most likely upload the logo locally to English Wikipedia as non-free content as long as the way the logo is used satisfies Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:39, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

You'll find further advice at WP:Logos. David Biddulph (talk) 13:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

How do you edit an edit summary?

If I forgot to make an edit summary or there were errors in my edit summary, how do I edit it? TaxGalPDX2 (talk) 22:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@TaxGalPDX2: Unfortunately there is no way to edit an edit summary. They can be deleted by administrators in instances of policy violations, but not changed. If there is information you wish to communicate, you may make a minor edit or dummy edit and refer to your previous edit in the new summary. TornadoLGS (talk) 22:57, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. There is no way to edit an edit summary after it was made. If you want to provide an explanation after the fact, you should use the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 22:57, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. TaxGalPDX2 (talk) 23:12, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@TaxGalPDX2: Another thing I've seen people do when making a mistake in an edit summary, is to make a tiny edit that doesn't change any content (like add a space after a period) and use that edit to write an edit summary to correct the previous edit summary. I don't bother, though. If I make a mistake in an edit summary, I just move on. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:31, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

What are the requirements to create an article?

I've created a few articles and submitted them to Articles for Creation, but I know it will take a long time to review them. Is there a level you can obtain where you can publish directly? Thanks! TaxGalPDX2 (talk) 22:04, 24 October 2023 (UTC) I'm not in a hurry ... just want to make sure I don't miss a stop somewhere. TaxGalPDX2 (talk) 22:08, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @TaxGalPDX2 and welcome to the Teahouse. To answer your question, the ability to create articles directly in mainspace is restricted to autoconfirmed users (registered, at least 4 days old and has made 10 or more edits). New articles created in mainspace will be reviewed by a new pages patroller before they can be indexed by search engines. Happy editing! Grumpylawnchair (talk) 22:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Grumpylawnchair! TaxGalPDX2 (talk) 22:27, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@TaxGalPDX2 From looking at your editing history, you have created three drafts submitted to AfC, two of which were declined and the third waiting on review. Given your history, I advise skipping AfC. An article created in mainspace could be changed to draft by NPP or even nominated for deletion. A note on review time - the system is not a queue. Drafts may be reviewed within days, weeks, or sadly, months. David notMD (talk) 02:12, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

P.S. At Oregon Board, your only ref for this extremely short draft is the Oregon Board website. You need refs to publications about the Board that have no connection to the Board. David notMD (talk) 02:15, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

I meant to write that I advise not skipping AfC. David notMD (talk) 10:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@TaxGalPDX2: Remember there are no deadlines on Wikipedia. There is no reason to be impatient about getting a draft reviewed. You just wait, even if it takes months.

Given your record so far, even if you are permitted to write directly in article space, or move drafts there, I recommend you don't. You might find yourself wasting the time of other editors who move your stuff back to draft space because it isn't acceptable for article space.

I'm an administrator and even I occasionally submit a draft for review because I want a second set of eyes on it to make sure it's worthy. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:35, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

why is there a page called foodp0rn

why is there a page called food porn I81.117,13.122 (talk) 02:52, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! There is an article called Food porn because editors created it, added a sufficient number of sources, and no one has determined that it should be deleted. There are all sorts of interesting articles that people choose to write about. GoingBatty (talk) 03:13, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

this site is weird I81.117,13.122 (talk) 03:14, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

That's because this world is weird. —TheDJ (talk • contribs) 09:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Create an account and then you can create an article "Plant porn." David notMD (talk) 10:21, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

I81.117,13.122 already has an account, David notMD. Their username looks a bit like an IP address on first sight, but isn't. Cordless Larry (talk) 10:25, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Too subtle for me; I do see now that it begins with a capital "I" rather than the number 1. David notMD (talk) 10:29, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

ha, fooled you i guess I81.117,13.122 (talk) 15:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the internet Babysharkboss2 was here!! 14:18, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

How do I change my username?

I wanna change my username to something else but I have no idea how. Does anyone know how I can change my username? DarkModeEditor (talk) 17:38, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @DarkModeEditor, and welcome to the teahouse. You may request a username change by following the instructions here. Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 17:42, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! DarkModeEditor (talk) 17:44, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome! Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 17:45, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

DYLN

I'm a bit confused by this one and would like other eyes on it. Article is called DYLN but intro starts

Stephanie Lang (born December 30, 1988), currently known by her stage Stef Lang name and previously known professionally as Stef Lang, is a Canadian Pop/RnB artist, songwriter, and producer based in Los Angeles, California. Lang took the stage name Stef Lang in 2016.

It looks as if this was changed in several edits in June from two IP editors, here. I don't think this is hijacking, but a musician who has changed her name or reverted to her birth name. As it is, the article is confusing. What do we do here - should it be reverted to refer to DYLN rather than Stef Lang, or do we need a source that discusses her change of name? Thanks. Tacyarg (talk) 11:34, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tacyarg: If the artist now goes by DYLN, the article should be changed appropriately with published reliable sources. I suggest starting a discussion at the article's talk page, and invite the editors who renames the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Soucre For Del Shannon Little Town Flirt Album 1963 Album.

i need Soucre For Del Shannon Little Town Flirt Album 1963 Album if i want to do an article of the album. Samchristie05 (talk) 16:10, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Samchristie05, and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, that is correct: if you want to write an article (on any subject whatever) your very first step is to find several reliable independent substantial sources on it.

People who answer questions here at the Teahouse are not in general in the business of finding sources for you: it might happen that somebody is sufficiently interested to go looking, but more likely not. On the other hand, if you have looked for sources and not found any (which I guess is the case or you wouldn't be asking) then there is a very good chance that the album is not notable, and it's not worth spending any more time on the article. ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@Samchristie05: The list at Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources might be helpful for you. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

what about like The LA Times Samchristie05 (talk) 19:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Blocked.

I think I have been blocked from editing by Widr. The notice showed up on my phone but I cannot locate the notice on my computer. Where would such a notice appear? How can I determine the reason for the block? Drsharps53 (talk) 19:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Drsharps53 I do not see a block notice on your Talk page, nor any reverts of your recent edits that might have triggered a block. While User:Widr does do a lot a blocking, I do not see any recent block of your account. Have you tried editing an article? David notMD (talk) 19:34, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks. Will try…as soon as I spot something. Drsharps53 (talk) 19:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Indeed, not blocked! How odd…. Drsharps53 (talk) 20:03, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

You're likely not logged in on your phone; what shows up there is most likely an IP block, not a block of your account. Drmies (talk) 19:49, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Creating a page

I recently made the mistake of googling myself and found some odd things I never posted. I am curious on how to create a wiki page on my public life as a public performance artist. I'd like to do it the right way and have seen my contemporaries that have pages on themselves with a much smaller public profile. How do I do this correctly as I am not very educated. I am reading up on it here and just want to do things correctly. Thank you. Chinaksi187 (talk) 21:07, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Chinaksi187: Hi there! WP:AUTO explains that Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies. Creating a new Wikipedia article can be challenging, especially when you have a conflict of interest (COI). To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. When you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple published independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of you, and determine whether they demonstrate that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could create an account and declare your COI on your user page. Then follow the instructions at Help:Your first article and summarize what the sources have published, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting for review, declines, and rewrites, before an article is created. If you are successful, then you could never edit the article directly due to your COI, but could submit edit requests on the article talk page. Hope this helps. GoingBatty (talk) 21:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I appreciate the guidance. I will opt not to create anything on myself as it seems to be something I am not versed at, I am just curious as to what I have found out there on me and found it odd. There are many links about what I do but I think it's best I leave it up to fate. Thanks again. Chinaksi187 (talk) 21:41, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

COI noticeboard?

I tried looking at the noticeboards category, and can't seem to find one for COI specifically. These edits to Allen Frances look a lot like COI: they read as personal opinion and belief-based just put in third person, and are not sourced. Kimen8 (talk) 22:47, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Would this be what you're looking for? WP:COI/N Knitsey (talk) 22:53, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I searched "COI" on Category:Wikipedia noticeboards, when I should have spelled out the word. Kimen8 (talk) 22:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Could you give the money-begging a frigging rest, please?

I haven't beenn able to view a single page without you sticking your hand out. 24.69.97.22 (talk) 23:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

You can disable the fundraising banners by creating an account, then unticking the box next to Preferences > Banners > Fundraising. Tollens (talk) 00:03, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP 24.69.97.22. Please understand that the "you" you're referring to in your post is really the Wikimedia Foundation (WMF), and how they operate their fundraising campaigns is really not anything that the volunteers who edit Wikipedia have any control over. While it's possible for those with user accounts to set their preferences to "turn off" those banners, eliminating them completely or making it possible for non-registered accounts to also turn them off is something you will need to take up with the WMF. You can tyring emailing your concerns about all of the donation banners this to this email address, and perhaps you'll get a response. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Userboxes' and image/copyright

(I originally posted this on Jimbo Wales talk page, but was told i'd most likely get better results here.) So, I've had three images removed from Userboxes' I've made. (a Montero one, a King Nothing one, and a King Crimson one). And all three images have had their images removed, due to copyright. Now, I reverted the King Nothing one, since I didn't know about the files only allowed in articles, but the bot re-reverted it, and I read about it and left it alone. but TODAY I made the King Crimson and Montero one. and the difference between these two and the first is that I KNEW SPECIFICALY What images I can and can't use. I checked and used the images on the infoboxes for the respective article. (I will use THIS MONTERO UBX as an example). AND the infobox image SAID "Fair use" on it. So if their both fair use images, then why does the images keep getting removed on the ground of copyright? Sorry If this is worded poorly. Babysharkboss2 was here!! 13:48, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

The image to which you refer was removed as a violation of WP:Non-free content criteria. You need to read that. The reason was explained in the diff. David Biddulph (talk) 13:56, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Babysharkboss2. As explained at WP:UBX#Caution about image use, only images which are in the public domain or otherwise released under an acceptable free license can be used in userboxes; anything that is non-free wouldn't be allowed per non-free content use criterion #9. Wikipedia does allow some types of fair use content to be uploaded and used, but only when said usage satisfies Wikipedia's non-free content use policy. This policy is quite restrictive (even more restrictive than fair use) and one of these restrictions is that such content may only be used (i.e. displayed) in the article namespace. Such content can't be used on user pages, talk pages, noticeboards, in templates, or any other type of page that isn't a Wikipedia article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

where would it say on the image that it's "free content". Since, there's a userbox using the JJBA logo, and one using the Beatles logo, and another using Abby Road's box-art. Babysharkboss2 was here!! 14:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

If you are saying that you have found userboxes that violate WP:NFCC, you can remove the violating content. You can't use other violations as an excuse for yours; see WP:Other stuff exists. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:20, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

im not saying "They did it, so why can't i?!1?" I'm just asking what IS and ISNT considered copyright, and how do I make sure it's public domain or free. Babysharkboss2 was here!! 14:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

You'll find information on what can be copyrighted at Threshold of originality. You'll find further advice at WP:Copyrights, including at WP:COPYOTHERS. In general you should assume that anything you see published elsewhere is copyrighted unless you can see that it has been published under an appropriate free licence. - David Biddulph (talk) 14:36, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

ok, thank you Babysharkboss2 was here!! 15:09, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Babysharkboss2 You can of course base your userboxes on virtually any image you find at Wikimedia Commons, since by policy that project only hosts images acceptable for Wikipedia in articles and elsewhere. There are numerous ways to search Commons for what you need. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:28, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@Babysharkboss2:. You can find out how a file is licensed by looking at it's Wikipedia page, and you can find a file's Wikipedia page by simply clicking on it since the image itself functions as a link to the file's page. All files uploaded to Wikipedia or Commons are required to have some basic information about the provenance of the file and a copyright license; so, there should be something on each file's page stating how it is licensed and anything licensed as "non-free" is going to unacceptable for user boxes. However, please understand that files are not really vetted before they're uploaded and basically the license added is based upon the uploader's self-assessment. This means that a file can be incorrectly licensed and it's just that nobody noticed the mistake yet. Since Commons doeesn't allow non-free content of any type, most files you find on Commons should be OK for userboxes; once again, though, incorrectly licensed files often slip through and go unnoticed (even for some time). -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Appropriateness of hatting or archiving of a thread guidance?

Note: I'm specifically asking that any reply not provide opinion or advice, but rather only existing consensus in Policies and guidelines. Can someone point me to the guidance on when hatting or archiving of a thread is appropriate? Or a way to do search of Policies and guidelines pages for keywords? All I've been able to find is unclear or contradictory. (Example: Let's say I opened a thread on a WP: Talk page, to raise an issue, and I thought had evidently run its course, and would not get the last word by doing the hatting/archiving.) RudolfoMD (talk) 22:53, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi RudolfoMD. Perhaps the information you're looking for can be found in WP:TPG. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Can someone please look into my edit request for "pogrom"?

I wanted to add the 10/07 Hamas attacks on Israel attacks to the article but some editors who have issues with Jews said no. I am a Jewish person and I know damn well what a pogrom is.

I have added articles to support my thesis. Pedantic editors who have ill feelings towards Jews don't want it added.

I have abided by requests to not get into an edit war, but I would like someone with experience and seniority to look into this.

It should not be this controversial to add what is clearly a pogrom to this page. Ghostlystatic (talk) 22:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ghostlystatic Welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not experienced enough on editing in controversial subject areas to comment, but I feel that accusing others of being "pedantic editors who have ill feelings towards Jews" comes across as a personal attack. I understand your frustration, but please comment on the content, not the editor. Thank you. Grumpylawnchair (talk) 22:11, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Well then, their content was extremely obvious as was the intent of the content. Anything to score a goal against the Jews.

These editors about the difference between a riot and armed attack.

Either way Jewish people were massacred, it was organized, and the intent was to Jewish people. To me it is insulting pedantry and semantics.

The fact that I have to even dispute all this is disgusting and why I hate working with your website. I read it a lot but I really hate the bureaucracy. Ghostlystatic (talk) 22:18, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@Ghostlystatic: Continue the discussion on the talk page. If you can't reach consensus, follow the guidance at WP:DR RudolfRed (talk) 01:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Also, read WP:AGF and don't assume people who disagree with you are doing so because your are Jewish. RudolfRed (talk) 01:05, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

I assume they are doing so because they don't like Jews, not just because of me.

I will follow the fiction of having a veneer of NPOV in discussions as best as I can, but I will state when something feels the way it feels to me. Ghostlystatic (talk) 02:27, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I can't really get any consensus on this besides quibbling on the difference between a riot and an armed attack by a random user who can't even spell "Israelis" right. That's the issue. It is provably true that it meets the definition of a pogrom. I can list sources but if the change isn't made by someone who has more than 500 edits or whatever my opinion is apparently worth less than a farthing. Which again is why I have resisted even trying to edit due to issues like the present one. It makes this website un-user-friendly. Ghostlystatic (talk) 02:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

User sandbox

What exactly is a ‘user sandbox’? Is it a sandbox that no one else can see, just me, or is it still a sandbox just for me, but anyone else can see it?

Thanks, Shadestar474 (talk) 02:13, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@shadestar474: just for you (although everyone can edit it (they usually don't)), but everyone can see it. ltbdl (talk) 02:19, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Shadestar474. There's a community-wide sandbox at WP:SANDBOX and there's also an individual WP:USERSANDBOX for each registered account. The community sandbox can be used by unregistered accounts or anyone else who wants to and it tends to be recyclied fairly rapidly. Individual sandboxes are in your user namespace and you're free to use them as you please as long as do so in compliance with WP:UP. For reference, anything you post in your sandbox or delete from your sandbox can be seen by others per WP:REALWORLD, so you might want to keep that in mind when using it, Most people will leave your sandbox alone unless there's some kind of serious problem that requires attention, e.g. WP:COPYVIO, WP:BLP violations or any other serious violation of Wikipedia policy.-- Marchjuly (talk) 02:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you, @Marchjuly and @Ltbdl! This is very helpful. Shadestar474 (talk) 02:42, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

The Signpost

How can I become a writer for The Signpost?

Thanks, Shadestar474 (talk) 02:53, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

P.S, just out of curiosity, what’s the etymology of calling the Wikipedia news outlet the “Signpost”? It just seems so random. Shadestar474 (talk) 02:53, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474: See Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Newsroom/Quick Start for information about contributing. With regards to the name, The Signpost#History states The Signpost's name was suggested by the Wikipedia practice of editors digitally signing talk-page posts. Tollens (talk) 02:59, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

That’s fascinating! Thank you! And thanks for the info on how to become a writer! Shadestar474 (talk) 03:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

are wikipedia templates turing complete

title Natelabs (talk) 09:55, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Natelabs: There is no way to make a loop or goto statement, and recursion is limited to a depth of 1, so no. Tollens (talk) 09:59, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

That's interesting, I wasn't aware of the recursion limit. Is there any way we can bypass this limit through template A transcluding template B and B transcluding A? 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:01, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Doesn't look like it – just found someone who tried at mw:User:Ypnypn/sandboxA. Tollens (talk) 10:09, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I assume that's by design. Tollens (talk) 10:10, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I think so. First of all, we have Lua modules that can be invoked by templates, but even if we were to not use Lua, we have these conditional templates that should be able to evaluate a brainfuck program by representing integers through strings. 0xDeadbeef→∞ (talk to me) 10:00, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Ah, well I suppose with Lua, yeah. I'm not aware of how you'd implement moving an instruction pointer backwards using conditional templates, though. Tollens (talk) 10:04, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Lua technically isn't turing complete either because it has a hardcoded time limit which means all Lua programs must halt. If you ignore that, you would be justified in ignoring Wikitext's similar limits. So, it depends on what definition you use, as usual. See also the bottom of Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)/Archive_189#Can we define variables in templates? * Pppery * _{it has begun...} 03:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Sources for bands

When citing sources specifically for a music group/band, can you use their website as a reliable source? For example, if I was to cite a source for a new album, could I cite the website page where they list the album and the songs in it as a reliable source? (Sorry if this is already answered in the help guide I’m just not sure) UniversalAlien (talk) 01:37, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Also, what are the little “character” things on the top right corner of some user pages? UniversalAlien (talk) 01:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi UniversalAlien. Reliable sources for articles about bands are pretty much the same as WP:RELIABLESOURCEs about any subject; they tend to be WP:SECONDARY sources published by reputable publishers who have an established track record of editorial control. You can try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Musicians for more specific examples. As for your second question, those are, I believe, called "top icons", which are actually templates users can add to their user pages to indicate certain things. For example, Template:FA user topicon is a template that users who have helped to create Featured Articles can add to their user page, while Template:Rollback topicon is a template that users who have been granted WP:ROLLBACK priviledges can add. Such icons are part vanity and part informative and exist for all kinds of accomplishments or priviledges. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Just to add on, you can cite self-published sources for claims about themselves (like your case), though with a couple exceptions (see WP:ABOUTSELF), but secondary sources are certainly preferred. Keep in mind that the source would not count toward establishing notability. Tollens (talk) 02:26, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

UniversalAlien, a notable band's website can be used for non controversial things like a member retired or moved on, and a new member joined the band. But new album releases are inherently promotional in nature, and independent secondary sources should be used instead. Cullen328 (talk) 04:55, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Why is the title in italics?

Hello, how can I make the italic title disappear? Buda Chronicle OrionNimrod (talk) 09:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@OrionNimrod: This can be done by adding the parameter |italic title=no within the infobox template. Tollens (talk) 09:33, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Tollens, but do you know the reason why the title is italic if I did not use the "italic title" template? Because this is automatic because of the book template? OrionNimrod (talk) 09:53, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

The {{Infobox book}} template automatically italicizes the title, since book titles are typically written in italics. Tollens (talk) 09:57, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Completing the translation of article Translation Christiane Benner

Europe's largest industrial union has a woman as the leader. I try to complete a translation of her german wikipedia page. Draft:Christiane Benner. ()()I have technical difficulties with the reference link to the newspaper tagesspiegel which I was not able to fix without help. Otherwise. I would like to have a second opinion on this aticle before i move it into the normal space for articles. My questions: 1. Can somebody please help me with the error message of the Tagesspiegel reference? 2. Is the article ready to be moved? Feel free to edit and move the article Aberlin2 (talk) 19:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Aberlin2, I made some changes which fixed the error currently shown; but I'd created a worse error and so reverted what I'd done. I note that your citations have parameters "titel" and "autor", which isn't how we spell those words here. Unfortunately, copying a citation verbatim from one language of Wikipedia to another often doesn't work. Maproom (talk) 20:16, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

I've now fixed the error that was causing a warning. The character between the two words of "IG Metall" was something weird, which I've replaced by a regular space. Maproom (talk) 20:20, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

thank you for youre support i moved the article to the article space and hope this was not to early but i was worried that another person tries to translate her page without noticing my already done work Aberlin2 (talk) 20:57, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Though, anomiebot does tend to swing by and fix those soon enough. -- asilvering (talk) 00:26, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

To sort out those annoying reference errors, when I translate from German WP, what I tend to do is open the original German reference and then recreate a reference in the English WP using the citation templates provided by the source editor. This has the advantage that the syntax will be correct for English WP, and also gives me a chance to check (a) that the source really says what the German WP claims, (b) is still there, and (c) doesn't say anything else that's actually useful. Elemimele (talk) 10:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

नया रायपुर को अधिकारिक नाम नवा रायपुर करने हेतु

जब मै गूगल पर नवा रायपुर खोज करता हूं तो विकीपीडिया नया रायपुर प्रदर्शित करता है जो की उचित नहीं है इसमें सुधार की आवश्यकता है,क्या आप नवी मुंबई को नया मुंबई प्रदर्शित करते हैं तो यह नवा रायपुर के साथ क्यों? Mr.chhattisi (talk) 09:47, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Machine translation:

To change the official name of Naya Raipur to Nava Raipur

When I search Nava Raipur on Google Wikipedia displays Naya Raipur which is not fair it needs improvement, do you display Navi Mumbai as Naya Mumbai then why it with Nava Raipur? Tollens (talk) 09:50, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Naya Raipur Tollens (talk) 10:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Mr.chhattisi: I have moved the page to the title Nava Raipur. Please try to use English when contributing in the future, or provide a machine translation if you are unable to. You may also be interested in contributing to the Hindi Wikipedia.

मशीनी अनुवाद: मैंने पृष्ठ को नवा रायपुर शीर्षक पर स्थानांतरित कर दिया है। कृपया भविष्य में योगदान करते समय अंग्रेजी का उपयोग करने का प्रयास करें, या यदि आप असमर्थ हैं तो मशीनी अनुवाद प्रदान करें। आपको हिन्दी विकिपीडिया में योगदान देने में भी रुचि हो सकती है।. Tollens (talk) 10:25, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Note to others: I am not 100% confident in that pagemove but because I see an old talk page section with no replies asking about this exact rename, and because most recent sources used "Nava Raipur" over "Naya Raipur" in my brief search, I moved it – looks like the article doesn't get a whole lot of activity. If you disagree with the move please do feel free to revert me. Tollens (talk) 10:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Merging sections together

Sorry if this is a technically advanced question. If it is, please direct me to the correct place. I have been working on restructuring the sections in the vital articles list at Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/History and I am trying to merge the sections together. If you look in the Contemporary history section, there are duplicates of sections. Before, there was 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries and I have changed them to Late modern and Contemporary. However, it seems like when I try to merge the sections together using the source editor, the process is very tedious and involves scrolling up and down. TLDR: it's a hassle. I am looking for a good tool that I can use to make the process a lot easier. I tried using AI tools like ChatGPT and Bard, but I had no luck with those. I am hoping that someone can point me in the right direction on how I can solve this problem. Interstellarity (talk) 23:12, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Interstellarity. It's very nice to see you back in the Teahouse again!

I can't offer an elegant solution, but I can suggest how I would approach the task. I'd add an {{in use}} template to the List before I started anything. I would then open three adjacent browser windows.

In one, I'd simply View the article and use the Contents list on the left side to navigate to where I see sections duplicated.

I'd then open that article twice so I have two sets of identical source code side by side. The left side I would treat as the 'donor' and the other one as the recipient.

Scrolling down through in View mode, I'd locate the first article in a duplicated section and make a written note of it. (I found Pelee and Sars at the top of two 'General' sections in the Americas. From my donor page I'd select all the articles I want to copy over. To find the right place quickly, I'd Ctrl-F on 'Sars' or 'Pelee', and I'd then drag and drop them into the recipient page's section. I'd repeat that process for all duplicate sections - possibly using pen and paper to tick each one off as I go.

To sort a long list of articles into alphanumeric order, I might copy them over into Excel where I could sort them and then copy them back - probably one section at a time.

I won't say that's necessarily easiest way of doing it, but I'm pretty sure it'd work for me. Before saving the page, I'd want to carefully preview it - or even copy and save it in my Sandbox to check everything looks OK.

How does that sound? (Don't forget to remove the 'in use' template afterwards) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:55, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Sounds good. I'll look into it tomorrow. How are you up at 2 AM writing all this? It's almost 9 PM from where I am. Interstellarity (talk) 00:56, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@Interstellarity LOL! I'm retired now and can snooze in and get up late in the mornings if I want to! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:55, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Hi Nick, I have successfully merged the sections together. I am trying to sort the pages alphabetically. I tried using LibreOffice Calc, which is a similar program to Excel, and I have no luck sorting the pages alphabetically. I am also trying to put events that happened prior to 1945 in the Late modern section and the events that happened after that time period into the Contemporary section. Although I started working on it, I am hoping that someone can help me with it as well. I don't think anybody at the Teahouse can really help me with that, so I was hoping that someone can point me into the right direction so that I can get some assistance doing this although I am willing to do some work if need be. Regards, Interstellarity (talk) 20:44, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Interstellarity. My apologies for missing your ping. I'd suggest that to get help, you explain what you're trying to do and what help you seek on the List's own talk page at Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5.

Then, rather than repeating everything again, simply post a call to help on the talk pages of both these WikiProjects: WP:WikiProject Vital Articles and WP:WikiProject History. Just link to where the discussion is taking place so that people can go to Wikipedia talk:Vital articles/Level/5 and make suggestions there, with everything happening all in one place, not three. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:59, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Just did. Thank you for your help. Interstellarity (talk) 11:41, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

My Three Sons Episode page

Does anyone know why seasons 10, 11 & 12 cannot be viewed on the List of My Three Sons episodes page. They were there not long ago. The source code for the three seasons are there. They work perfectly when seen with preview. A lot of work went into those seasons and they should be viewable. Thanks for any help. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_My_Three_Sons_episodes# Entercontainment (talk) 14:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Already answered at the help desk. Entercontainment don't post a question on both Teahouse and Help desk as it will lead to a waste of volunteer effort. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:21, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I am so sorry. This is the first time I've done this. Again, I'm so sorry. Entercontainment (talk) 14:34, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

My edit has been removed; how do I find out why?

Hello.

I am a new Wikipedia user, finding my way.

Earlier today I dded this edit to the Wikipedia page of HSBC bank:

Violations record

HSBC's violation record in Violation Tracker UK can be found here.

HSBC's violation record in Violation Tracker USA can be found here.

But when I go to that page I see what I added is no longer there.

Does anybody know why?

What I added was purely factual, so it's not as if I have behave irresponsibly.

Any thoughts please, anybody?

Thanks for any help that might be offered. One of many Concerned Citizens (talk) 13:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

One of many Concerned Citizens Wikipedia is not the place for you to give your views about HSBC or to tell people where to find information about it. Per the article edit history your edit was removed. If you have independent reliable sources that report on documented violations of regulations or the law that have been adjudicated, please offer them on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 13:53, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, One of many. I recommend you also read WP:RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS. ColinFine (talk) 14:01, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Going forward, Wikipedia advises that editors be bold in their edits, but if reverted (what was deleted can be seen at View history), then discuss on the Talk page of the article to see if consensus can be reached. Editor 331dot suggested a path to presenting information with reliable references. David notMD (talk) 15:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Changed a section (References) but article did not reflect same. Why? [Reverted just in case.]

Short form of question:

Why would a published change to a section of an article _not_ show up when subsequently viewing the enclosing article?

2601:1C2:801:4420:38D0:1FAA:645C:CB4C (talk) 19:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC) A Nony Mouse

Question again, very long form:

In re: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TIC_168789840

curprev 18:23, 25 October 2023‎ 2601:1c2:801:4420:38d0:1faa:645c:cb4c talk‎ 13,239 bytes 0‎ Undid revision 1181867911 WHY did said rev have no visible effect? Reverting from abundance of caution. by 2601:1C2:801:4420:38D0:1FAA:645C:CB4C (talk) undo Tag: Undo

curprev 18:19, 25 October 2023‎ 2601:1c2:801:4420:38d0:1faa:645c:cb4c talk‎ 13,239 bytes 0‎ →‎References: Re-order refs to match order of call out in article text (i.e. prev "5" was first, now re-ordered same ref to be "1"). 2601:1C2:801:4420:38D0:1FAA:645C:CB4C (talk) 19:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC) A Nony Mouse undo Tag: Reverted 21 October 2023

I find it confusing when the first citation in an article is to source "5". So I moved the first reference called out in the article to be first in the list in the References section. This was preparation for sorting all of them. My change was to the References section. Previewing the Reference section showed the Reference section appearing exactly as expected/intended, no errors. So I published the change.

I then viewed the main/full/article page. My change was missing. The old/former/previous content of the Reference section was displayed.

Why? What if anything did I do wrong? How to troubleshoot?

Regardless, I immediately reverted/undid the change lest something else that I do not understand cause problems.

[I acknowledge that I am doing something picky. And I am quite aware of how "delicate" such ordering can be when many people are making all manner of changes over time.] 2601:1C2:801:4420:38D0:1FAA:645C:CB4C (talk) 19:02, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Citations in the Infobox (when there is one) come before any citations in the main text of the article, so if as in this case there are 4 (different) citations in the infobox the first (different) one in the text has to be be "^[5]".

The numbering of citations is performed automatically, so that if one is removed or added all the others will be renumbered as necessary without an editor having to do anything. It's best therefore not to fiddle with them for the sake of personal aesthetics. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 19:47, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

This is not a special rule for infoboxes. References are numbered in the order they are used in the code for the page. Infoboxes are usually first in the source code and therefore also first in the produced code. They have a CSS class with float: right which places them to the right with later content allowed to float to their left if there is room. If you make the window very narrow in the desktop version then the infobox is displayed on top with the lead text below it and not to the left or before. The mobile version has special treatment of infoboxes and may display them later than they appear in the code. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:04, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you.

2601:1C2:801:4420:B437:7DE2:F06B:B6D6 (talk) 20:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC) A Nony Mouse

Not autoconfirmed yet???

I should meet the requirements, but for some reason the user group hasn't been granted yet. Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian (talk) 13:10, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Your account is not four days old yet, it will be tomorrow(from my point of view). 331dot (talk) 13:11, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Do you have a particular need to be autoconfirmed? 331dot (talk) 13:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Sort of. I'm in WikiProject Video Games, but a lot of game-related articles are semi-protected, so it minimizes the amount of work I can realistically get done on this particular project. Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian (talk) 13:18, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian TBH: One day is not an unrealistic extra period of time to wait whilst you hone your editing skills. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:08, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Update: Too late! ...Sockpuppet of a user banned from Wikipedia for abusing multiple accounts. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:47, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

انا أريد العمل في المزارع

Mohamd alabou 160.164.181.142 (talk) 21:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Machine translation: I want to work on farms Tollens (talk) 21:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

The article Farm can certainly be edited by IP users, providing content is added in English and cited to WP:Reliable Sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:45, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP editor! You may be interested in WikiProject Agriculture, or some of these articles? Please try to use English when contributing in the future, or provide a machine translation if you are unable to do so – you might alternatively prefer to contribute to the Arabic Wikipedia. Tollens (talk) 21:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Changing wikipedia articles about people after they have died

Hi,

This has boggled my mind quite alot lately, and I couldn't find any answers with search engines so I want to ask here:

When someone with a wikipedia article dies, is there some kind of automatical system to turn sentences written in the present tense into imperfects (like turning "Obama is an american politian" into "Obama was an american politian")? Is it all done manually or is there some other way to fix those things. 91.153.156.177 (talk) 13:28, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't believe there is an automatic way to change tense on articles. I have looked at a couple articles of lesser-known people who died after the article was written where there was a mix of "she is" and "she was" phrases in sentences, and I manually edited the article so everything read "she was." Karenthewriter (talk) 13:56, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for replying! 91.153.156.177 (talk) 14:47, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

This is actually a task requiring a certain amount of nuance, so an automated tool would have to be very sophisticated. Imagine a world record sausage-thrower. He was the first man to throw a sausage more than 500 yards, he is the only man to have thrown a sausage more than 600 yards, he holds the record for the longest throw ever, but was the world champion until he was killed by a rebounding bratwurst. We need a mix of present and past tense depending on the context. Quite often, it's very subtle: Claudius is the Roman emperor best-known for invading Britain. Claudius was a Roman emperor, who is best known... . Claudius was a Roman emperor who invaded Britain. Elemimele (talk) 21:23, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

..." killed by a rebounding bratwurst" Brilliant! Nick Moyes (talk) 21:36, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

On conducting a whimsical websearch, I found to my surprise that Sausage-throwing as a sporting contest actually exists, albeit at low level, in England, Switzerland and Germany. Perhaps an article might be created in anticipation of its eventual acceptance as an Olympic event. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 09:31, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Indeed - there are other weird contests, too. (example). Nick Moyes (talk) 15:29, 24 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I've witnessed that several times in both England and Scotland, and competed at least once. I've yet to encounter Dwile flonking in the flesh, although I've had a book of games that includes it for years. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 22:17, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Comments that have nothing to do with the topic

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confused!

 Courtesy link: Confused! Linked to the wrong article. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 12:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Look at the first sentence. Is this relevant? Why does the mod reverse my editing saying my reason wasnt good enough to remove that? 87.69.169.120 (talk) 11:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

This is a question you might ask (preferably after rewording for clarity) at the article's talk page. 1.33.56.248 (talk) 12:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Actually, the IP address was right to remove that. That edit clearly does not belong there and is a harassment edit against the President of the United States. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 12:28, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

incidentally, that was the wrong link

this is the right one

good job removing the vandalism :D cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 12:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Lemonaka is not a mod (or admin), just an editor patrolling for vandalism who didn't quite look closely enough at what they were reverting. I've re-added the disambig which got lost in the shuffle. IP editor, leaving more descriptive edit summaries can help prevent such reverts, but it's probably going to happen sooner or later. Discussing things with the reverting editor on their talk page usually clears up the situation. 57.140.16.31 (talk) 13:08, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Midori No Sora and @57.140.16.31, hello, welcome to the teahouse! I'm not regularly checking wiki issues today, and sorry a lot for lagging. This is totally my problem for nasty reverting without checking closely. The next time you may directly revert my edits with proper edit summary, and (or) leave a comment on my talk page and may get a quicker response.
Again, I do admit that I was a little bit puzzled yesterday, leaving messes for others to clean up. As for mod, no, I'm not a sysop, at least on this project. These are sysops, or modder whatever you called.
I'm just a common editor on this project. And even worse, I admit that I edited like a bot sometime, I've read that reply, nothing uncivil. I may get false positive and then reverted something helpful. If I did that, please help to give me feedback or ask me to stop directly.
In order to minimize future false positive, I will increase the ORES threshold for patrolling. Best wishes. -Lemonaka‎ 16:04, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, appreciate that :) 87.69.169.120 (talk) 17:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Lemonaka, in the context of Wikipedia, "sysop" is an established synonym for "administrator". But if it suggests that administrators operate the system (however defined), it's misleading and unfortunate. Administrators can, where appropriate, "delete" articles and other pages, and reverse such "deletions"; they can also change protection levels and block other users and reverse such blocks. And that's about it. Although they should avoid unnecessarily raising other users' tempers, they don't "moderate", and Wikipedia lacks moderators. -- Hoary (talk) 00:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Biographical article

I've been working on a biographical article but having trouble getting accurate, good references. One editor suggested the sandbox. Can I copy and paste the entire article to my sandbox and can others still offer advice and editing there. Otherwise, what is the point?

What the heck is this? I just asked my question above here... Nricketts (talk) 20:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Nricketts, welcome to the Teahouse. It seems you typed your question into the subject field, which means it turned into the title of a post rather than an actual post. I've tweaked it a bit for you. 57.140.16.31 (talk) 20:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Arnold Hendrick - 57.140.16.31 (talk) 20:35, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Nricketts. I don't understand what you're saying about the sandbox: it seems irrelevant to me, as you have a draft in Draft:Arnold Hendrick, and you can continue working on that draft.

If you are having difficulty finding good references, it may be that Hnedrick does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability - unfortunately people in some creative areas simply don't get written about much. ColinFine (talk) 20:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I just added another reference. I know there are more I just don't have the time it takes to mess with this. Nricketts (talk) 21:01, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Nricketts: When you say that you "don't have the time", do you mean to track down the references, or to format them for Wikipedia? If it's the formatting, let us know, because this can be mostly automated from a URL/ISBN/ETC. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 05:22, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Problem uploading the translation

Good day,

I translated my webside from Czech to English and run into a problem uploading the translation. Wikipedia tells me I need confirmation from an Experience Editor. How should I proceed please? I am a new member.

Thank you very much in advance.

Best regards

Mária Lobotková Mária Lobotková (talk) 08:22, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. You need to submit your draft for a review using the Article Wizard. Accounts new to the English Wikipedia cannot directly create articles. Please understand that the English Wikipedia likely has different rules than the Czech Wikipedia, you will need to make sure that your topic meets our definition of notability and sourcing requirements. 331dot (talk) 08:52, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

What staff tools have age limits?

Okay, I'm 12, but I've been starting to correct vandalism, and am thinking about submitting a request for Rollback rights on the wiki in a few months. Are there any age requirements for user groups, and which ones would I even be able to obtain at my age? Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian (talk) 16:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Puzzle Piece the Wikipedian Hello, welcome to the teahouse. Usually rollback does not have any age requirements, the only hard requirements for something is related to privacy, for example, checkuser, VRT and Oversighter. However, usually sysops are preferred to be adults. -Lemonaka‎ 17:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

For children, especially younger children on this project, I strongly recommend you to read Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors -Lemonaka‎ 17:06, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

OP blocked as sockpuppet, my blindness. -Lemonaka‎ 10:23, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

How can I export the reference list of a Wikipedia page to import into EndNote or Zotero?

I have a large page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_Smooth_Island_(Tasmania) which I want to rewrite via Microsoft Word. I'll need to use a reference manager like EndNote or Zotero. How can I export the page, and it's reference list, to ensure the numbered inline citations don't become a complete mess once I start moving sections around in Microsoft Word?

Thanks Vitreology (talk) 01:07, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vitreology: The reference list is built from the references inside the article's wikitext. Its not something you can export or import separately. I'm not sure how well importing the article to Word, editing, and then trying to export to wiki text will work. You may want to start with a small changes instead of a large rewrite to see how it goes before you spend a lot of time on this. RudolfRed (talk) 01:32, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vitreology: I will second what RudolfRed recommended above about "major rewrites". Generally, it's better to be WP:CAUTIOUS is such situations and work on improving an article gradually then to try and do so in one fell swoop. Wikipedia is a collaborative editing project in which users try to improve and build upon the edits made by others. Unless an article is in absolutely horrible shape or is nothing more that a few sentences, completely disregarding the work of others who might have previously edited an article (without a really good policy based reason for doing so) is often viewed unfavorably and can lead to a quick revert per WP:BRD. By at least explaining what you'd like to do on the article's talk page, you're giving others a chance to offer feedback and perhaps point out policy or guideline issues that you might not be aware of. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:58, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Honestly, if you have a look at it, I've written 99.9999% of the content of that page. There is not anyone else to consider at this stage. Vitreology (talk) 02:26, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

​ If that's the case, then go ahead and knock yourself out. Making changes in bits and pieces can, however, still be beneficial to others since it makes it easier to follow what you're doing instead of trying to decipher one massive rewrite. Here are some suggestions on your rewrite. You should set thumbnail images to a fixed pixed width because it forces everyone to see the image at the same size regardless of the device they're using. This could create MOS:ACCESS issues for user who are reading the article, but who aren't using the same device that you're using. It's better to scale images instead as explained in MOS:UPRIGHT. You should try and refraing from using MOS:ALLCAPS whenever possible, even in citations. You should pick one of the acceptable WP:CITESTYLE and apply it consistently throughout the article. You should also avoid WP:BAREURLs whenever possible. You should also make sure the date format is consistent (including in citations) throughout the article per MOS:DATEUNIFY. Finally, you might want to consider other ways to display the images being used in the article since MOS:SANDWICHing too many images into an article can make it difficult to read, particularly for those using smartphones or other portable devices. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:49, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Much appreciated, thank you.

I really would love to know how to cleanly extract the references from the article. I've tried many approaches and so far nothing has worked.

I'd really like to be able to export the article's reflist into either a RIS or BibTeX format. Vitreology (talk) 02:53, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Vitreology. Since the reflist does not exist until the Mediawiki software displays the page, it is unlikely there will be a solution unless somebody has specifically progammed it. A quick search does not offer anything. Sorry. ColinFine (talk) 13:50, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Vitreology, if you have the Zotero browser extension it should be possible to extract the machine-readable metadata exposed by the standard citation templates as per Wikipedia:COinS. Specifically, it looks like it will give you a list of the refs on the page when you go through the right click context menu, with the options Zotero Connector > Save to Zotero > Save to Zotero (COinS), and you can then click select all in the window that pops up. I've taken a quick look at the page in question and it seems to work there. Alpha3031 (t • c) 11:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vitreology: Go to the article, click "Edit source", select all the wikicode, copy it, and paste it into Word. When you move sections around in Word, be sure to move the associated references with them. When you copy from Word and paste back into the Wikipedia source editor, the Mediawiki software will take care of all the reference numbering and formatting for you. GoingBatty (talk) 14:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vitreology I wouldn't recommend using Word for this sort of editing offline. Much better to use text editors like WordPad, which won't mess around with the wikicode. Word will likely convert two consecutive ' characters into a single quote character ", or worse a smartquote character, which will ruin the code, because double ' characters are used to indicate italics. I edit offline all the time, just copy/pasting the new code into my sandbox to Preview the resulting text. There is no need to save/publish the sandbox as you proceed, since you will be saving the offline version. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:39, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

How to make sandbox ready for AFC?

Every time i click on the link to my sandbox, it redirects to Honeycomb moray (disambiguation), is there a way to get it to not be a redirect (and make it possible for an AFC submission) Abdullah raji (talk) 12:35, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Abdullah raji you submitted it for review successfully. It was moved to Draft:Honeycomb moray (disambiguation) as the draft prefix is preferred for drafts. Someone accepted the draft, and it was finally moved to Honeycomb moray (disambiguation).

If you want to remove a redirect, you can click on the little pop up at the top of the page that says "(Redirected from XY)", then you can edit the page as normally. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 12:53, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Where can I find toppage to message

I need to measage a person from toppage where do i find it Spideog&123 (talk) 14:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Spideog&123 I think you mean the Talk Page of another editor that you wish to use to leave them a message. The link to these pages is in their signature, although yours is currently a redlink because it doesn't currently have any content. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:55, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Mike. Spideog&123 (talk) 15:49, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

History of Yampil, Vinnytsia Oblast

Hello, help me with templates. Need their fix. СтасС (talk) 15:37, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@СтасС: The template {{EIy}} does not exist. What are you trying to do with it? Perhaps an alternative can be found. RudolfRed (talk) 15:45, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you.--СтасС (talk) 15:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

It's a template in uk-wiki, uk:Шаблон:ЕІУ, which formats references to the Encyclopaedia of Ukrainian History.

The article reads like machine translation, so I thought it was an unacknowledged translation from Історія Ямполя, but in fact that was only created today (and is likely an unattributed translation from the English article). ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much.--СтасС (talk) 17:48, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

"Template:Improve categories" resolutions?

Hi friends, I’ve been coming across a few instances where there is a “Template:Improve categories” in an article, followed by several edits adding appropriate categories, but I haven't seen any guidance/consensus on what constitutes *enough* categories or time passed for when such a template can and should be removed, and haven't yet come across anything on talk pages reflecting on this. I'm curious, when is it the right time to remove such a Template? Would love any ideas or wisdom you might have <3 TL;DR -- when is it safe to remove a "Template:Improve categories"? Waterfelt (talk) 13:20, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Waterfelt, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure I've seen any specific guidance on this either. Maybe there is some I've overlooked, but I'd suggest this is more of a subjective matter. You didn't list any examples, so it's hard to comment. Obviously, the basic ones do need to be included so that any topic can be grouped with similar articles to aid its discovery. You could look at very similar articles and see what categories they have been placed in. Reading the article right the way through to ensure all the main potential categorisation possibilities have been addressed. If you're confident they have been reasonably addressed, then by all means remove the template. If not, leave it there for another editor to stress over! Further information at WP:Categorization and WP:Categorization dos and don'ts. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:13, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much Nick Moyes. This is super helpful. I had an inkling this sort of subjective judgement was the case, but didn't want to just assume as a newcomer. Cheers! Waterfelt (talk) 18:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Make Way for Noddy Cast

Hi all,

I have only just recently opened an account with Wikipedia (although I have edited before as an unregistered user). I'm a children's television historian.

I'm having some problems regarding sourcing for the Make Way for Noddy cast. In the UK, the cast never receive any credit on screen, so I've been trying to track them down for a long time now. I've finally managed to get ahold of the full cast list directly from the UK's voice director, but this it seems is not sufficient (even paired with the only instance I can find of the cast being credited onscreen in the UK, as if they're going to completely recast for a special episode or something). I find the the fact that this is not sufficient extremely disheartening, like all my efforts have been in vain.

My argument is - how do you verify any uncredited cast or crew? It's not uncommon for them to not receive on-screen credit, take old cartoons for example. All that information is obtained by people, like me, who go directly to the people who worked on it and get the information directly from the horse's mouth. It's not documented anywhere; it just comes from the source. And it's even less uncommon for voice actors to be listed without specifying who they actually voices which also would be a problem going by these guidelines. If we all stuck to these guidelines, we'd never truly know anything unless it's credited onscreen - imagine how short Daws Butler or June Foray's filmographies would be!

I think this site would be better operated in matters like these by going by a quantum of proof - ie. there's more proof than not. I mean, it's not as if I'm editing the results of a World Cup, we're talking about a children's TV show from the early 2000's - what possible motive would I have for fabricating that (unless I was adding myself to the cast or something!).

It's like if I went on Amazon and made a Kindle ebook titled "Make Way for Noddy Cast" and put my email from the voice director in quotes inside, you'd probably except it (based on what I've seen on other pages). How is this any different? Simple answer: it's not.

For full information, including links to screenshots, see my original thread with user Waxworker: User talk:Waxworker#Make Way for Noddy

Thank you,

Ed. EdwardBohan89 (talk) 15:58, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@EdwardBohan89 As you probably know, IMDb contains that sort of information (see this link) and although Wikipedia does not consider that a reliablle source, because it is user-generated, we do allow external links to these entries as part of our articles. Your only alternative is to publish your research in another outlet considered as reliable and then quote that publication here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, EdwardBohan89, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that the answer is that you cannot add unpublished information to a Wikipedia article. Verifiability is a core principle: we want a reader in Birmingham next week or Buffalo next month or Bangaluru next year, to be able to verify the information in an article (it doesn't have to be easy: needing to order a copy from a major library, for example, is acceptable).

The problem is not that anybody doubts your veracity: it's that Wikipedia is the encyclopaedia that anybody can edit. Suppose you insert unsourced information, and next year somebody changes that - out of a sincere belief that it was wrong, or by mistake, or out of malice to somebody, or out of vandalism. That change may or may not be noticed, and an editor look to correct it. But if there is no published source, that editor has no way of knowing which is the correct information, and nor has any future reader.

If you can get your research published by a reliable source, then it can be referenced in a Wikipedia article - though you should not add it yourself, because that would be regarded as a conflict of interest ColinFine (talk) 16:23, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine & @Michael D. Turnbull,

Thank you both for taking the time to explain and in a more respectful manner than the last guy I might add!

My main gripe with it all is that anyone can be an expert in any field, just because someone is published, doesn't necessarily mean they're any more right from some unknown guy like me. I see it all over Wikipedia. Especially on pages for old cartoons from Warner Bros, Fleischer Studios etc. Who really knows who provided, say for example, the voice of the baby Swee'Pea in the old Popeye cartoons. Answer is: we don't know for certain - one book written by an expert says one thing, another says another, the company has long since been closed/merged and everyone who worked on it are dead. How come that's allowed to go unchallenged? And as I pointed out on the Make Way for Noddy page, how did it come to pass that Ben Small was attached to so many characters in the first place? We knew he worked on the show, but why was it never challenged before as to who he voiced? I see no source for that (and as it turns out this information IS wrong going by the voice director for the show).

I know that has to be some form of proof - but I genuinely thought I had provided enough. But hey-ho, it is what it is I guess.

I've had my findings in this matter put out on several IMDB episodes for Make Way for Noddy (I'll do the rest in due course).

Sorry for the rant, but it's just very frustrating. I'm sure you understand. As I said before, it's like having all your hard work slung back in your face, but I shouldn't keep going on at people who are just doing what Wikipedia says is "the right way of doing things", please forgive me.

Thanks again for your response. It is much appreciated.

Ed EdwardBohan89 (talk) 16:48, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

@EdwardBohan89: There are times when reliable published sources disagree, and we can indicate that in an article by stating that source 1 states X and source 2 states Y. GoingBatty (talk) 18:59, 25 October 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Wikipedia:No original research, those should help explain things. Happy editing! Industrial Insect (talk) 18:44, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

how do I make a article

i don't know how 207.192.241.227 (talk) 18:19, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, as an IP, you are limited in what you can do. I would recommend creating an account and then following the advice at this page. Sincerely, Novo Tape (She/Her)^{My Talk Page} 18:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Please note that nearly everybody who tries to create a new article as the first thing they do has a frustrating and miserable time, because it takes some time to understand the rather singular requirements of Wikipedia. For this reason I always advise new editors to spend a few weeks or months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles - especially adding references where they are lacking (this is the most time consuming and sometimes difficult part of editing, but it is an absolute non-negotiable requirement for creating a new article. If you try to create a new article without understanding sources, you will fail).

I remember when I started editing, eighteen years ago, I so much wanted to "make my mark" by creating a new article. Now I know that there are far far far more valuable ways to improve Wikipedia than creating new articles - I've only ever created a dozen or so. ColinFine (talk) 19:21, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Unsalting

Hi, I was going to accept Draft:Elvish Yadav but the title has been salted. Can you please tell me the process for unsalting, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:18, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Atlantic306. WP:Protection_policy#create says . Editors wishing to re-create a salted title with appropriate content should either contact an administrator (preferably the protecting administrator), file a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection § Current requests for reduction in protection level, or use the deletion review process. ColinFine (talk) 19:25, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

thanks, i'll make a request, regards Atlantic306 (talk) 19:40, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

My article was deleted without any notice. Is it common on Wkikipedia?

Hello Wikipedia guys. Thanks for watching my question. I'm a new member to Wikipedia and I posted the 3rd article few days ago. But it was deleted suddenly without any notice. Is it common on Wikipedia? I think it is undemocratic and unfair. I thought if my article was not good for Wikipedia it should be noticed and discussed. But there was not any notice and deleted suddenly. I think my article handles very common matter about " How to enjoy old lens", and neutral and verifiable. The guy deleted my article said "Wikipedia cannot handle New matters". Is it right? If it is common in Wikipedia, I cannot handle "Recent(new) topics" on Wikipedia. I think it will degrade the presence of Wikipedia.

How do you think about it?

The deleted article is on my Sandbox. https://ja.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%88%A9%E7%94%A8%E8%80%85:TomoakiKasuga/sandbox

The guy deleted my article is --柏尾菓子 The talk with him is below and I think it is meaningless to talk with him.

---

”オールドレンズ 楽しみ方 評価手法 井の頭レンズ研究所”　を削除されたようですが、不当であると考えます。オールドレンズの楽しみ方を書いており、新しいレンズ評価手法を考えており、従来の手法とは違う方法ですから、参考データとしてサイトを参照するのは当然と考えます。これがだめなら新しい方法はWikiには載せられないという事になりませんか？

---

「新しい方法」をWikipediaに載せることはいけません。独自研究です。そういう方法があるという、信頼できる情報源による出典による、専門家などが分析した資料を用いて記事を作成してください。Wikipedia:ウィキペディアは何ではないか、Wikipedia:中立的な観点などもご参考ください。--柏尾菓子（会話） 2023年10月24日 (火) 02:51 (UTC) TomoakiKasuga (talk) 00:51, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TomoakiKasuga, and welcome to the Teahouse! It looks like this is about the Japanese Wikipedia, a completely different website than the English Wikipedia – we cannot help you very well with issues there. However, as I assume their rules about original research are similar to ours, I will say that he is correct that the article does appear to consist largely if not entirely of original research, which is (at least here on the English Wikipedia) unfortunately not allowed. I cannot comment on the speed of the deletion as I am entirely unfamiliar with the deletion process at the Japanese Wikipedia. Tollens (talk) 01:00, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

No response from Japanese Wikipedia mailing list... TomoakiKasuga (talk) 07:52, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi TomoakiKasuga. Each of the local Wikipedias is a separate project with its own policies and guidelines, and its own community applying and enforcing those policies and guidelines. The Teahouse is really intended for questions about English Wikipedia and it's better to ask questions about Japanese Wikipedia over on Japanese Wikipedia. You can try the Japanese Wikipedia Help Desk at ja:Wikipedia:利用案内 and see if someone there is able to answer your question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:02, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

No response from Japanese Wikipedia mailing list. It seems as Japanese Wikipedia is dead. At least it is not friendly to new comer. I won't use it more. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 07:50, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

No, TomoakiKasuga, Japanese Wikipedia is not dead. It is alive and vibrant. Editors there need to follow their policies and guidelines, just as editors on the English Wikipedia need to follow our policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I think Wikipedia needs to be friendly to members. Without it it is same as dead. No need. English Wikipedia is alive. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 00:46, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@TomoakiKasuga: You have received a response from the Japanese Wikipedia mailing list - see ja:利用者‐会話:TomoakiKasuga. GoingBatty (talk) 14:15, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

It is not the mailing-list. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 00:42, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi GoingBatty, It's OK to delete with this process. But there was no process like this this time. So I was very surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_index/Speedy_deletion TomoakiKasuga (talk) 01:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

How to deal with following?

So an user has been following me. We got into an argument on one page which dragged on and now he has arrived on another page where I later went. What do I do if this continues? It is preventing me from editing freely. MrMkG (talk) 07:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

In the first instance I would recommend you to try to ignore it, refrain from editing that article or responding to their comments if you can and continue your editing elsewhere. Perhaps come back to that article at a later time when they've moved on to something else. If they continue to follow you across multiple articles then I would recommend reporting at WP:ANI. Polyamorph (talk) 08:30, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Situation - the dispute exists at length on the Talk page of MrMkG. Issue is editing disputes at what Wikipedia designates as contentious topics. David notMD (talk) 10:31, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you User:Polyamorph and User:David notMD. The problem is solved. He went away on his own saying he doesn't want to discuss with me anymore. I hope he will not follow me anymore.

It is true the topic is sensitive and I am not sure how to act right now. But I am seeing a much bigger problem on that page. The very charecter of the topic has been morphed into something else. Into a view that is not even put under any consideration in the academic world. Sources given as citations are not being followed and weird claims made nilly willy. Can you people come and see? I think it needs people to edit it who can look at the topic from a distance. MrMkG (talk) 10:16, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@MrMkG What article is the problem? Are you talking about Bangladesh genocide? -- asilvering (talk) 01:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Sources

I'm trying to find information about a small company, but I just can't find any good sources. Do you all have any recommended websites to get good sources for beginners? Flobeigor (talk) 08:43, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@Flobeigor We require references from significant coverage about the topic of the article, and independent of it, in multiple secondary sources which are WP:RS please. See WP:42. Please also see WP:PRIMARY which details the limited permitted usage of primary sources and WP:SELFPUB which has clear limitations on self published sources. Providing sufficient references, ideally one per fact referred to, that meet these tough criteria is likely to allow this planned article to remain. Lack of them or an inability to find them is likely to mean that the topic is not suitable for inclusion, certainly today.

The issue is that the company is unlikely to be notable if you can find no useful references with ease. Look for news media, but beware PR material and press releases, both of which are inappropriate.Read HELP:YFA, and do not start to draft before you have references.

Are you connected with this company in any manner? 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 09:12, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

It's my grandfather's one. I wanted to add it to the wikipedia But I know I can't just use ''my grandpa is the owner, so you should absolutely trust me'' Thanks, though. Flobeigor (talk) 06:06, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Flobeigor, you'll want to follow the instructions at WP:COI. I warn you also that it's pretty tough to write articles on companies, especially small ones, because the bar for notability is set very high. -- asilvering (talk) 01:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Guidance on an article for deletion

I was asked to review 1986 Lewisham London Borough Council election.

The 'This article has multiple issues.' dates back to July 2019 and June 2021. I agreed with those comments and proposed that the article should be deleted.

The editor who removed that proposal seems to be the author of the incomplete information from May 2010.

I do not understand the reason given for keeping the article: "not prodable".

As the editor responded promptly, I consider that they would have been aware of the 'multiple issues' concerns. Does the other editor have a COI by being the author?

Please can someone else consider this matter. I only came to this article because it was one that needed consideration. BlueWren0123 (talk) 02:54, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@bluewren0123: you have already asked this question here. please do not ask questions in more than one place. ltbdl (talk) 02:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Test result

As I'm new to Wikipedia, I have wrote 3 levels of articles in order to know how Wikipedia works. The first one is with very precise information: https://w.wiki/7sDF The second one is with so so good information: https://w.wiki/7sDC The 3rd one is with rough information: https://w.wiki/7uTC After uploading, the first one is OK with no comments. And the second one is OK with some comments. And the third one was deleted without any notice, and I asked why deleted to Japanese Wikipedia mailing-list. But there was no response from them. I have asked same thing here and got some responses. The problem is the 3rd article was deleted without any notice and no responses from Japanese Wikipedia mailing-list. I was very surprised by such unpleasant responses. I cannot trust such undemocratic interface for Wikipedia. So I decided not to use Wikipedia more. I think it is better to change Japanese Wikipedia managers. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 11:25, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

I am preparing a detailed response to this query. Please wait. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:34, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, TomoakiKasuga. Each language wiki operates under its own policies and guidelines, so we normally avoid commenting on issues beyond English Wikipedia. However, if I pretend for a moment that you had created those pages here on English Wikipedia, I would have had only minor concerns about the first two you linked to - namely that I would want to see more inline citations after each statement of fact, rather than just a list of hard-to access reference list just at the bottom. I would however have said "well done" on creating those two new articles - it's not an easy thing to do. I would hope you would have been encouraged by this.

Now, your third article would not fit within our ideas of an encyclopaedia article. It is more of a '"How to do it" article, and would hit our WP:NOTMANUAL policy. It was more of a chatty help page, better fitting a personal blog or magazine, not an encyclopaedia. It would not have survived long here, either, though I would have hoped someone would have had the courtesy to explain to you why this happened. I'm not aware of any mailing lists, but here we would expect an editor who has had article deleted to be able to approach the deleting administrator and politely seek an explanation.

I genuinely hope you are not put off by this experience and that you continue contributing to Japanese Wikipedia. I also had one of my first articles put up for deletion when I first started here - it is common that people do not always appreciate all the criteria under which Wikipedia works. In essence, it's an encyclopaedia of notable things, not an instructional aid, nor a site to promote a business, or favourite musician or pop personality. Don't let one hiccup put you off! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:43, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Nick. Thanks for kind response. If there is a message like this in Japanese Wikipedia, it's nice. But I felt there is a very bad feelings in Japanese Wikipedia, so it's very hard to contribute to it. Anyway thanks for kind response. TomoakiKasuga (talk) 12:20, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

@TomoakiKasuga: You are most welcome. But I did notice that you actually received a reply on your talk page on Japanese Wikipedia to your email which did explain the circumstances. It was written by User:柏尾菓子, and you could always have responded to them on your talk page and asked questions. However, I think the message they left for you was very similar to the explanation I have outlined above, namely that your article was original research, or essay-like, so not acceptable for Japanese Wikipedia.

To be fair, many of us experienced editors are often accused of being rude or blunt here, too. We can come across as intolerant of simple errors made by new editors such as yourself. (That's why this 'Teahouse' forum was established, so as to be an extra-friendly place to seek advice).

But the reality is that on English Wikipedia we have 6.7 milllion existing articles and about 500 new ones created every single day, and hundreds more that fail to make it. On Japanese Wikipedia, you have 1.39 million articles. With so few volunteer editors on each project, we simply do not have the time to leave lengthy explanations. Instead, we rely on 'templated' messages which contain links to key policies. We sort of 'expect' new editors like yourself to take the time to read them, simply because we don't have that time ourselves to deal personally with the authors of every draft article that fails our 'notability' criteria. Inevitably those actions, be they rejection or immediate deletion of an inappropriate page, can leave people feeling mistreated.

The time we spend helping editors in the way you and I have interacted here is actually quite a rare thing - and that's what's makes the Teahouse a special place for new editors on English Wikipedia. I'm afraid I can't see an equivalent place specifically for new editors on Japanese Wikipedia (there's a language list at the top right of this page showing 31 different languages that do have one.) But this link should take you to the Japanese equivalent of our own Help Desk if you ever need help and guidance there. Happy editing and 幸運を! Nick Moyes (talk) 13:29, 26 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Nick, It's OK to delete with this process. But there was no process like this this time. So I was very surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_index/Speedy_deletion TomoakiKasuga (talk) 01:05, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@TomoakiKasuga, お疲れ様でした, thank you for your work on Wikipedia. I'm sorry you've had this negative experience on ja-wiki. Unfortunately (or fortunately?) the only way ja-wiki will become friendlier is if more friendly people join it (and that means you!). So, please keep at it. It looks like your first article is notable, so it shouldn't be deleted. That's really good! Most people don't write an article that meets wikipedia's guidelines on the first try. -- asilvering (talk) 01:37, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi asilvering Thanks for reply. It's good to hear my first article is good enough. It helps me to stay at Wikipedia. Thank you! :-) TomoakiKasuga (talk) 05:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Nick, It's OK to delete with this process. But there was no process like this this time. So I was very surprised. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Template_index/Speedy_deletion TomoakiKasuga (talk) 01:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Regarding indexing of my article

Recently I have created an article Premanand Ji Maharaj, but still this article is not indexed on Google search ?? What thing is preventing this article from indexing? WikiAnchor10 (talk) 17:32, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, WikiAnchor10. In most cases, a new article is not indexed for search engines until either it has been reviewed by a New Pages Patroller, or 90 days has passed. Read Wikipedia:Controlling search engine indexing for detailed information. Cullen328 (talk) 17:39, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Premanand Ji Maharaj says that its subject is a sanyasi and a spiritual teacher, but doesn't explain what he's notable for. I assume that if I could read Hindi I could find out from the sources; but it would be good to see more explanation in the article. Maproom (talk) 08:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Can you submit someone else's article draft?

I'd like to know if that is allowed, because I just stumbled upon a draft that looked very good and worth for submitting even though it was never edited by me. EditorEpic (talk) 10:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @EditorEpic: you can, at least technically speaking, in the sense that nobody 'owns' any draft or article. Whether you should is a different matter: there may be a reason why the author hasn't submitted it yet, and they might be upset if you do so prematurely (in their opinion). As a courtesy, you should probably at least ask them first if it's okay to do so. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:36, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@EditorEpic: If you're referring to Draft:Quackity, I would advise against submitting it right now – it currently does not have the sources that would be required to demonstrate the subject's notability, and so would be almost certainly declined. Before any draft is submitted, it should have at least three references to reliable sources that are independent of the subject which discuss the subject of the draft. Draft:Quackity currently only has references to YouTube videos (which are unreliable because anyone can make them), news sources which are either considered unreliable (see WP:RSP#Sportskeeda and WP:RSP#Distractify) or not sufficient to establish notability (see WP:RSP#Dexerto), and sources which are automatically generated and therefore considered routine. If you're able to find additional sources that would demonstrate that the draft meets the notability guidelines, feel free to add them in and submit the draft, but it doesn't appear likely to be accepted in its current state. Tollens (talk) 10:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Unexplained removals

There have been unexplained removal of sentences from some Islam related articles like Rape in Pakistan, Kafir etc. especially after the 2023 Israel-Hamas conflict started. I request editors to restore sourced text wherever they are being removed.-112.133.244.13 (talk) 03:15, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I looked in the history of Rape in Pakistan. It took only a few seconds for me to understand that the removal is explained as the work of sockpuppets. If I misunderstand, feel free to bring up the matter in Talk:Rape in Pakistan. -- Hoary (talk) 04:28, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Hoary! Though not involved, I found your statement above ambiguous. Do you mean the removals were performed by sockpuppets (as your text literally means) or that it was the work of sockpuppets that was being removed?

Barbardo, as an involved editor who has been very active in this and other related articles, do you want to enlarge on what's being going on? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 19:14, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that was poorly written. Better: "the removals were described as deletion of additions by sockpuppets", or similar. Specifically:

• Kiu99 removed material, commenting "Rv commentary spam by likely sock of User:Lau Cheng"
• Barbardo removed material, commenting "sockpuppet removal edits"

However, the teahouse isn't the best place to discuss this. -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary The above IP is a sockpuppet of 1Firang. I reverted their (now blocked) IP and 2 other accounts who I believe are sockpuppets of a proxy abusing socks of @Lau Cheng based on the editing pattern (which I had done on multiple other articles weeks ago). Though I didn't explain why I reverted the IP. I believe Barbardo was doing the same. Kiu99 (talk) 00:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

[1][2] Okay this is definitely the sockpuppet of 1Firang. The sneaky canvassing attempts they are making here is a thing have done before to win edit wars. Kiu99 (talk) 00:28, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

The IP who posted this turned out to be the same sockpuppet as before. Barbardo (talk) 11:00, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/112.133.244.13

Just adding the IP it was a block evasion attempt Barbardo (talk) 11:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Translating non-English text to use in English Wikipedia articles,

Can anybody point me to any protocols on translating text from other languages for inclusion in articles, please?

When the article is of little importance, an effort by contributors themselves, or even by online translation, may be sufficient. But when we get to subjects of any significance, it is easy to see that through ignorance, bias or incompetence contributors could be corrupting the original material, with consequences ranging from just embarrassing to dangerous.

Should the source of all translations be logged, so that we can judge their reliability? Belle Fast (talk) 11:49, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

See WP:TRANSLATION for guidance. Since you are extended-confirmed, you can use WP:CXT, which... has benefits and has problems. Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:20, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

If you use CXT, @Belle Fast, my advice is to have the draft publish to your userspace, not to mainspace (you can change this in the settings, but you have to do it for each individual article you translate - annoying). Then you can fix up the problems that CXT creates. Otherwise, you will probably get hounded by over-eager new page patrollers before you get a chance to make any fixes. -- asilvering (talk) 01:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

The main problem with CXT, I've found, is the lack of a source mode editor, which makes it very difficult to fiddle with references, templates, or formatting. Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Belle Fast Note that many newcomers to translation don't realise that each Wikipedia language version has its own rules about notability and the ones here for the English Wikipedia are quite stringent. Make sure that the foreign-language article has adequate sourcing so you can establish that notability, either from the existing sources or by adding extra ones you have found independently, or your work may be wasted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:11, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

New page

Hi there, I just made and sent my first page for review. Please could somebody check it for me Journalist0071 (talk) 21:36, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello Journalist0071 and welcome to the Teahouse.

You are asking about Draft:Navina Evans, right?

You need a source for the Awards section. Your section titles need to be fixed (the edit button is not a part of the section header). We have a policy document called MOS:LASTNAME which you have not consistently followed. There are other parts of that document that apply to where the title Dr. or post-nomial CBE should be given.

I question whether the photo you took is your "own work", given that the same photo appears at the top of a letter published by Evans on the NHS website.

Look again at each of your sources to determine if they represent secondary, independent reporting about Evans. Too much dependence on "official" sources is a problem because they cannot be used to establish notability. — jmcgnh^{(talk) (contribs)} 22:12, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Despite what jmcgnh says, it looks like a reasonable job for a first attempt, but I haven't looked closely. I am not a reviewer, and your draft will sit in the heap until a reviewer chooses to pick it up. That might be tomorrow, or it might be months away. ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

Journalist0071, GoingBatty perhaps suggests that provision of a reference for the "Awards" section is all that this draft needs before resubmission. If this is indeed what's meant, then I warmly disagree. The draft isn't all bad, but it's written in PR-speak. Please see Draft talk:Navina Evans#Prose. -- Hoary (talk) 00:39, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both. it's my first draft (ever), will work on the changes Journalist0071 (talk) 13:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Fiction Category Question

There's Books set in ??? categories.

There's TV shows set in ??? categories.

There's Films set in ??? categories.

But are there any categories for places which are the main topic, but aren't actually set there?

For example Spine Chillers' Bradford in my Dreams where the main topic is the City of Bradford. Danstarr69 (talk) 05:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

There's Category:Books about cities; this does already include for example Category:Books about London, but it doesn't seem to have yet been much exploited. Rightly or wrongly, it's a subcategory of Category:Non-fiction books by topic; this may inhibit its use for fiction. -- Hoary (talk) 06:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with Bradford in my Dreams. Are you saying it is set somewhere other than Bradford? I'm struggling to understand how a film could not be set in a place if that place is its main topic. In any case I suspect there are too few examples to warrant a separate category. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:58, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Shantavira the title is basically the plot (well that's what it seems like anyway after skipping through it multiple times over the last year, to see whether it was filmed in Bradford).

It's basically a film about a man from London (I think), who keeps having a dream about driving to Bradford, which he talks about with some psychiatrists, which is based on Lawrence Block's book Cleveland in my Dreams.

In the future I will most likely create some books/films/TV shows about Bradford categories like the London one, when I can think of at least 5 examples, and they will most likely be films or TV shows, as that's what I focus on Danstarr69 (talk) 13:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Translation of a Swedish article

Hey "all you who know how this amazing thing works",

I want to publish a translation of a Swedish article: https://sv.wikipedia.org/wiki/F%C3%B6retagening

I have the translation ready. Where should I start?

Kind regards / Hans David.Hassle (talk) 15:49, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, David, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please see Translation, and take special note of the requirements for attributing when copying or altering material, and of the fact that the policies (specifically on notability and sourcing) for different Wikipedias may be different. ColinFine (talk) 16:08, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I think Colin meant to point you to Wikipedia:Translation - Arjayay (talk) 16:11, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Creating and link and or adding a photo

In my fathers page..........there is a link to general Congressional Gold Medal............I would like to like it to the page that references his actual medal. The Congressional Gold Medal for American Fighter Aces and I would like to insert a photo of the medal itself since that is his highest award. looking for help please. "jhokeefe" (talk) 16:17, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi there, "jhokeefe", and welcome to the Teahouse. Whilst I can see there is an article entitled Congressional Gold Medal, I cannot find one specifically for 'Congressional Gold Medal for American Fighter Aces'. If you are suggesting that we do have one, please drop a hyperlink to it in with your reply.

What you can do is link to the same article, but have different text appear on the page. E.g.: Congressional Gold Medal for American Fighter Aces. If you click 'edit source' on my reply, you will see the source code I used. You could simply copy and paste everyting including the double square brackets into the article.

If you have access to your father's medal and want to take and upload a photo of it, you can do so. In the main menu on the left side of every page you'll find a link to 'upload photo'. It's a two step process. First you upload the image to Wikimedia Commons (not to Wikipedia directly) - this includes a release allowing it to be reused by others. Then you'd insert that image from Commons into the Wikipedia article page. We can talk you through that process if that's what you want to do.

I would observe that he does not appear to be listed at List of Congressional Gold Medal recipients, so this is something else that could be done. It would be a good idea to declare your connection to your father in any edit summary you make, or, better still, making a note of it on your userpage by following these Conflict of Interest Guidelines.

Nick Moyes (talk) 16:38, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Image discussion

Please, what are the steps to be taken as an editor of you feel that an image on an article (infobox image) should be replaced or removed? I have already started a discussion on the article's talk page but I want some form of official contributions from other editors. Jõsé ^hola 11:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: Often, if the page isn't super major, you can just be bold and change the image yourself. If you start a discussion on the talk page, few editors will probably see it, and nothing will actually get done. If someone reverts your edit, then start a discussion, following WP:BRD, and talk with that editor. If the discussion is going nowhere, then you can always go to WP:THIRDOPINION. Which article is it? Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Edward-Woodrow: it is Manuel Noriega Jõsé ^hola 12:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

What I would do is to change the infobox image to the option you think is best (I see you've already removed the mugshot) and leave a note accordingly on the talk page. If anyone objects, then you have someone to discuss the issue with. If not, then pat yourself on the back and move on. I'd suggest leaving an explanation of why you think the new image is better, like I did here. Cheers, Edward-Woodrow • talk 12:41, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

There don't appear to be any better images in c:Category:Manuel Noriega, Jõsé, which is no doubt why that one was used. You may have difficulty finding a suitably licensed image elsewhere. ColinFine (talk) 13:46, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I actually quite like File:Manuel Noriega.jpg, but that probably goes against every lead image guideline in the book. Edward-Woodrow • talk 17:07, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Deleted article move to draftspace

Would an admin be kind of nough to move the deleted article for Adam Guillette to draftspace? He's been in the news lately and I'd like to see what was there. Also a possible lerge candidate to Accuracy in Media. Thank you kindly. The deleting admin is "semi-retired". Thanks. FloridaArmy (talk) 20:09, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

I can move it into your user space. Ruslik_Zero 20:18, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

That would be great User:Ruslik0. Can you please alert me when it's moved and where? Thanks! Have a great weekend. FloridaArmy (talk) 23:30, 27 October 2023 (UTC)

@FloridaArmy: I moved it to User:FloridaArmy/Adam_Guillette. Ruslik_Zero 17:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

My Wikipedia page has not been published.

Hello, My name is Harmangeet SIngh and i creat a page of a actor, lyricist and poet but My Wikipedia page has not been published. Harmangeet Singh (talk) 11:05, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

That's right, Harmangeet Singh, Draft:Binder Pal Fateh hasn't been converted into an article. On 20 March '23, it was rejected. As Bonadea wrote at the time:

No independent sources, no sources that discuss him at any depth, no secondary sources. This source doesn't even mention him, this is a listing on a website whose aim is "providing services to the Actors and Models fraternity", the textile-industries source doesn't mention him and anyway it's just another database listing, and we can't use an autogenerated page about a song as a source.

You were asked to stop working on this. That didn't work, and therefore I'll repeat: Please stop working on this. -- Hoary (talk) 11:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

UPDATE: HS moved this to mainspace despite Declines and a Rejection. Now nominated for deletion. Did not declare COI. David notMD (talk) 17:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia Draft for review.

Hello, I’ve completed a wiki draft titled “Draft:The Phone Up Studios Inc”. can someone kindly review the article. I don’t want to submit it for actual review and it disappoint me. So if someone can take a look, and let me know if you do you think that it will pass approval, or if not give kindly explain what needs to be corrected.

Thanks! Hjared (talk) 11:15, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hjared, where are the reliable sources that describe or discuss this company in depth? -- Hoary (talk) 11:29, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Meanwhile, let me quote: This not only marked the conclusion of an era but also signified a profound transformation. Through a final and momentous process of rebranding and restructuring, they emerged anew as The Phone Up Studios. The conclusion of an era? A profound transformation? A momentous process? I read this stuff, and, wondering about its authorship, I read this -- and somehow I can't take seriously what I read. But then I don't have a PhD. -- Hoary (talk) 11:39, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hjared Now Speedy deleted, so you no longer need to worry about submitting it and it being Declined. David notMD (talk) 17:47, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello - would you help me please with my edits to David Shentow?

URL rot WikiUName (talk) 17:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: David Shentow ayakanaa ( t · c ) 17:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Be more specific about the nature of your ask. David notMD (talk) 17:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Uploading images on Wikimedia Commons

Hello, what are the steps and guidelines regarding uploading images on Wikimedia Commons? I don't seem to understand the licensing in plain terms. Jõsé ^hola 20:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

If you are uploading your own image, Commons recommends Attribution Share-Alike 4.0 International which means that anyone can use it for any purpose as long as they attribute you (credit you as the source) and keep it as the same licence. If you want to upload someone else's image, I need more details in order to answer your question or you can see WP:Copyright questions. ✶Mitch199811✶ 20:54, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237 I've probably addressed at least some part of your question at our discussion already going on here. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:55, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Elinor Otto Edits

I made corrections & added more accurate info to Elinor's page. Another user keeps reversing my edits? How do I get ACCURATE INFO on her page that will stay? My source IS ELINOR OTTO who is 104 today & been my roommate for almost 5 years. She is my grandmother's sister & my Great Aunt. Elinor is AMAZING & notices inaccuracies. Thank you Rosietheriveter1919 (talk) 21:18, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

(Note to Teahouse hosts: please see also User talk:Willondon#Elinor Otto and User talk:Rosietheriveter1919#October 2023.) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

No citations for lead section template?

I was looking for a template similar to {{{unreferenced}}} for the lead section but I can't find one. Does it exist? Article is The Beach Boys, btw. phrogge 'sup? edits 21:39, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

{{Not verified in body}}? Lead sections are not required to have citations as long as the material from the body of the article that is being sumnarised in the lead is properly cited where it appears in the body. Folly Mox (talk) 21:48, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Creating articles

What is the system for creating a new Wikipedia article? I am looking to make an article on Bird Middle School. How would I get started? 2600:4040:53F1:7200:A8B0:51C2:342:8DCD (talk) 22:22, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Bird Middle School has been a redirect for almost a decade, uncontested. In the face of such long-standing status quo, you'd need multiple sources about the school that each pass all the criteria listed in at WP:ORGCRIT. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:21, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Ein kleine Frage

Wie konnte ich es überhaupt schaffen, jemals zu versuchen, zu sehen, ob es einen Weg gibt, so weit zu gehen, wie vielleicht die Entscheidung, nach einem anderen Bearbeitungsprojekt zu suchen, das wahrscheinlich eine Chance hätte, sich schrittweise zu erhöhen, unabhängig davon, ob jemand darüber nachdenken wollte, bestimmte Maßnahmen zu ergreifen oder nicht? Spritzt im Furzgesicht (talk) 18:02, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Google Translate: How could I even manage to ever try to see if there was a way to go that far, like perhaps deciding to look for another editing project that would probably have a chance of incrementally increasing regardless , whether someone wanted to think about taking certain actions or not?

@Spritzt im Furzgesicht Welcome to English Wikipedia. I am not very sure what you are looking for. I suggest that you seek assistance on German Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Fragen_von_Neulingen

Cheers, -- TheLonelyPather (talk) 19:32, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) This is English Wikipedia where we interact in English, but your question makes no sense to me, even when translated. However, your username is offensive in German, and I have 'soft blocked' you for that. You may choose another username that does not violate our policies. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

It's probably just one of these, but incomprehensible German instead of incomprehensible English. We get a lot of them here. Folly Mox (talk) 21:51, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Folly Mox Ah, good to know soffit, fix it, bene, kumquat belike goodness becomes it, fastnet always befuddleda mention but kraut declines oft feelings. Deep joy. (As Stanley Unwin might have said). Nick Moyes (talk) 00:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

The user make a big mistake of Julie Brown's birth year.

The user 2600:1004:B11A:5DAA:94D2:A4BF:4C7C:D061 has messed up the year of the actress Julie Brown 1958. Not 1954. The user is making a mistake. I have fixed the right year. 108.21.67.83 (talk) 03:31, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

The reference shown for the birth date of Julie Brown does not mention when she was born. Would you be able to find a reliable reference that states the year of her birth? Karenthewriter (talk) 03:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

@Karenthewriter: The reference does have a date, at least for me – if you scroll up there is a "Born" field. I can alter the URL so that it loads the page at the top rather than the middle; I was also initially confused about where the date was in the cited source. Tollens (talk) 05:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I apologize for my mistake. I clicked on the reference link and didn't scroll up, for I thought that the little biography was all that was there. Karenthewriter (talk) 02:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Deleted edits

Hey folks,

Thanks for all your time and work here helping out editors! I have what I think is a simple question. Looking at my activity statistics[3], I notice that the number of deleted edits has shot up from about 5 to 17 in the recent past. This very likely has to do with my work on the new page patrol, in which I am participating for the first time to help with the backlog.

Yet, although some folks have disagreed with my editorial judgments, as is the normal course of things, no one has notified me that I've done anything so wrong that must be permanently stricken from the record!

I assume the complete lack of warning or threat of sanctions means that whatever the issue is, it has nothing specifically to do with my contributions, but I'm mystified as to what I might have done that could possibly require this level of administrative intervention.

If, however, I am doing something wrong, I would like to know what it is so that I might avoid repeating the mistake. Apparently, however, I do not have the necessary privileges to even see which of my own edits have been deleted. This leaves me somewhat baffled.

I'd be grateful for any information/contextualization you might be able to provide without (obviously!) revealing any specifics I do not have the administrative privileges to access myself.

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 23:06, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Just means you edited a page that's since been deleted, right? Not that your edit has been deleted. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:24, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh, okay! I've definitely made minor improvements to pages I have also suggested probably do not meet notability criteria for inclusion.

Having one's contributions logged as permanently deleted feels like a demerit, but your explanation makes perfect sense. I will set this concern aside until such a time as I might be alerted of possible policy violations or the like.

Thanks again for hanging out at the Teahouse to support new – or, as may be the case here, simply neurotic – editors.

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 00:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

PatrickJWelsh, there is no negative connotation whatsoever about deleted edits. Any editor who regularly tags bad content for speedy deletion or properly nominates articles at AfD will steadily accumulate deleted edits. That's a good thing, not a bad thing. Cullen328 (talk) 00:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

User:Rotideypoc41352, that's correct: "deleted edits" refers to edits made to pages that have been deleted, not edits that have been subject to revision deletion or suppression. Folly Mox (talk) 08:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@PatrickJWelsh: if it's any consolation, a quarter of my edits (=20K of them!) are showing as deleted. Comes with the territory, esp. when hanging around in some of the 'problem neighbourhoods' around here. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

What is the POS(Point of Sale ) Software?

What is Point of Sale Software? Walton Pai Pai POS (talk) 11:02, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Walton Pai Pai POS: You may be interested in the article Point of sale. Tollens (talk) 11:17, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Adding disrespectful in userpage

i think this user is adding misleading in infobox. Can it be removed from userpage. User_talk:QuadriSyedSahab#About_ethenicty 103.241.226.144 (talk) 11:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Everyone is given quite a wide degree of latitude in customizing their userpage as they see fit – he can describe his own ethnicity however he wants. Tollens (talk) 11:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

It's not about ethnicity, it's about music. 103.241.226.144 (talk) 11:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Ah. See Islam and music – he is perfectly entitled to that opinion as well. Tollens (talk) 11:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

NOTE: I have warned this IP that her personal beliefs and feelings are irrelevant to Wikipedia and that she may not WP:HARASS other users because of them. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:03, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

How to do so?

How to add borders and spaces between userbox, awards, etc in my userpage? I added service awards and unified login box but it is masked by other userbox and awards. TheProEditor11 (talk) 13:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @TheProEditor11, I've fixed your userpage and does it look okay now? 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 13:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, it is looking Okay now but can you please tell me how did you do that? TheProEditor11 (talk) 13:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

There are other ways how to do it, but I did it by adding {{clear}}, under the sections you want to split. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 13:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay and Thanks! TheProEditor11 (talk) 13:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Using photographs

13:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)GirlOK (talk)Recently created two articles. I have photographs for both . One is from a textbook -the National Library of Scotland cannot locate the copyright to the photo (I estimate taken around the 1920s) . The other photo is from a local government publication in 1932-if I want to use them what can i do? GirlOK (talk) 13:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@GirlOK: The first image sounds like it is in non-free content territory. Knowing the articles, it is unlikely you will find a free image. That being the case, you can upload the non-free image via Wikipedia:File upload wizard, following the "Upload a non-Free file" path, and choosing the option "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." I anticipate that will give you a Fair Use template to fill in - you can see an example of that template (albeit for a portrait, not a photo) on File:Mary Paley Marshall by AS or SA.png. The local government image can be uploaded to Commons using the {{OGL3}} licence template. Talk to me on your talk page if you want further help on either; I'll add that page to my watchlist. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Example for a photo at File:Fatima Ali.jpg. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Infobox Character help

Hello,

I just wanted to ask how to add a link to "last appearance" for a userbox template (like Miss Trunchbull's page) just to add context for readers. I would also like a reply specific to VisualEditor, please. Firesword9140 (talk) 15:28, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Firesword9140 I'm not convinced that this particular infobox needs a link for "last appearance", as the WP:LEAD gives several possibilities. Technically, in the visual editor you need to click on the infobox and then hit the "edit" button on the small template box which appears. This creates a larger box with individual lines for each component of the infobox, which can be altered to add a WP:WIKILINK and then "apply changes". Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:08, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thank you for the help with the explanation about WP:LEAD and how to add a wikilink. Could you also go more in depth how "last appearance" would not need a link. Thanks again! Firesword9140 (talk) 16:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Firesword9140 The WP:INFOBOX should just summarize the article, which at present has many dates mentioned but this is a moving target. Googling "matilda the musical", for example, tells me that it is currently running in London until at least 2024, so a pedant might suppose that the infobox should be updated every day to reflect the "last" i.e. latest notable performance. (It isn't a big issue for me and one you could discuss on the Talk Page of the article if you wished). Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Publishing an Article

Hello, How can I publish my article today? Lammoy (talk) 16:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Lammoy: Draft:John Dewey and his contribution to Inquiry-Based Learning as an Instructional Design Approach is not an article. It is a list of sources. So it will not be promoted. It seems a little unlikely to me that there will ever be an article on this subject; it sounds more like an essay, and WP is not a venue for essays. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I posted a complete article on the topic yesterday, along with sources/references. So, I am unclear about it not being able to publish. Lammoy (talk) 17:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

You did not I'm afraid, as above Draft:John Dewey and his contribution to Inquiry-Based Learning as an Instructional Design Approach is just a list of sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Lammoy: No, the text is there; it was hidden. Now unhidden. Still feels like an essay to me, though. Let me have a think about it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I think my first question would be, given that you say "Researchers over the years have had a lot to say about the work of John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning." ... can you supply references for any of them? The list of publications at the bottom of the page do not strike me as obviously speaking to "John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning" so much as "inquiry-based learning". Presuming that "John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning" is a thing, the article would need better referencing - inline references, paragraph/assertion by paragraph/assertion, as you will see on most articles. I'm sure somewhere there must be a WP page on artiles versus essays, but I can't put my hands on it now. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Probably WP:NOTESSAY. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, do you know where I can find the information? that way I could fix it and resubmit Lammoy (talk) 17:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Lammoy We have an extensive article on John Dewey, with several linked articles which cover his work. What you wrote about him, rather than his contributions, is already available and does not need to be repeated. Maybe your draft would be better split over the relevant sub-topics. Note that you should carefully cite to your sources anything you do add: see WP:REFB. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much but based on the nature of my assignment this will not help me. Lammoy (talk) 17:49, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

What assignment? Wikipedia doesn't exist to help student assignments, only its readers. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:51, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I know, thank you. Just interested in getting the article published here Lammoy (talk) 17:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

If it helps, it looks like a very good essay. But we lack citations pointing to the concept of "John Dewey’s inquiry-based learning" as a self-standing subject :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:59, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Please direct whomever gave you this assignment to Wikipedia:Education_program. If your grade depends on getting a new article published like this you have been given an unfair and possibly impossible assignment, and they should ensure that both this and any future assignments comply with both Wikipedia's content policies and our best practices for these sorts of assignments. MrOllie (talk) 18:00, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Health promotion

HI ! I added on the Health Promotion entry a few url's of website pages from the organizations that state what's being written in the sentences and have being erased. The organizations related to what was stated in the sentences are the Public Health Agency of Canada, the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Network of Health Promoting Hospitals and Health Services (HPH). What is being done incorrect? PedroAntonioDelValleLopez (talk) 23:23, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

PedroAntonioDelValleLopez, it looks like you are overrelying on primary sources. Secondary sources are preferred on Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 00:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

So, even for information that are statements related to the mission / objectives of those organizations available at their websites it is needed to identify a secondary source that repeats something that is informative? PedroAntonioDelValleLopez (talk) 14:47, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@PedroAntonioDelValleLopez No, better to WP:Avoid mission statements for the reasons given in that essay. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

But these are not private institutions, WHO and HPH are recognized health organizations. PedroAntonioDelValleLopez (talk) 18:07, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@PedroAntonioDelValleLopez It might be better to take this discussion to Talk:Health promotion and WP:PING a few of the editors who are reverting you. I think that they probably object to using primary sources like these: it is pretty obvious that WHO promotes health and the question is whether we have a secondary reference that meets our special criteria for medicine-related article sources. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, PedroAntonioDeiValleLopez. Why do you think that might make a difference? Wikipedia's requirements on sourcing apply across the board. There are three components to acceptability of a source: reliability is only one of them. Another is independence: 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) 18:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikitia scraping non-accepted drafts

I know this isn't really a wikipedia problem, but I'm curious how it happens. I was just looking for sources to recommend to Skihound24 for their draft on Samuel Holt [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Samuel_Holt_(weaver)] and came across the same article, word-perfect copied to Wikitia ("And Encyclopaedia by Verified Editors"), I can't provide a link because Wikitia is on the global blacklist and rather unhelpfully, like Voldemort, cannot be referred to by name even in a talk-page such as here. The Wikitia article (no doubt by a verified editor) admits in very small print at the end that it's been taken from Wikipedia, and adds "The list of its authors can be seen in its historical. Articles taken from Draft Namespace on Wikipedia could be accessed on Wikipedia's Draft Namespace." a statement that was clearly written by a Verified Editor.

This bothers me on so many levels. (1) Our draft-space is not supposed to be Google-searchable, with a view to protecting it from being scraped by random search engines. Does this mean that Wikitia are deliberately scraping our draft space? (2) An unaccepted draft is liable to deletion, but the material is still Wikipedia's, and is released on the understanding that authorship must be credited. Wikitia's credit to the authors immediately vanishes the moment Wikipedia deletes a draft, and this is unfair on the original author. Given all the cash that WMF have, it would be sort-of nice if they could occasionally object to behaviour like this. Elemimele (talk) 21:11, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Elemimele: All text in Wikipedia is freely licensed and may be reused for any purpose, as long as attribution is given. There is nothing wrong with a website copying drafts, as long as they say where it came from. This is just one of many Wikipedia mirrors or forks. Another example is Deletionpedia, when it was active it held copies of articles deleted from Wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 21:16, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

How to fix this template page? put in a placeholder for {{{1}}}?

I just made Template:Year in Texas by copying from Template:Year in the United States though it's still wonky because I'm not knowledgeable with technical aspects of template. How do I make it so that the page Template:Year in Texas shows the template with current year, instead of giving all those errors from {{{1}}} being missing? It works on pages that use it, e.g. User:Michael7604/2023 in Texas. Michael7604 (talk) 21:44, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Michael7604: I'm not sure, but I think it is due to the template Year in United States is pulling the displayed example from the doc page and not putting the template directly on the page like you are doing at Year in Texas. RudolfRed (talk) 21:52, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Fixed :) I think you missed the includeonly tags while copying it over, those prevent the template from being displayed on their own page (includeonly, i.e. only shown where included) Sohom (talk) 21:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Actually, so {{CURRENTYEAR}} will give you the current year, and if you use {{{1|{{CURRENTYEAR}}}}} your template will use the supplied first parameter or the current year if non is supplied (which appears to be the behviour you want) :) Sohom (talk) 22:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

adding an award/honor to professor's wiki page

Hello! I wish to add an award citation to Professor Ted Rappaport's website. When I attempted a trial run in my sandbox the link to the citation, which in my sandbox version is the last bullet on "awards" bulleted list, pulls up a "page does not exist" textual when I hover over it, and when I click on it goes to a yet-to-be-created wikipedia placeholder page.

Question: how can I fix this so the citation is valid and goes not to the wiki page but to the actual correct external page at IEEE? Kgberg (talk) 22:39, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Kgberg. It looks to me as if you've solved this, yes? ColinFine (talk) 22:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Weird Citation

"Wartime North Africa: A Documentary History 1934-1950" is a collection of translated documents edited by Aomar Boum and Sarah Abrevaya Stein. Each chapter is a diffrent document with a different author translated by a different person.

So here's my issue.

Chapter 39 is An Algerian Muslim’s Memories of Internment 1940–1943 which is a selection of translations from 'Trois années de camp: Un an de camp de concentration, deux ans de centre disciplinaire, Djenien-Bou-Rezg, Sud Oranais (1940 à 1943 Régime Vichy)' wriiten by Berkani, Mohammed Arezki in 1965. The translator is Rebecca Glasberg.

So I would I cite this? Is it?:

Berkani, Mohammed Azerki (2022). "An Algerian Muslim's Memories of Internment 1940–1943". In Boum, Aomar; Stein, Sarah Abrevaya (eds.). Wartime North Africa: A Documentary History, 1934–1950. Translated by Glasberg, Rebecca. Standford, California: Stanford University Press. pp. 174–187. ISBN 9781503611511.

But that's not true, since Berkani wrote it in 1965. But since I don't have the original Berkani (1965), how would I cite this chapter - which is a translation from another book within a book? Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 23:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

orig-date? --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't know the original date only 1965but thank you! Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 23:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

• Berkani, Mohammed Azerki (2022) [1965]. "An Algerian Muslim's Memories of Internment 1940–1943". In Boum, Aomar; Stein, Sarah Abrevaya (eds.). Wartime North Africa: A Documentary History, 1934–1950. Translated by Glasberg, Rebecca. Standford, California: Stanford University Press. pp. 174–187. ISBN 9781503611511.

Do you have any compelling reason to use Template:Citebook? I'd skip it, and instead write

Mohammed Arezki Berkani, "Trois années de camp: Un an de camp de concentration, deux ans de centre disciplinaire, Djenien-Bou-Rezg, Sud Oranais (1940 à 1943 Régime Vichy)" (1965), as translated by Rebecca Glasberg within "An Algerian Muslim’s Memories of Internment 1940–1943", chapter 39 (pages 174–187) of Wartime North Africa: A Documentary History 1934–1950, edited by Aomar Boum and Sarah Abrevaya Stein (Stanford, California: Stanford University Press, 2022; ISBN 9781503611511).

-- Hoary (talk) 23:43, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I want to also use Inline citations. That way seems best for the Further Reading Section.

Here's what I have so far Relations between Nazi Germany and the Arab world#Mohammed Arezki Berkani I tried my best with the citations Drsmartypants(Smarty M.D) (talk) 23:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

New Draft for Samuel Holt

Hi re:- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Samuel_Holt_(weaver) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Skihound24 (talk • contribs) 16:27, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I have once again had my Draft submission rejected for the following reasons - "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources".

I have now just added 3 new amendments to the references 1, 8 & 9 which now include links to online versions of the books i have referenced. (not sure why i did not do this 3 months ago!).

Could someone please have a quick look and see if i have enough reliable sources before i resubmit.

Regards

Mike Skihound24 (talk) 16:25, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Skihound24: The subject is probably notable; the first reference has non-trivial coverage. The article still has all sort of issues. You should not use inline external links, fullstop. Not use findagrave to reference anything. Not use wikipedia articles or commons images as references (refs 3 & 6). Not use emboldening as you have with the patent numbers. Not overlink - a single link to a page is generally sufficient. (And you have an issue that there does not seem to be a great page to link Terry Towels to, although you provide three or four links to a DAB page.) All that aside, it's a very good article, nice writing, good story. Right now, it's only ref 1 which demonstrates notability. Refs 8 & 9 are useful, but don't really add to notability. But were the other issues dealt with, I'd be inclined to promote it. --Tagishsimon (talk) 16:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Tagishsimon, Many thanks for the very quick reply i am most grateful. I have been over the article and think i have done all of the edits as you have suggested. I will resubmit and keep looking for some more notable references.

Thanks Skihound24 (talk) 20:22, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Now Samuel Holt (weaver). Congratulations. David notMD (talk) 01:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Conflict of names on a list

Hello, Locomotive 150 here. I’ve been doing some work on the Deadliest Catch page and have come across a problem. I’m attempting to improve the list of vessels that have appeared on the show. One of these vessels was USCGC Munro (WHEC-724). However, in the latest season, USCGC Munro (WMSL-755) was shown. My question is what should I do when I have 2 vessels with the same name? Locomotive 150 (talk) 18:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Locomotive 150: I don't understand your question. Can't you just link to the articles for each, like you have done here? Please clarify what problem you are trying to solve. RudolfRed (talk) 19:13, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Accordingf to Douglas Albert Munro 724 and 755 are two Coast Guard ships, both named after Munro. 724 is the older, decommissioned in 2021. 755 commissioned in 2015 and in active service. Burden on you to determine which one or both involved with Deadliest Catch. If both, list both. David notMD (talk) 01:19, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Australian Categories - and how to use them

Hi.

I have created a Category:Australian Innovation and intend to find and categorise pages that are relevant. I would like to have made this a subcategory of Australian - but this does not exist. In the future, I would like to create another category of Australian Inventors etc, but this would make more sense in

Category:Australian people

But IMHO the Australian Categories looks to be a bit of a mess. And it is very hard to work out where things should go.

Can anyone offer some advice.? I don't want to add to the confusion.

PS. I found the Category Category:Australian inventions which I will use. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elliot Duff (talk • contribs) 00:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Elliot. Elliot Duff (talk) 00:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Elliot Duff: I think that your new category should be a sub category of Category:Australia. You can also try asking at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Australia for advice from other editors interested in this topic. RudolfRed (talk) 00:19, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Elliot Duff. I see that you are a relatively new editor. Categorization can be complex and it can be controversial. I recommend that you read Wikipedia:Categorization and its associated links. There isn't (or shouldn't be) anything different or unique about categorization of Australian topics, as opposed to topics related to any other country. Cullen328 (talk) 01:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks - yes I did have a read of the Categorisation page - a bit confusing. But it led me to the page Category:Australian inventions - which is the category that I have used. Elliot Duff (talk) 03:20, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

How to archive my talkpage?

How can i archive my talkpage, there is much unnecessary content. -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 12:51, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi QuadriSyedSahab. There are different ways to archive a talk page, You can found out more about them at Help:Archive. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly Thanks -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 12:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@QuadriSyedSahab Help:Archiving (plain and simple) works pretty well. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks -- Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 05:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Biography

When using an autobiography as an only source, can the article be deleted? Flobeigor (talk) 08:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Flobeigor: Simply lacking reliable sources is not usually a valid reason for deletion, as articles should generally be improved rather than deleted if at all possible. However, if reliable sources for the topic do not exist at all, that would be a valid reason for deletion. You might be interested in the deletion policy. Is there a particular article you're asking about? Tollens (talk) 08:20, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Do y'all think Cross-site leaks has a chance at a GA ?

Hey, I recently (read "a while ago finished") reworked the Cross-site leaks article to a significant extent adding a bunch of context regarding the history of the attack and currently available defences. Do you y'all think the article has a chance of passing a Good article review in it's current state ? If not is there how should I should improve on so that it can pass a Good article review ? (My theoretical plan is to work towards making the article a Good article and hopefully a FA eventually once the DYK process is over).

I generally tend to know my way around the more technical areas of Wikimedia, but I'm pretty much a noob when it comes to article content writing, which is why I'm asking at the Teahouse (hope you guys don't mind ) Sohom (talk) 21:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Sohom Datta, taking a very quick glance, I'm not seeing obvious major deficiencies. Some sort of illustration would be nice, if anything relevant exists. You may get some challenges about source quality for e.g. Medium. Editors at relevant CS wikiprojects might be better to consult. And ultimately, the way to find out whether it can pass a GAN is to start a GAN. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Agreed, I am looking at adding a illustration, I need to ping the authors of the one of the papers, or might need to make my own one. I will ask around at the Computer science project and then put it up for GAN then. Sohom (talk) 22:12, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I found the lead very hard to understand. The second sentence starts "These classes of vulnerabilities", but only one class has been mentioned — maybe it means "These vulnerabilities"? In the third sentence, "leveraging side channels" means nothing to me. Maproom (talk) 08:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Maproom I've re-worked the lede to explain things a little better. I realize that "leveraging side-channels" is probably not something that makes any sense outside of the field of computer security, thanks for pointing that out :) Sohom (talk) 08:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Article organization

What is wrong with this article - Viterbo -? all headings except History are listed as sub-headings of Geography on the article, I don't know if it is from my browser but that is the only article that looks that way. Jõsé ^hola 08:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

​ Fixed. Looks like there was some malformed HTML in the article making it appear that everything following the climate data table was part of that table. Tollens (talk) 09:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Tollens: thanks, for a while I could not just figure it out. Jõsé ^hola 09:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Auto generating of ISBNs no longer works for me

Until recently, whenever I've wanted to cite a book, I would bring up the relevant dialogue from the Ref Toolbar, type the ISBN in the appropriate box, and then click the little magnifying glass to its right. The Wiki software would then cleverly fill in many of the other fields.

But this doesn't seem to work any more. I have tried the following:

- In the Source Editor, clicking on Cite -> Templates -> Site Book, then proceeding as above. When I click the magnifying glass, nothing happens.

- In the Visual Editor, click Cite -> Automatic, and fill in the ISBN, and click Generate. Result is a message: "We couldn't make a citation for you."

- I've tried using both the 10- and 13-digit versions of the ISBN; and tried typing it both with and without dashes, spaces, etc. None of this helps.

Am I doing something wrong, or is the feature no longer working?

Thanks in advance for your help. Mike Marchmont (talk) 17:21, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Marchmont: I just tried with 978-3-16-148410-0 and it worked fine (source editor, Cite Book). What ISBNs are you trying with? --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:27, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your prompt reply, @Tagishsimon:. The ISBN that you quoted actually worked for me. But I've tried many others over the last few weeks, and none of them worked. I'll look through my history to see if I can retrieve them, and will then try them again. I'll report back. Mike Marchmont (talk) 09:45, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Sahil Gupta bollywood Indian actor kon haim

Sahil Gupta bollywood Indian actor 2023 K new superstar hai aur actor hai SahilGupta-Sahil (talk) 06:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @SahilGupta-Sahil. Do you have a question? Qcne (talk) 08:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sahil, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability (but not otherwise) there may be an article about you. It will not be "your page", as on social media, and you should read about why you are very strongly discouraged from writing about yourself. If you do meet the requirements, then somebody will eventually write an article about you.

Hijacking an article about somebody else (as you attempted to do to Sahil Gupta is regarded as disruptive editing. Do not do it again. ColinFine (talk) 11:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Article Review

Hello Teahouse, it nice to be back again. I have drafted an article Bala Sanusi Turaki on my page, your review and advice would be immensely appreciate. Brogonee (talk) 01:57, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Brogonee: Welcome to the Teahouse! THIRTEEN references in a row for a two-sentence draft is citation overkill. GoingBatty (talk) 04:45, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Delete all references that make no mention of Turaki. Also, at one point the draft was much longer (sections for Education, Career, Awards, Memberships....) What happened? David notMD (talk) 09:20, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello David notMD, GoingBatty, you are absolutely correct. The article got declined due to citation overkill. However, i deleted most sections because of verifiability issues and limited knowledge. This verifiability issue is duely because of poor citations which i feel is appropriate to back-up with relevant citations. However, there are some details about him not made publicly available online. Brogonee (talk) 09:56, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Brogonee: The reliable published sources you use in the draft do not have to be online (e.g. books, newspapers) GoingBatty (talk) 20:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

yeah GoingBatty, i have used many reliable sources in the draft. The person is of high prominence in Nigeria, but unfortunately, the editors keep bringing in excuses. The first one is "seems like a resume", second was "too much citations" and third was "less citations". this is already becoming something else. with just a google search, you will understand the subject is prominent. I have added secondary reliable sources, dignified media channels cited. But still excuses. Please do check my draft log for Bala Sanusi Turaki and see how many edits i have made. Brogonee (talk) 00:33, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Brogonee: as the reviewer that most recently declined the draft, a few comments.

• it is not the responsibility of reviewers to do Google searches to establish notability of submissions; the submission itself should have sufficient sources to do so
• I suggest reading the guidelines carefully for what is expected. It is not "excuses" when reviewers point out flaws in the submission. It is simply that they do not believe it meets the criteria. The version that I declined contained three sources, none of which verified some of the key information presented in the draft, nor even mentioned the subject by the title used for the submission. If the subject is prominent and the sources confirm this, and you stick to verified statements, the draft will have a better chance of being approved. Greenman (talk) 12:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello Greenman, I now understand what you mean. I will change somethings and replace with relevants. Kindly understand that this your statement meant a lot to me in understanding the flaw. You should have placed this as a comment under the article Bala Sanusi Turaki. Brogonee (talk) 14:32, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

political satire allowed?

is political satire, vice an outright factual article, EVER allowed here? Chuckeholm (talk) 01:31, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

No, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. GoingBatty (talk) 01:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

On the other hand, Chuckeholm, factual, neutrally written, well-referenced articles about political satire are welcomed. A Modest Proposal is just one of many examples. Cullen328 (talk) 01:48, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

any idea of any writer's sites OTHER THAN www.everything2.com? Chuckeholm (talk) 03:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Wordpress. -- Hoary (talk) 05:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

i'd now like to withdraw this draft. what do i do? Chuckeholm (talk) 11:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Chuckeholm Good idea: thanks for taking the advice you have been given. Simply add the template {{db-author}} at the very top of the draft and it will be deleted completely quite soon. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

i need to find it back to copy it to my clipboard. how? Chuckeholm (talk) 13:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Chuckeholm: I read your comment above (and this edit of yours) as a request for G7 deletion, so I deleted Draft:Nixon's phoenix after nam. I've restored it so that you can copy the content. When you're done, please add {{db-author}}, braces and all, at the top of the draft, and someone will delete it again. Deor (talk) 16:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Southeast Asia in the Age of Commerce

How can we show two ISBNs in the book infobox? 76.14.122.5 (talk) 20:34, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

From the instructions at {{Infobox_book}} it doesn't look like you can. Use the ISBN of the first edition if you have it. RudolfRed (talk) 20:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. The template does allow for an |isbn_note parameter, which could be used to show a second ISBN, with an explanation, if that was needed. See Chapterhouse: Dune for an example of how it would appear. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:33, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Perfect. Thank you. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 17:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

where Sahil Gupta bollywood Indian actor

sahil gupta bollywood Indian actor live in samastipur SahilGupta-Sahil (talk) 17:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

FYI

OP blocked for repeated self-promotion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:22, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

How do I create a draft?

I'm starting but going about it the wrong way. How do I create a draft..I'm going to publish too quickly -trying to save my work. but that's putting it live GirlOK (talk) 16:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@GirlOK: The "Publish" button is the save button. RudolfRed (talk) 16:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok-I do that regularly, but then folk are telling me about lack of citations and sources , when I haven't finished-Is sandbox the answer to that? GirlOK (talk) 16:20, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

If you search for draft:My next article (i.e. draft: plus the article name) you'll get a redlink in the search results which yu can use to start the draft article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:16, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@GirlOK Your Draft:Jane Falconer Coulter is fine where it is in draftspace and you can continue to edit it (saving/publishing additions as you go). When you are ready, there is a big blue button at the top which formally submits it for review and possible acceptance into the encyclopaedia. Meanwhile, anyone can comment on it or help to improve it: however, no-one but you should submit it for review. At present, it needs many more citations so that readers can verify what you have written and to show the notability of the subject, both of which are core Wikipedia policies. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:30, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello GirlOK. I just want to let you know that you can use reliable published sources for references, even if they are not viewable on the Internet. So if you find old newspaper articles or reference books that have useful information about Jane Falconer Coulter you can use them as Wikipedia article references. Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners have useful information. Best wishes on finishing your draft and submitting it.Karenthewriter (talk) 17:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Image

For what purpose is this image File:Tony and Estrada.jpg on Erik Estrada's page? It seems as though it was placed there for personal promotion by the person in the photo with Estrada. Is WP a place for sharing like Facebook? Can anyone put personal photos of themselves with celebrities without reason? This does not appear to have any cause for inclusion. Maineartists (talk) 14:35, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Well, the best I can come up with in its defense is "there's room for it.", so it doesn't give me knee-jerk annoyance. It doesn't have a year, so there's no "Estrada in YYYY", which would be something, and there is nothing obvious in the article about fundraising. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:23, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Maineartists This was posted by User:Marine 69-71 at Commons in 2009. Marine has posted more than 2,400 of his own photographs to Commons, and is still active. The image is of himself with Estrada. Personally, I agree that the image adds nothing of value to the Estrada article, so you could delete it with no harm. David notMD (talk) 16:06, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Wow. 2,400 images? are they all similar in nature? Maineartists (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Gråbergs Gråa Sång. I chuckled when I read: "there's room for it." I've seen other images on (celebrity) BLP pages where "regular" people have placed their personal selfies with celebrities that have absolutely no connection with anything within the article or particular section other than to simply show them with the BLP; which should be left to social media, not WP. I've also seen personally autographed ephemera on BLP pages that are highly questionable for inclusion. However, I'll wait for others to weigh about this particular image here; but I'm thinking this one needs to go. There is just no merit. Maineartists (talk) 16:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

I will add that in instances when I had added photographs of celebrities standing side-by-side with my wife, I cropped out my wife. (talk) 16:09, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi, David notMD. Yes, I agree. I have also seen this. And in these instances, there is a plausible reason for the photo to be included: i.e. support of article content "[BLP name] at the 2004 Emmy Awards in Los Angeles, California". This image has no caption nor reason even it was cropped. I will remove based on this discussion's reasoning. Maineartists (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists I think that the justification for that particular photo could be that it includes Estrada's autograph, which is not otherwise present. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:14, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull Hm. Maybe. But is a celebrity's autographed publicity photo or selfie reason enough to include an image at WP? If so, that would open the flood gates for millions of autograph seekers to plaster every celebrity page with their own personal collections. Not sure that's what WP is really about. Maineartists (talk) 16:29, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

.... indeed, I'm pretty sure it's not. Many "good" articles do include signatures (although not usually in selfies!). See Abraham Lincoln, for example. My only reason for mentioning the possibility was because that's what I think Marine_69-71 might say. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:05, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Ah yes. You are correct re: signatures. I have seen many in infoboxes. Signatures aside, however, I wonder what the make-up of the 2400 image uploads consist of for this particular editor. Maineartists (talk) 19:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Why wonder. Go see. https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Special:ListFiles?limit=500&user=Marine+69-71&ilshowall=1 --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:04, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Tagishsimon. Perusing the thousands of uploaded images by this editor, it is clear that over the years the intent has grown into something that perhaps should have been either curbed or monitored to follow policy and guidelines for Encyclopedic content. In many articles the photo galleries view as a vacation photo-book rather than a relative image supporting content at WP. Not to mention that entire articles have been create by the editor to support the multiple images uploaded i.e. List of historic properties in Duncan, Arizona, List of historic properties in Clifton, Arizona, List of historic structures in Oatman, Arizona etc. WP pages notwithstanding, images of water towers, clocks, street signs, donkeys, multiple images of the same shot from different views: caves, bridges, or "Historic House", "Rooms within Historic House", "House Marker", et al are questionable if not overweight. Maineartists (talk) 00:01, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree that Marine 69-71 has been very liberal in identifying properties as "historic." For the Clifton, AZ article, only one of the properties is on the National Register. David notMD (talk) 00:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Respectfully, I completely disagree with you both. The List of historic properties in Clifton, Arizona images are, by my understanding, properties listed as part of the Clifton Townsite Historic District - cf. https://npgallery.nps.gov/NRHP/GetAsset/NRHP/90000339_text - and so Marine_69-71 is not creating articles out of the ether to satisfy their wish to take & upload photographs, but rather meticulously photographing everything found in a US local heritage listing - which listing is a WP:N notable thing. I presume much the same pattern for Oatman, &c. Given that there is, in fact, a solid basis for the images, it then follows, for me at least, that it is unproblematic and probably desirable, to have multiple images for each subject; and it follows too that these are exactly the sort of encyclopedic content which we should all be here for. So talk of curbing or monitoring is completely erroneous. A better policy to bring to mind, under the circumstances, is WP:AGF. --Tagishsimon (talk) 01:08, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Tagishsimon I'm not sure anyone here is not assuming good faith; but to upload 3 separate views of a cave, water towers, gas stations, a sidewalk clock, fire truck or wild donkey (just to mention a few) is not in keeping with either historic sites or the purpose of images at an Encyclopedia. It's a vacation slideshow at best. The articles are stubs and the images in many cases outweigh the content. Creating an article about historic sites for a town such as Philadelphia, Pennsylvania at WP is one thing; but creating a page for historic sites in Duncan, Arizona population 800 is another. Maineartists (talk) 14:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

That way lies madness. For example, Concord, Massachusetts has four building images and three other. The National Registry of Historic Places lists 27 for Concord. The Massachusetts Cultural Resources Information System (MACRIS) lists 1,928 building or other as historic. Wikimedia Commons has thousands of images. David notMD (talk) 01:45, 30 October 2023‎ (UTC)

• Hi there everybody! They say that when people talk about you it is because you are important! Just kidding, hey where's my cup of tea? Now in regard to the photo of Eric Estrada with a fan. The fans name was never mentioned therefore there is no personal promotion of said person. What the photo shows is the kind side of Mr. Estrada posing with a humble fan during a donation drive. By looking at the photo people will realize that Mr. Estrada is not like many other actors who refuse to be photographed with their fans because they think that they are better then anyone else.

Now in regard to the 2 thousand photos which I shared with our Wikipedia, I did so in good-faith. You see this is an encyclopedia in which we not only share our knowledge but also pictures because they can give the reader an idea of what the property mentioned looks like if said reader wishes to visit it. These are not vacation photos. I have no time for vacations and as a historian I visit and document historical related structures and such. Just because a property is not on the National Register of Historic Places does not mean that said property is not historical. The towns in Arizona have Historical Societies which determines what is historical in accordance to their criteria. It is trough these societies that I determine which objects to document. Take care, Tony the Marine (talk) 21:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikimarkup fonts for sigs

Hello! Where can I find a list of fonts that I can use in my signature? As you can probably see, I’m in the process of customizing my signature. Thank you, Shadestar474 (talk) 03:33, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Which currently near-impossible to read due to darkened colors and black background. David notMD (talk) 03:46, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

There. Is that better? Shadestar474 (talk) 03:56, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

It's less bad, Shadestar474. But David notMD's signature (as one among many) is less wasteful, more legible, and all in all more pleasing. -- Hoary (talk) 05:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

it's much more readable in dark mode

could this be what it's made made for? cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 13:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474: It's generally a good idea for the contrast ratio to be at least 4.5:1 for AA, and at least 7:1 for AAA, but your current signature has 5.84:1 and 3.61:1. QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 09:09, 30 October 2023

Courtesy ping: Shadestar474 QuickQuokka ^{[⁠talk • contribs]} 07:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, it doesn’t have a black background anymore. Is that better? Shadestar474 (talk) 18:55, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Also, could somebody please answer my original question, a list of fonts? Shadestar474 (talk) 19:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

from an insert timeframe here of testing to make a single cruelty squad joke, it seems to be every font available in ms office cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I… don’t know what that means. Shadestar474 ^(talk) 19:46, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

i did some more looking, and it turns out that answer was also wrong

per mos:fontfamily, the answer is "every font you have on your device"

this means you can use fonts like broadway and comic sans if you want, and any device that has them installed will be able to see them

but if they don't, it defaults to the default font cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 20:26, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you! Shadestar474 ^(talk) 21:37, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I can't read your signature on my screen :( Qcne (talk) 08:11, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Scottish Gaelic

Is there a Scottish Gaelic Wikipedia? Or an Irish one? I’m wondering because I’m learning Scottish Gaelic and would like to use the Scottish Wikipedia to enhance my learning.

Sincerely, Shadestar474 ^(talk) 23:35, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474: Check out the list at m:List_of_Wikipedias. There is Scotish Gaelic at https://gd.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr%C3%AComh-Dhuilleag and there is Irish at https://ga.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr%C3%ADomhleathanach. RudolfRed (talk) 23:40, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Shadestar474 ^(talk) 23:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

How do I delist my own nomination for deletion of an article?

I nominated the article Kenneth Lutchen for deletion, but am persuaded by the "keep" rationales of other editors that this was a mistake. I believe there is a way to withdraw my nomination to avoid wasting other editors' time, but I can't find instructions for how to do this without possibly messing up the record. Could anyone direct me in the right direction?

As always, much gratitude to everyone here for sharing so much time and expertise!

Cheers, Patrick J. Welsh (talk) 23:57, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@PatrickJWelsh: See Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion#Withdrawing_a_nomination RudolfRed (talk) 00:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

edits i've made

I just inserted a quotation emailed to me by Sam Charters' widow, explaining his service in the Army. I don't think that it has ever been published before. I looked at the finished segment and I thought it looked good. I then looked at the official Wiki page and it wasn't there. Does it take time before it is published, or go through an editorial review? What is a general timeframe after posing an edit and seeing it in print as part of the article/? It is the Samuel Charters entry. ALSO... am I able to change my name from Ritlarge>? Ritlarge (talk) 23:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Ritlarge, material whose source hasn't been published may not be added. Please see Wikipedia:No original research. -- Hoary (talk) 23:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the information. Ann Charters posted that information on my FaceBook Group: The Legacy of Sam Charters Legacy of which, Mrs. Charters is a member. I am the author of a work cited (I believe) by this group. i.e.: Exploring Sam Charters (Living Blues Magazine. On another issue, may I change my name to Larry Hoffman instead of Ritlarge? Ritlarge (talk) 00:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I don't see any recent edits by you at Samuel_Charters. Do not add anything that has not been published in a reliable source. RudolfRed (talk) 23:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Ritlarge, a posting to a Facebook group isn't a satisfactory source. On your username, please see Wikipedia:Changing username. -- Hoary (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Improving a page

'ello!

I've been editing the Santa Ana canton page for I believe what is now 4 or 5 months, and in that time i've improved it quite alot i'd say! My goal is to (hopefully) get the page to a "Good article" ranking eventually if I can, so i've just wanted to ask for advice on how to improve this page further

I hope whoever's responding to this is having a good day btw! Srafelball55 (talk) 00:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Srafelball55, as Santa Ana (canton) is in Costa Rica, I'd ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Costa Rica. -- Hoary (talk) 00:18, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh alright, thank you! Srafelball55 (talk) 00:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Location transcluded information

I have a problem with this page... the Cite error: The named reference "cp2021" was defined multiple times with different content (see the help page) seems to be caused by census data being copied in from another page, but I am stuck trying to find out where. It is probably because the reference in the copied information for for one of the two tables was recently changed. Quebec99 (talk) 15:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Quebec99: As far as I can see, the issue lies in {{Canada census}}, which is used in two places in the article (for |location=La Tuque TE, and for |location=La Tuque TE, Quebec) and which emits named references which are now fighting each other. Don't know a cure, sadly, beyond doing one of the tables manually. There must be a better way though. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Quebec99: Based on Tagishsimon's analysis, you might want to ask your question at Template talk:Canada census. Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 18:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty:Thanks... I will.Quebec99 (talk) 01:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Incomplete info in an article - what to do?

I am a wikipedia user, have never edited, but found missing information in the entry for Ralph Vaughn Williams that bothers me.

The section on his chamber and instrumental music mentions his "phantasy" string quintet, but not his quintet for piano and strings. I don't know how to show a reference to this work that is reliable, but I found a link for a PhD thesis from the Univ of Texas regarding this composition.

What do I do? Thanks!!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ralph_Vaughan_Williams#Chamber_and_instrumental

https://uh-ir.tdl.org/items/08b91425-c749-47c4-9c37-c9a37f6d01a1 Viola Bob (talk) 01:01, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Viola Bob. Don't fret - the best way is simply to go to the article's talk page and start a short discussion by clicking 'Add Topic'. Post your concerns and links there, and interested editors will look at the source and decide if it's suitably reliable to use in this instance - which I suspect it will be. The page has over 200 watchers who monitor changes to it and to the talk page.

Alternatively, you could make a formal WP:EDITREQUEST, citing the source and stating word for word what text you would like to add, based upon that source. That will draw the attnetion of editors who monitor such requests.

Or, you could WP:BEBOLD and make the edit yourself. You might want to read WP:REFBEGIN to learn how to click the 'Cite' button to add a url and all elevant detail. The {{Cite thesis}} template would be the best one to use. There's explanatory documentation, but it can be a bit daunting at first.

I hope this isn't too technical, but you do now have a choice of three options you could follow. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

List of interments at Hollywood Forever Cemetery

I added the name of a prominent person to the Interments list at the Hollywood Forever Cemetery on 7/31/23. My listing showed up initially and now it’s gone. I’m a new contributor so maybe I did something incorrect. Any suggestions of why the listing is no longer showing up? PTL16 (talk) 20:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @PTL16. Welcome to the Teahouse! Your addition was removed on 09 September, as well as a all of the other red links in the article. Red links are links to non-existent Wikipedia articles. There's an argument that red links should be retained if it links to a topic that could plausibly sustain an article, but I have no idea if Frederick Woodward Blanchard meets our notability requirements for an article (or any of the other removed red links).

I'm pinging the removing editor @Rusted AutoParts to see if they can shed any light. Qcne (talk) 21:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I removed all redlinks from the page. I would personally disagree about them being retained if notable to a specific topic. If this was the Hollywood Bowl page sure, but it's the Hollywood Forever interments page so it doesn't count in my opinion. Rusted AutoParts 21:44, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your response. If that is the criteria, then these listings would also need to be removed; James H. Beatty (1836–1927), federal judge in Idaho (aged 91), Jackson Barnett (1842-1934), folk figure (aged 91),Elmer Berger (1891–1952), inventor of the rear-view mirror (aged 61), Gypsy Boots (1914–2004), fitness guru (aged 89. These listings are all under the letter “B” and there are more like this from the listings A-Z. I know the Hollywood Forever Cemetery considers Mr. Blanchard’s Monument as one of their notable interments. Can one of the executives at the cemetery reach out to you or someone else at Wikipedia that could help with this listing? Thanks again for responding. PTL16 (talk) 22:03, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

No, PTL16, editors of Wikipedia are not (or anyway should not be) swayed by appeals such as this. What count are published materials. -- Hoary (talk) 22:19, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I understand and appreciate what you’re saying and I’m not trying to sway anyone. I’m new at this and I’m trying to figure out the best way to contribute. I’m more confused about this than anything. It’s already discouraging. I’ll look for the source of the original interment list because I couldn’t find articles that tied into some of the names I spot checked on the list. Again, I’m new at this but it seems like the criteria should be consistent. PTL16 (talk) 22:36, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

PTL16, I've just had a quick look at List of interments at Hollywood Forever Cemetery. Because it was quick, I may have missed something; but I didn't notice any name that wasn't blue-linked. Where is the inconsistency that concerns you? -- Hoary (talk) 23:00, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Please note that whenever Wikipedia refers to notability, it is used in a drastically different manner than in other uses. You may want to think of it as wikinotability. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining that. I was wondering why this was turning out to be so difficult to add his name to a list when he would obviously meet the standard definition of notable. And by that I mean if you just searched the internet, some newspaper archives and libraries there is enough information to support it. His monument is also included in several books about the iconic and notable memorials at the Hollywood Forever Cemetery. I think Mr. Blanchard would meet Wikipedia’s definition but I’m too new to all of this to know how to navigate the process. Again, thanks for your help. PTL16 (talk) 00:20, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks so much for responding. Frederick Woodward Blanchard was one of the original founders and the first President of the Hollywood Bowl. He was also the Founder of Blanchard Hall and was involved in most every important civic and cultural project in the early days of the development of Los Angeles. His monument at the Hollywood Forever cemetery is one of the marque monuments in the cemetery. It was designed by Lloyd Wright (designer of the Hollywood Bowl shell) and includes a depiction of the Hollywood Bowl. Both the Hollywood Bowl and the Hollywood Forever cemetery can verify his prominence and notoriety. I can provide contact names as well as books that reference his major contributions to Los Angeles. I’m new at this so I’m still learning about posting. Thanks again for responding. PTL16 (talk) 21:46, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

PTL16, I suggest that you read Wikipedia:Write the article first. Cullen328 (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I will check the article out and I definitely want to add a page about Mr. Blanchard. In the meantime I will reach out to my contact at the Hollywood Forever Cemetery. I have worked with them regarding this monument because it is one of the most prominent and photographed monuments in the cemetery.Thanks again. PTL16 (talk) 22:23, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

PTL16, neither places nor contactable persons can verify prominence or "notoriety" (fame?). Reliable published sources (where reliability is as defined by and for Wikipedia) can do so. I suggest that you work on the improvement of existing articles. After you've done quite a bit of this, successfully -- I mean, without having your edits reverted -- then return to the matter of Blanchard and decide whether he's notable (where notability is as defined by and for Wikipedia). If you decide that he is, then click on Draft:Frederick Woodward Blanchard, write something up, and "publish" (i.e. save) it. Keep improving it and "publishing" it. When you're happy with it, submit it for promotion to a regular article. -- Hoary (talk) 22:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

F. W. Blanchard looks interesting; very likely passes WP:GNG. There's a FWB thread runnning through Making music in Los Angeles : transforming the popular (2007) [4] and several nods to FWB in Who's who in music and dance in Southern California (1933) [5]. I've found a wee bit of contemporary press coverage (e.g. in Los Angeles Graphic - 1907-08-17 [6]). Judging by FWBs interests, I'd be surprised if there was not more to be found - I've not tried a newspaper archive. Not evidencing notability, there's also a self-published book F.W. Blanchard: First President of the Hollywood Bowl by his niece (?) which likely will provide some more pointers. However, PTL16, reliable sources WP:RS are not thick on the ground, so it will take some work to uncover enough evidence to meet WP:GNG. He does sound like the sort of person who should have an article, so I hope it works out. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your response. I really appreciate your quick research. I am Mr. Blanchard’s neice that co-wrote the book. I have boxes and boxes of articles written about Mr. Blanchard and a long list of books that reference his contributions and accomplishments. There are even several published books that include photos of his monument at Hollywood Forever and specifically mention his notoriety. What prompted me to contribute this information to Wikipedia is the fact that I receive so many requests for information regarding Mr. Blanchard from other people that want to include him in their articles, books or libraries or request public appearances from me to discuss Mr. Blanchard’s life. I thought adding his name to some of the existing articles on Wikipedia would be a simple and quick additional source for people to get some of the information they are requesting. I was extremely surprised that his name was rejected based on all of information published about him. I had no idea what I was getting into trying to accomplish that task. I can’t thank you enough for responding. You’ve renewed my faith in the Wikipedia process. PTL16 (talk) 00:04, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Do be aware that being a relative of a subject of an article is usually considered a WP:COI and you may want to read the guidelines in relation to that. Fermiboson (talk) 01:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

How to do nowrap

Is nowrap an HTML tag? <nowrap> </nowrap>? Or is it something else? Shadestar474 ^(talk) 00:46, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474: See WP:NOWRAP – looks like it's the template {{nowrap}}. For future reference, you can often find information on a topic by picking the relevant word and placing it after WP: in the search bar; I had no idea where the information was located but guessed correctly. Tollens (talk) 02:00, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! I didn’t know about the WP: trick! Shadestar474 ^(talk) 02:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

List of campaigns?

Hi, I see that this month is Asian Month. Is there a list of campaigns that run during the year, similar to this one? Thanks! MurielMary (talk) 23:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Kind of? So far, I've found the table at meta:CentralNotice/Request, where notices for such events would go. (Also, I remember you from Template:Did you know nominations/Beatrice Beeby.) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Recent changes patrol

How do I become a recent changes patroller? Can you just start doing it and declare yourself a patroller? If not, can I do it even if I am not a patroller?

Thanks, Shadestar474 ^(talk) 02:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474: Yep, you just start doing it – anyone who does recent changes patrol is by definition a recent changes patroller. Tollens (talk) 02:51, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Oh, ok, so it’s not like being an AfC patroller where you have to apply for it? Shadestar474 ^(talk) 02:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

That's correct. Tollens (talk) 02:55, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! Shadestar474 ^(talk) 02:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474: There are three kinds of "patroller" rights: WP:New page reviewer, WP:Autopatrolled, and WP:Pending changes reviewer. All of those must be granted by an administrator, and none have anything to do with recent changes (unless the recent change is a new page creation or an edit to a pending-change-protected page). ~Anachronist (talk) 04:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Interesting. Thank you. Shadestar474 ^(talk) 04:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Those are the patrols that require user right, but there are plenty of other "patrols", including Wikipedia:Recent changes patrol. NotAGenious (talk) 05:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Page recovery

I had a wiki page for many years. I was cited for editing my own page a few years ago and it was taken down. I am a musician and music producer. Now that I have no page, my album distribution and listings on Youtube and almost everywhere else have been removed because they use Wikipedia to decide if you are worth promoting. I have been invalidated and I am almost unable to find any of my 20 music releases and dozens of music productions. I am a multi platinum and grammy award music producer, songwriter composer and recording artist. I have worked with Duran Duran, Celine Dion, Fleetwood Mac and many others. What can I do to get my page back? Jonesrecord (talk) 23:05, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Jonesrecord, you can ask at WP:REFUND, if you would like to retrieve an article that's been deleted. Regards. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 23:10, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Jonesrecord (talk) 23:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Jonesrecord. I'm sorry you're suffering because other people misunderstand what Wikipedia is, but Wikipedia is not going to change its policies to suit you.

I can't look at the deleted article, as I am not an admin, but I'm sure that what happened was that the article about you was deleted not because you edited it, but because when you edited it somebody noticed that it did not meet Wikipedia's policies: almost certainly because there was not enough reliably published, independent material about you for you to meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

If a significant amount of independent material about you has been published since then, it is possible that you now meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and an article can be written - preferably not by you.

Note, though, that Midori's offer to you is to retrieve the content of the deleted article for your use, not to reinstate it as a Wikipedia article. It is extremely unlikely that much in it can be used in that way even if you are now notable by Wikipedia's standards: an article should be based almost 100% on what the independent reliable sources say, and if those sources didn't exist previously it seems unlikely that the former content will be of any relevance. ColinFine (talk) 23:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Jonesrecord, the article John Jones (record producer) was a list of assertions, among which just one (that Thank You "was voted #1 of the 50 Worst Albums Ever! by Q magazine in 2006") came with a reference. So the reader had no reason to trust the accuracy of well over ninety percent of what was written. Every assertion must be verifiable, of course in reliable, published sources. -- Hoary (talk) 23:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Jonesrecord Unlike ColinFine, my administrator rights allow me to look at the deleted article (John Jones (record producer)). It was deleted back in 2018 under a process called WP:PROD (follow that link to undertand how it worked.) The grounds for deletion were stated as "Not notable"

The problem, I think, was that the page was a very detailed article about you, but contained not one single useful reference to support anything in it, including the Grammy Award the page states you won. (You would need to have been named specifically as the Grammy Winner, not simply be associated with the production of a Grammy-winning record, I feel) The one and only citation was to one trivial statement (this one). Hardly a ringing endorsement that would have allowed anyone to VERIFY the statements made about you - or which you added yourself.

So, I'm not surprised it got deleted, though, to be honest, a bit of WP:BEFORE by the person proposing its deletion might have permitted the page to be improved.

Now, our Notability Criteria for musicians and musical artists can be found at WP:NMUSIC, and for living people in general at WP:NBIO. Please read them carefully and find some properly published sources by reliable organisations that you can use to prove you meet the relevant criteria for having a page about you here. By 'prove', I do not mean links to your own website or IMdB entries - anyone can write anything in those, and Wikipedia ignores them. But NME-type magazine and high quality newspapers and non self-published books are seen as Reliable Sources. If you go to WP:REFUND (suggested above), you'll see that undeletion is permitted for certain deletions made by the WP:PROD process. If you can demonstrate some detailed books or articles that have written about you, that would be perfect. Three would suffice to meet WP:NBIO.

However, if 'refunded' that article should not go back into mainspace as it is (the main encyclopaedia part of Wikipedia) but made into a DRAFT which you could then work on to insert the appropriate WP:INLINE CITATION after every single factual statement made (and delete all unverifiable information, noting that your own website is not deemed useable for this purpose). Having done that, the Draft could be submitted to the Articles for Creation process for review by others, and accepted or declined, per our rules.

Being the subject of the article, you have a clear Conflict of Interest, and should declare that on your Userpage (which you have never done, right since you started adding to that page between 2013 and 2018). I see from your talk page that you were warned about the need to declare your WP:COI back in 2017, but you failed to do so.

The article was also flagged up at this Conflict of Interest Noticeboard, too. The failure to address any of these issues probably led to the page's deletion. So here you are five years later, now seeking its reinstatement.

If that were to happen, once submitted as a draft with appropriate referencing and approved at Articles for Creation you should then cease editing that page. It is not 'your page'; instead you should submit suggestions for improvement on the article's talk page as an WP:EDITREQUEST.

TL;DR : Prove to use that you meet WP:NMUSIC by personally winning a Grammy (I'm honestly not sure if this would suffice), or that you meet WP:NBIO by showing us three good articles written about you, your life and achievements in mainstream media outlets. Unfortunately, many 'backroom people' don't get the coverage that Wikipedia requires to demonstrate notability. Simply working alongside many famous musicians isn't, in itself, sufficient. As someone who knows virtually nothing about music or the music industry, I hope these comments don't come over as rude or insulting. But it's now down to you to decide if you can prove the things I've tried to explain. Nick Moyes (talk) 01:08, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes There may be some useful stuff out there:[7][8][9] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

File deletion process

Hello, I'm trying to get a file deleted. I tried reading through Wikipedia:Deletion_process and Wikipedia:Proposed_deletion. Unfortunately, the latter page says the process only applies to files that are not on Commons. If I'm seeing this correctly, the file in question does exist on Commons? Any guidance is appreciated. Kimen8 (talk) 01:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi Kimen8. Files uploaded to Commons needs to be deleted from Commons in accordance with c:COM:D. If the file meets one of the conditions listed at c:COM:CSD, you can tag it for speedy deletion. Otherwise, you will need to nominate the file for deletion per c:COM:DR. For reference, there's a difference in meaning between "deleting a file" and "removing a file". If all you want to do is to remove a file from a Wikipedia page, you can do so by simply removing the file's syntax from the page much in the same way you would remove text content from a page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:47, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Regarding deleting versus removing: In this case I think I do want it deleted. I removed it from the only article it appeared on in a recent edit. Moreover, it's a blurry picture of a table, and so is just worse than a table in html/wiki markup in every way. Even worse, being an image, the typographical issues in it can't be fixed (lack of closing paren, missing + on a +/-).

I'll check out the process over at Commons. Thanks for the pointers. Kimen8 (talk) 01:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Kimen8: nominated for deletion as out of c:COM:Scope for being a text-only image: commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Pharm table mitragyninine.png. MKFI (talk) 12:02, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Kimen8 (talk) 12:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

draft apporving

there's a article draft I did called Del Shannon sings Hank Williams and it's waiting to be apporve? thanks Samchristie05 (talk) 02:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Samchristie05: Yes, it has been submitted for review. As the banner at the top of the page notes, it might take a while to be reviewed as there are a large number of drafts also waiting to be reviewed. You can feel free to keep working on it in the meantime. Tollens (talk) 02:35, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Samchristie05 Your draft has been reviewed and declined five times since 14 October. As such, you have already had more than a fair share of reviewers' time. Recently you have added material which another editor believes were copyright violations. Please work to bring the draft to its best possible state while it awaits re-review. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

What’s the point of mentors if there’s the Teahouse?

And is there any privacy danger in telling others who your mentor is? Is it based on IP address or something? Shadestar474 ^(talk) 22:13, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Not really Cwater1 (talk) 22:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for answering so quickly, @Cwater1! Shadestar474 ^(talk) 22:17, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

But I still want to know what the point of mentors is if there’s the Teahouse. Is it because you’re supposed to ask your mentor certain questions, and the Teahouse others? Shadestar474 ^(talk) 22:24, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

The point is just to provide many avenues of help. Some people might find it better to have a specific person to ask questions to, and others might like using the Teahouse more. Galobtter (talk) 22:28, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! Shadestar474 ^(talk) 22:29, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474 I've been a mentor since the scheme started and find that the questions I get asked via my Talk Page are often of the sort that new users might feel embarrassed to ask in such a public forum as the Teahouse. Also, Teahouse threads get archived very quickly whereas personal Talk Pages stay put for much longer (useful for follow-up questions). I often advise those who do contact me to use the Teahouse when they need faster answers or wider opinions. Incidentally, many of those who are assigned to me as mentor never contact me at all. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Complete Draft from Translation

With the help from this Teahouse I was Able to complete some translations from german into the English Wikipedia. Now I have made a new translation and need feedback and help with the clean-up (second opinion )before I move the draft-article into the normal article space.

I think here is a possible place to ask for support in publishing translations and I would be happy if someone joins me but I would also appreciate recommendations on where I could better ask for support in publishing translations. Aberlin2 (talk) 10:46, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Aberlin2 I've moved the section on weblinks to be "External links", at the end, to conform with our WP:MOS. If you add Wikipedia Projects to the Talk Page of the article, the same as for similar other biographies, that might attract other interested editors. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Aberlin2: I've tagged this article for notability, as the sources don't seem enough to satisfy the WP:GNG guideline, and the person doesn't come in any obvious way under the various special guidelines, either. If you can add better sources, please do so, and if you'd like this in the meantime to be moved to drafts, that would probably be a good idea to save it from being deleted.

This is quite a common problem, and one you need to be aware of if you're planning to translate more articles. The English-language Wikipedia has higher requirements for notability and referencing than the others (that I'm aware of, at least), which means that although an article has been accepted into another language version, it may not be accepted here. That's why whenever I'm thinking of translating something, the first thing I do is check whether the sources in the original are sufficient, and if not, whether I can find more by searching. If not, then I won't even bother, as it would probably be a waste of time. (Of course, some subjects such as elected national-level politicians are inherently notable, but they are very much the exception.) HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:32, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Is there any truth to rumor Elon Musk wants to buy Wikipedia and shut it down?

He also wants to change the name to something I can't say.166.82.105.36 (talk) 16:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm sure he was speaking hypothetically combined with his own views on Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 16:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation is a charitable foundation, so there is nothing to buy. See User talk:Jimbo Wales#Elon Musk if anyone wishes to read more. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Verification and assessment of sources/citations

Hello all,

I am drafting an article about an actress: Sandra Mae Frank. On the talk page of this draft, I entered a table where I analyzed the criteria for the useability/reliability of the sources that I cited in the draft. My questions to you:

1. Did I understand the criteria correctly?
2. Could you please check one or two samples if I applied the criteria correctly?
3. What next steps are necessary to bring this draft to the level of it being ready to submit/publish?

Best regards Bernhard.rulla (talk) 09:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft talk:Sandra Mae Frank Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 10:13, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla I've never seen an Editor go to such lengths to analyse all the sources in a draft. I commend you for that, it certainly will make the reviewer's job easier. My issue is that most of the sources where Sandra is mentioned are WP:TRIVIALMENTIONS. However, when reviewing I have to consider if there is a 50% chance that the article will pass an Articles for Deletion discussion. I think it's really borderline! I would love to see one or two more sources that are very specifically devoted to Sandra, but not interviews. I think that would put it over the line.

You also have a bunch of [citation needed] tags on the article- which either need removing if you've already sourced them, or sourcing, or the unsourced text being deleted.

Ping me if you feel you can do those, and I'll take another look. Qcne (talk) 11:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla I think that Franks winning the Helen Hayes Award will take her over the line to notability. I don't like the expression Frank was awarded with the Helen Hayes Award but that's a minor point. A bit more tidying up and you'll be there.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:08, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks for your feedback! I removed the "with", now it is "Frank was awarded the Helen Hayes Award". As I am no native speaker of the English language, I need and appreciate such feedback! I would like to have a first version of the article to be submitted that then can be continuously improved for better wordings and expressions. Of course, I do my best to have it right in the first place. Bernhard.rulla (talk) 16:23, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla Actually, it was the repeated "award" I didn't like. I have now reworded that part, since the citation says the Award went to the ensemble, not Frank specifically, Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull When you call the citation and scroll down (or search for "Frank" with ctrl+f), you will find that the award was given to Frank and Michael Baron as "Outstanding Direction in a Musical Hayes", the two being co-directors. So I think it would be wrong to say the award was given to the ensemble in general. What do you think? Bernhard.rulla (talk) 16:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, I missed that! I've tweaked the sentence. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:12, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne Hello and thanks for the feedback! This is my first article and I am looking for that borderline, wanting to get better with crossing it. When I look at the table of citations (thanks for the positive feedback, it brought me quite some insights into what Wikipedia is requiring), I have eight citations of sources exclusively about SMF, eight "mentioning her" and three where she is listed, e.g. as member of a theatre's team. I used the last group as a proof for what is stated in the text (she is member of Deaf Austin Theatre, because the theatre states so on its homepage). The article that you mention states: "(...) Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention but it need not be the main topic of the source material. (...)"

Anyway, I will make an effort to replace the simple mentions with more detailed reports. If I can't find such, should the topic be removed altogether? Of course, the same applies to the statements that do not yet have citations? Bernhard.rulla (talk) 16:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Qcne The correct numbers are eight citations of sources exclusively about SMF, eleven "mentioning her" and three where she is listed. Bernhard.rulla (talk) 16:56, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

trying to add an article to my file but cannot follow instructions provided in "Illustrating Wikipedia."

Adding an article Vkworth (talk) 15:11, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't see in your edit history where you have attempted to draft an article. Did you use the article wizard? New accounts cannot directly create articles.

Images are secondary to the draft approval process, which only considers the text and sources. I wouldn't worry about images until your draft is accepted and placed in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 15:14, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I want to add a link to another wikipedia page to my page.

thank you for your help. Vkworth (talk) 15:31, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Okay. You place the title of the target article or page in double brackets; [[Joe Biden]] makes Joe Biden. [[Wikipedia:Help Desk]] makes Wikipedia:Help Desk. 331dot (talk) 15:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

thank you. I will try that. Vkworth (talk) 15:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I have another question, if you don't mind.

I tried to add a picture that I found on wikipedia but it didn't appear.

thank you. Vkworth (talk) 15:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

where do you place it? Vkworth (talk) 15:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Vkworth Please see Help:Pictures for very full instructions. The image files come from the sister Project Wikimedia Commons which also has extensive Help pages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

thank you. Vkworth (talk) 20:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Column issue

Can someone help and teach me how the parameters to use if you create a new column with more or less headings/titles than the initial column on the same table? i.e on this article.Jõsé ^hola 21:11, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

New Articles for creation Not Accepted / How to move Draft Article to Live?

Hello, I have been trying to add a new article which is about coming movie in Tamil from India. its still in review Draft version not moved to live space could you some one help me to get this up. i don't know what i did wrong added all the information about the particular move. Please someone help me. Ranjith20602 (talk) 16:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

You have resubmitted it for review and it is pending. Note that upcoming films rarely merit articles, see the notability guidelines, unless something is very unusual about the production of the film itself. 331dot (talk) 17:03, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response @331dot Even i have added most of the Principle Photograph Press release event photos, movie's banner as well. Dubbing stills as well. Ranjith20602 (talk) 17:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Every major film has press events and releases posters or banners before it is released. Those don't confer notability as Wikipedia defines it. There needs to be something very unusual about the production; see Rust (upcoming film) for an example of this(on that film someone was shot). Typically a film does not merit an article until reviews by professional reviewers are published. 331dot (talk) 17:14, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback and Guidance @331dot.

yes actually i'm one of the person in Production Team. Its not for the promotional or marketing purpose. just wants to add our movie as well in the movies list in wikipedia.

so where we needs to look for the professional reviewers. Ranjith20602 (talk) 17:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

You must immediately make a formal paid editing disclosure, a Terms of Use requirement, and you should also read conflict of interest.

I am unfamiliar with reviewers of Indian films or how they are published there, but where I live movie reviews are published in newspapers and other forms of media. 331dot (talk) 17:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Do you have an association with the production of this film? 331dot (talk) 17:16, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Why have you added those, Ranjith20602? They make the draft look even more like a piece of blatant promotion than it did before.

They will not assist in any way in getting the draft accepted: only solid sources which meet the strict criteria in golden rule will do that, and as 331dot pointed out, it is very very very unlikely that such sources exist for a film not yet released.

What you could do while waiting for review, rather than prettying it up with irrelevant pictures, is to remove some of the peacock language: words like "gripping" and "enchanting" and "renowned do not belong in any Wikipedia article, unless in direct quotations from sources independent of the subject. ColinFine (talk) 17:17, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine I thought of adding the related images but as per your previous message i understood that adding images will leads to promotional activity which will not accepted by wikipedia Ranjith20602 (talk) 17:39, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ranjith, I'm afraid your protestations of "I'm not here for promotion" ring completely hollow. Everything you have done to that draft, from creating it in the first place onward, has been promotional. What you are doing is telling readers what the producers want people to know. Do that on your own website, or social media. Wikipedia is not the slightest bit interested in what the producers want people to know. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the producers have published about the film (which is why the article is probably not yet possible). ColinFine (talk) 22:34, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Help me

I have accidentally moved Talk:Scanf, can someone undo it? Thanks. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 22:50, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping: done. Edward-Woodrow • talk 22:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much. I was trying to move the article. Maybe I'll try to make an RM about it later when I have time. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 22:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

In case you don't now, when you move an article, the talk page is usually moved as well – for example, if I move foo1 to foo2, then Talk:Foo1 automatically gets moved to Talk:Foo2. Unless there's some kind of special technical issue, at which point its best to back away slowly and go for help at WP:RM/TR Edward-Woodrow • talk 22:57, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia didn't publish what they promised

Hi

I payed in order to have my news published by wikipedia. For the moment they published some articles about me, but I am not in Wikipedia. I hope I was able to make me understood. What have I to do? Some suggestions? They sent me the Wikipedia draft, it was ok, but it is not published.

Sincerely. Daniela Asaro 62.19.206.134 (talk) 21:42, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

It sounds like you fell victim to a scam. Can you tell me who you paid money to? NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 21:49, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that's a scam. Polar Apposite (talk) 22:10, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

You seem to have contacted a company that offers undisclosed paid editing services. This goes against Wikipedia's Terms of Use, so they are unlikely to succeed. They will be blocked when discovered, and the content they add will be removed. That is assuming they deliver the service at all, since many of these companies are scams. MarioGom (talk) 22:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Additional information can be found at Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning. Cullen328 (talk) 23:05, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I have a one question

Can I publish someone's draft into mainspace without asking, or simply click on review drafts of someone else? Is it sanctionable? Is there any policy regarding it? 103.241.226.144 (talk) 15:25, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

please please please do not do that. ltbdl (talk) 15:52, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I successfully did it, with Draft:@hotel, though in that case the article was started by a paid editor. Mach61 (talk) 01:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP editor: I agree 100% with the above. It's not acceptable behaviour. If you feel a draft someone is working on now merits full publication, just drop by the editor's talk page and say how impressed you are, and ask them if and when they plan to move it into mainspace, or if they'd like any help with the draft. Of course, if it's a stale draft, and the editor who worked on it is no longer active on Wikipedia, that might be a different situation, as drafts are liable for deletion after 6 months of complete inactivity. The problem you could cause by taking a draft someone was working on and putting it directly into mainspace is that you render a poor quality article liable for immediate speedy deletion (or an WP:AFD discussion) if it wasn't ready. That would not have happened if the draft was submitted for review via our Articles for Creation process.

I once had a draft article taken from my sandbox and published by someone else. Even though there's no hard rule saying you can't (because we are all releasing our work under a Creative Commons licence, it's such incredibly bad form that if I saw it happening I'd consider warning and then taking sanctions against that user if they persisted.

So, please please please do not do that! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:27, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

I have another question. The IP's question is framed as though the IP and the author of the draft are completely independent of each other. But might there be a WP:SOCK possibility here? (Or am I being too cynical in considering that?) Feline Hymnic (talk) 17:33, 28 October 2023 (UTC)

Nick has this answer down 100%. Ask the author. Offer to collaborate. Wikipedia is meant to be a community. But if the author is long gone, just send a good faith message and wait a reasonable period. They probably won't care what you do.

Feline Hymnic raises an interesting issue. The question is what harm would it do. If someone submits an article while logged out, does that manipulate Wikipedia in any way? Would being submitted by what looks like a different person from the drafter make any difference on whether the article stays or goes or what its content would be? Do we have any cases of any non-sock editors who submitted an article based on someone else's draft and then that had a specific effect that a socker might want to replicate? (Pretending to be two people in a deletion discussion could affect whether an article is deleted, but would that happen here?) Darkfrog24 (talk) 19:49, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

To weigh in on this discussion: I have seen editors actually delete entire articles from other editor's sandboxs because they deemed it unworthy of publication at WP. I view my own sandbox as my own. Period. I cannot fathom going into another editor's sandbox as they are still in progress of creating an article and edit their work, let alone publish. I view my sandbox as a place where I work on my own submissions. Who is to say when something is ready for publishing or not except the editor working on their own article? Is there a template here at WP that one can place as a header that states something to the effect: Work in progress. Please do not publish, delete or edit? Maineartists (talk) 20:18, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Yes, there were some problems on the English Wikinews when a reviewer arbitrarily deleted drafts out of another user's userspace. So long as no one uses a draft to call dibs, but I know of no cases on the English Wikipedia where that has happened. Darkfrog24 (talk) 12:26, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Template index/Maintenance. Fermiboson (talk) 00:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Adding Sections to Articles

I asked this question before but it got deleted for some reason.

I want to add a section about live events to the Tree Fu Tom Wikipedia page, but I don't know how. I would look here, but as I said, my question on that got deleted. I won't ask anyone to answer again in case it gets deleted again, but can someone please add a tutorial on how to add sections on that tutorial on how to use Wikipedia? Triviatronic9000 (talk) 02:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Triviatronic9000. Please read Help:Section. I use the source editor, which makes it very easy to create a section. In the edit window, on a new line, you type two equal signs, then the new section mame, then two more equal signs. The wikicode code looks like this:

==New section==

It is that easy. Cullen328 (talk) 02:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Where do I go to get editing restrictions lifted?

For about six months I have been placed under editing restrictions from ANI which I'd describe as unbearable. I have respected such restrictions, but they both make contributing to wikipedia a living Hell for me, and I believe undermine my ability to meaningfully contribute.

I would like to be able to make my case somewhere for a reduction in restrictions, so I can meaningfully contribute in the future. Where would I do this? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 00:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I will note that there is currently another ANI discussion going on about me right now, but I feel it is mostly over and has gone in my favor. There are restrictions I think will be put on me but I respect them and see them as much more reasonable than my earlier restrictions. I will not attempt any kind of appeal until the issue is over. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 00:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Immanuelle, I suggest that you ask the administrator who imposed the editing restriction for guidance for how to appeal it. Cullen328 (talk) 00:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I guess the key thing to say about it is that I didn't really understand how the community worked when the initial restrictions were put in place, and the incentive to not have such restrictions put in place again would do more to encourage the desired behavior than any restrictions would stop such behavior. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 00:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle Would you kindly provide links to those discussions and restrictions if you want advice from us here. Your talk page is a morass of innumerable article 'concerns', so it's hard for us to discern what's been going on. I agree with @Cullen328's comment above. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Here is the current discussion which I expect to result in me not being able to make drafts over a 20 draft count. It occurred as a result of me having way too many drafts

This Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1122#Need Japanese-speaking and maybe admin help is the earlier point where I got the restrictions.

Among other things I was banned from making articles not through AFC, which is the reason for the extremely large amount of drafts. It also restricted my ability to use machine translation or ai writing tools. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 00:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Immanuelle The Teahouse is absolutely NOT the place for you to be airing these grievances. I have skimmed through the ANI discussion you linked to, and can appreciate that whatever has driven you to automate the creation of a vast number of relatively trivial draft articles is neither good for your own mental health and welfare, nor for this Project. If you are so 'driven' that you find the restrictions placed upon you "unbearable", then I earnestly advise you to walk away from Wikipedia and find alternative outlets for your creativity and your interests. I can see that you genuinely want to create innumerable drafts about innumerable hypothetically notable (yet seemingly trivial) topics, but this approach is simply not at all helpful to the volunteer Wikipedia community, nor, dare I suggest it, to your own wellbeing.

I am really concerned by this comment of yours: "I am making a lot of drafts because I figure since I can only make articles with AFC, it's best to have a draft on everything I conceivably might want to make an article on and whenever I learn something new on the topic add to the article so I can eventually put it through AFC and hopefully get an article on it. This, my friend, smacks of, obsession and I fear that we, here, are interpreting it as WP:DISRUPTIVE editing now.

Any follow-up comments should be made -as has been suggested - either at the ANI discussion thread of a few days ago, or directly to the administrator who placed those restrictions on you. I'm really sorry I can't offer an alternative solution for the problems you have created for yourself. Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 01:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) Hi Immanuelle. Probably the best place to start would be the administrator who imposed the restrictions since that person is probably in the best position to assess whether the restrictions are still needed. The ANI discussion can be found at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/IncidentArchive1122#Need Japanese-speaking and maybe admin help and the closing administrator was Galobtter. As for I have respected such restrictions, but they both make contributing to wikipedia a living Hell for me, and I believe undermine my ability to meaningfully contribute., there are lots of ways to meaningfully contribute to Wikipedia that do not involve any of the things discussed in that ANI discussion. You're unlikely going to find any sympathy from administrators if your intent is to essentially go back to do what you did before. One of the problems others had with you was that you seemed to be creating lots of questionable drafts and then moving them to the mainspace yourself. Just from looking at all of the notifications related to drafts on your user talk page, it still seems as if you're still creating too many questionable drafts. Wikipedia doesn't really need stand-alone articles about individual kanji characters per WP:NOTDICTIONARY, and most likely many such "articles" for such characters already exist on Wikitionary. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly ideally what I'd want would be as such

• Firstly the 20 draft restriction that I think will happen stays in place
• I am not allowed to move any articles made before the restrictions were lifted to mainspace
• *This means I must use AFC for in practice at least several more months
• *Because I will not get to under 20 drafts for a very long time
• *This means I am not able to mass move drafts into mainspace
• *I cannot move draftified articles into mainspace
• *Draftified articles contribute to my 20 draft cap. So I am forced to either improve draftified articles or delete them
• *I must create an article in draftspace and then move it into mainspace myself rather than making one directly in mainspace. This addresses the issue I had earlier of being rather rushed with my articles, This means it contributes to my draft count as well, so if I have 20 active drafts I cannot make new articles.
• I am allowed to freely use ai or machine translation but must declare it. If I am found to be introducing inaccurate statement or similar for with it then I will face consequences

Simply put as I am so invested in not having these restrictions put on me again, I believe this will in practice serve as a very great incentive for good behavior on my part. I never ever want to return to AFC Hell.

There are many parts of my thought process that didn't really get covered in that since I didn't know what ANI was, which I think are important too, such as the rushing aspect. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 01:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Since I'm not an administrator, I couldn't remove your restrictions even if I wanted to; however, after reading the above, I'm not sure I would even if I could. The fact that you describe AFC as "hell", still seem to want to use AI and WP:MACHINETRANSLATION when you create drafts, and also seem to be fixated on some kind of "draft cap" is probably not going to convince many administrators that you yourself are able to reliably assess what is a viable draft that has the potential to someday become an article. How many drafts have you submitted for AFC review since restrictions were placed on your editing? How many of these were approved by AFC reviewers? You state you have twenty active drafts you're currently working on. How many of these are ready to be submitted to AFC for review? Restrictions were placed on your editing because the community felt you did have the competence to do certain things. In order to get those restrictions lifted, you're going to need to prove to the community that you now capable of doing such things. The restrictions aren't going to be lifted based on your promise to not do such things from hereon; they're only going to be lifted based on what you've been doing since they've been put into place. If you're able to establish a track record successful AFC submissions, then that would be one way of showing the community that restrictions might no longer be needed. Anyway, this type of discussion has moved beyond the scope of the Teahouse. Galobtter has invited you to continue the discussion on their user talk page, and that's probably what you should do. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

(Btw, small point, even I as the imposing admin cannot remove this restriction, since it derives from community consensus, so only the community or ArbCom can remove this restriction) Galobtter (talk) 01:34, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that is correct. I should've made that clearer in my post. Thanks for clarifying. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly I have thoughts about this but as you said it is not appropriate to discuss it here. So do you want to talk about it on my or your talk page instead? Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 02:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Whatever your thoughts are on this, the best thing to do would to continue discussing things on Galobtter's user talk page, or follow their suggestion as start a discussion at WP:AN per WP:BANAPPEAL. There's nothing about these restrictions that can be resolved by starting a new discussion on my user talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:04, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't really see what's in the restrictions that could be so unbearable (I could see having all your articles go through AfC be somewhat annoying though). What Marchjuly says is right. Galobtter (talk) 00:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I would not recommended appealing your restriction right after getting more restrictions. People generally want to see 6 months of problem free behaviour before restrictions are lifted. Galobtter (talk) 00:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Galobtter I think there might be an exception over the fact that the issues I had were directly a consequence of the editing restrictions put on me. I really hope there is at least because honestly I don't think I could bear 6 more months of these restrictions, and also my idea for how restrictions would be lifted links pretty strongly with it. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (talk to the cutest Wikipedian) 01:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I don't see how the editing restrictions forced you to create 4000 drafts. Yes it forces you to create drafts if you want to create articles, but not so many. The fact that you continue to favor speed over quality is not going to give people faith that you can be trusted with ai/machine translation. Anyways I don't think the teahouse is good place to have this discussion (my talk page might be better). Galobtter (talk) 01:19, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

My Wikipedia sandbox draft Deletion

My Wikipedia draft has recently been deleted by a wikipedia editor, how do I bring it back? Where can I see it again to make edits. G.O Memo (talk) 02:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, G.O Memo, and welcome to the Teahouse! It appears your draft was not deleted, but rather moved to Draft:International communication. It seems you may have accidentally moved your draft to User:International communication rather than some other location; a page by that title would be reserved for the userpage of an editor with the username "International communication". Tollens (talk) 02:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

how do I acess it? G.O Memo (talk) 03:10, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You can click the link I provided to Draft:International communication above (or that one). Tollens (talk) 03:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

AIV/Vandalism reporting question

Question: Is there a way to quickly report a vandal? Like a system that will automatically post a report on WP:AIV? Professor Penguino (talk) 03:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Professor Penguino: You might be interested in Twinkle, which can do that and a bunch of other helpful things. Tollens (talk) 03:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thanks! Professor Penguino (talk) 03:17, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh, apparently it was already enabled. Where is the option to make a quick report to AIV? Professor Penguino (talk) 03:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

If you are on a userpage, user talk page, or user contributions page, there should be a dropdown labelled "TW" near the edit/view history/etc buttons – within that dropdown you can select "ARV" to report that user, and the default report type should be vandalism. Tollens (talk) 03:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Huh. I don't see the ARV button, although I can use the TW button. Odd... Thanks for the help though! I'm going to try and fix it. Professor Penguino (talk) 03:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Found it! Something was wrong with my settings. Thanks again for the help! Professor Penguino (talk) 03:38, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

How do I put a green tick on a talk page, to show the issue has been resolved?

I can't find a tool for it! Nielshutch (talk) 03:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Nielshutch: There are a couple templates you might be thinking of: {{done}} produces  Done, {{Resolved mark}} produces  Resolved, or if you place {{resolved}} at the top of the section it will produce

Resolved

I have found Template:Done/See also to be a helpful resource. Tollens (talk) 03:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Tollens: thanks for that. I found another {{Yes check}} that does the trick. too. (In another first, I just pinged you – copy-paste is a wonderful thing!)

Resolved

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Nielshutch (talk • contribs) 04:59, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

3D models in infoboxes

Hi, folks. Not exactly sure if this is the right place, but any thoughts on adding 3D models to infoboxes where available, such as Statue of Liberty, The Thinker, and so on? I'd say that it would be a good action, as most typically plain images are used as the main image in infoboxes, but models can also contribute greatly to one's understanding of such a subject. However, it has been argued by User:Randy Kryn that this is intrudes upon the rest of the page, particularly on articles with large infoboxes. I can also see the reasoning for this.

Given the number of articles which would involve such a thing, but the fact that this isn't quite at a RfC level nor a WP:DR type of dispute, I figured that this would be the best place to discuss it. Please let me know where else to go if this is the wrong place. Thanks!

Mupper-san (talk) 02:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Mupper-san I think you might have more luck if you have this conversation at the village pump. You're more likely to get input from a range of editors than here at the Teahouse. Tomorrow and tomorrow (talk) 05:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I've placed it village pump now.

Mupper-san (talk) 05:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Palmer Report

Palmer Report is not “fake news” it has been shown to tell the truth consistently.It is terrible to say that and lock anyone’s ability to set the story straight. Also, the expression “fake news” is used to describe any news that might be unfavorable to Trump. Trump’s involvement with Russia has been well documented and not for someone to call it a conspiracy theory. Wikipedia has lost all credibility with this. Why is editing locked? Please answer this question. Nutmeg6542 (talk) 01:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Nutmeg6542: Your disagreement with the characterization "fake news" is better suited to the talk page of the article, though it should be noted that Wikipedia only summarizes what other sources have already said. If a majority of reliable sources call it "fake news" (and it appears based on the sourcing provided in the article that this is the case), that's the term used in the article regardless of my, your, or any other editor's personal opinion. To clarify, the current protection level does not prevent editing by everyone, just by users who have made less than 10 edits and/or held an account for less than four days. Over 2 million people are able to edit that article. The protection is in place per the contentious topics policy, which allows for the protection of pages in topic areas attracting persistent disruption – this includes any article related to post-1992 politics of the United States and closely related people. Tollens (talk) 01:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Nutmeg6542, the article Palmer Report explains, in great detail, the widely reported accuracy problems with this blog. The article is semi-protected because of years of disruptive editing by unregistered and very new accounts. If you have access to reliable, independent sources that refute the current content, provide links at Talk: Palmer Report. Cullen328 (talk) 01:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

"Also, the expression “fake news” is used to describe any news that might be unfavorable to Trump." With all due respect: no, it is not. Wikipedia comes from a neutral point-of-view. If reliable sources say the Palmer Report has spread fake news, then that's what the article will say. If you have reliable sources which you think dispute the current information represented in the article, you can go to its talk page. Professor Penguino (talk) 01:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

The information is sourced from Snopes, The Atlantic, HuffPost, and The New Republic. This isn't coming from sites biased towards Donald Trump. Professor Penguino (talk) 01:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Not to mention [10]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, it’s a very well sourced claim. Professor Penguino (talk) 07:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Reviewing former featured articles

Hello! I have seen that the article named Bangladesh used to be a featured article. Can I see the page where the discussion of removing its featured status took place? And what should be done to regain its featured status? Thanks in advance. --Ifteebd10 (talk) 10:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ifteebd10: These links are typically present on the article's talk page in one of the (admittedly numerous) banners – the relevant ones are its demotion from FA, and its two subsequent Good Article nominations which did not result in the article being listed (located here and here). You can additionally find links to the revision of the article when those discussions took place in the banner on the talk page. Tollens (talk) 10:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Working on Vital articles list

Hi, I have been working on this list at Wikipedia:Vital_articles/Level/5/History. I have combined several sections together in the Late modern and Contemporary sections. After combing the sections, which formerly said 19th, 20th, and 21st centuries, I am trying to sort through the events in the Contemporary section so that events prior to 1945 go in Late modern and events after 1945 go in Contemporary. However, the process is very time consuming sorting through ~500 articles. I would like to know some ways that I can speed the process up. Could AutoWikiBrowser be of some help? If so, how? What about the use of AI tools like ChatGPT and some other tool? I tried putting in a few prompts into it and it isn't very accurate at all. What would be your recommendation of speeding this process up so that I can easily get it done. Interstellarity (talk) 20:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: Welcome to the Teahouse! ChatGPT3.5 had its "last knowledge update in January 2022", which leads me to think that it can't read the current articles. You could try loading a list of the articles into AWB to sort the articles by looking at the categories (e.g. skip everything that contains \[\[Category\:(19(4[6-9]|[5-9]\d)|20[0-2]\d) to get a list for things that might belong in Late modern). Good luck! GoingBatty (talk) 20:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Hi @GoingBatty and thank you for getting back to me. I haven't used AWB in quite some time. To ease me into it, I am hoping that you could provide step-by-step instructions on how I can accomplish this task. Interstellarity (talk) 21:31, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: Step 1 is creating the list of articles. Can you share the list with me? GoingBatty (talk) 01:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Right here. Interstellarity (talk) 11:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Vandalism

Hello, I am QuadriSyedSahab with my alternate account, i just saw that User:Irfanarimbra786 had undone my edits which were supported by citations in Asjad Raza Khan [1] and on Kanthapuram’s article [2], you can see that both claims were had references with it. The user removed stating unreferenced. — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 09:07, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@QuadriOnMobile: You should discuss this with the user who reverted your edit – see WP:BRD. Additionally, I'd note that they never said your edits were unreferenced: their edit summaries were "not a valid source for the title" and "no valid source to asjad raza khan", implying that they simply don't believe the sources you have provided are sufficient, not that you've provided no references. Tollens (talk) 09:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I added citations of The Hindu and Times of India! Isn’t that sufficient? — Syed A. Hussain Quadri (talk) 09:28, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Again, you should take it up with them – nobody here is going to revert their edit on your behalf. Discussion with others in order to reach consensus is the backbone of Wikipedia. Tollens (talk) 09:41, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@QuadriOnMobile You may like to read WP:THEHINDU and WP:TOI and use these in your discussion with the other editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

My AI Content Was Removed - Why?

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Dispute resolution § My AI Content Was Removed - Why?

Hello, I have made a exciting new scientific discovery - the Theory of Artificial Evolution. I posted content to both the "AI Safety" and "Existential Threat of AI" pages on Wiki. Both content edits were pulled within minutes. Why? I have cited works of Alan Turing, Charles Darwin, Plato, Aristotle, Einstein, etc. to back up my scientific assertion. Why was my content pulled? Please inform me so I can understand how your platform works. Otherwise why did you remove this valuable scientific information from your platform? The readers of Wikipedia have a right to know the worst-case scenario threat of AI. Thank you. Dwoodrsg (talk) 17:33, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Dwoodrsg. If you click on the "history" tab for those pages, you can see the "edit summaries", which are the reason why you were reverted. The AI safety edit summary is self-sourced? original research? The Existential risk from artificial general intelligence edit summary is the same. This isn't the best page to discuss the issue. I would recommend one of these pages instead: Talk:AI safety, Talk:Existential risk from artificial general intelligence, WP:TEAHOUSE, or User talk:Willondon. Hope this helps. Happy editing. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

You pulled the same content from that page "Existential risk of AI' at the same time. Why? You are contradicting yourselves. And can you think of anything more important to safeguard against for AI than its evolutionary threat? That also doesn't make sense as an argument. With all due respect sir or ma'am. 2600:4040:2B8D:9900:3429:8247:831F:2FEC (talk) 17:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Wasn't me. I'm just reading the logs for you. –Novem Linguae (talk) 17:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. It cutting edge science that I am publishing to Wikipedia. What makes someone a credible source for posting? I'm not posting an opinion. I have cited the greatest minds in human history and organized their work to documen the Theory of Artificial Evolution. WHich is another page I want to post as original content. Is wikipedia going to yank that content as well? Just because it is the first time in human history that someone has discovered artificial evolution? Seems to be strange given the websites stated mission. There is no knowledge more important than this. Not expressing frustration with you directly, I'm just perplexed by the disqualifcation of me as a credible scientific source out of hand with no reasearch by your organization. Someone should read my book first and then decide whether I'm credible or not. 2600:4040:2B8D:9900:3429:8247:831F:2FEC (talk) 17:52, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Dwoodrsg It doesn't matter who you cite when you attempt to use Wikipedia to publish original research. Please read that link carefully, as this is a Wikipedia policy. You would have to publish your work elsewhere (e.g. in a reliable peer-reviewed journal) and after that the material could be cited here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:33, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ok, so just get pubished in a journal or professional publication and I'm good to go then? 2600:4040:2B8D:9900:3429:8247:831F:2FEC (talk) 18:38, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

That would help- if the journal is peer reviewed and reputable. The main purpose of Wikipedia is to summarize independent reliable sources. If you just want to tell the world about your theory, that's precisely what social media is for. 331dot (talk) 18:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Ideally, even if that happens, you shouldn't be the one to write about it. 331dot (talk) 18:41, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

I'm trying all avenues to get the word out sir. Humanity does not make it easy to share such a huge scientific discovery. I understand your policy and will seek to meet not just the letter, but the spirit of your intent. Thanks for thoroughly answering my questions/concerns. I know you are just trying to protect the public from frauds and misinformation. I have work to do to meet the academic standard you need to feel comfortable to publish my Theory of Evolution. So, I won't bother posting the page for The Theory of Evolution as it seems you will pull that as well since no one in history has EVER docuemnted it before me. It what is is. Thanks! 2600:4040:2B8D:9900:3429:8247:831F:2FEC (talk) 18:44, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Original research or the synthesis of new information from existing sources is unfortunately not permitted on Wikipedia – as a tertiary source Wikipedia's goal is to summarize what existing secondary sources have already said, not to report new findings or hypotheses. Self-published sources (which your book appears to be) are also not considered to be reliable sources. Tollens (talk) 18:37, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Dwoodrsg, you may find the article Technological singularity interesting. Maproom (talk) 08:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes. He is describing the process of artificial evolution. He just doesn’t know he is describing the process of evolution. 2600:4040:2B8D:9900:D42C:9DEC:9C9F:B15A (talk) 11:35, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Dead links to noticeboards

I’m not sure if this issue has been raised before, but a lot of links to discussions in noticeboards end up being dead once the discussion is archived. There is clearly awareness of this as perm links exist, but I’ve been trying and failing to find out how to use them for half an hour (could be just me being bad at searching, of course, but other technical help pages tend to be a lot more accessible. I would appreciate if someone could point me to the relevant page). Moreover, virtually all notification templates don’t use permlinks, which means that anyone other than the immediate involved editors trying to follow a past discussion will be unable to do so. Is there something that could be done about this, such as changing templates to use permlinks when linking to noticeboard discussions, or having the bot that archives discussions also crawl the backend for links to the archived discussion and changing it to permlinks? Fermiboson (talk) 12:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

If part of your question is how to find/make a permanent link to a particular version of a page: use a link from the page history ... click on the time & date column. That'll yield something like https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse&oldid=1182629797 . --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:39, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for that information, but I was more thinking about having a link redirect to the archive link once the discussion is archived. If, for example, I follow a link from a notification template, the state of the page when the notification is made isn’t necessarily useful. Fermiboson (talk) 12:51, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

I agree with you this would be a very nice feature to have. Even better would be if a bot could also alter the entries in Special:contributions so an editor could more easily find where their earlier Talk Page contributions have been archived to. Sadly, I think that the work involved would be excessive compared to the benefits. You could make a request at WP:VPR (I've not checked the archives to see if this has already been suggested). Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:07, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

There are a few user scripts that allow this. I think Convenient Discussions is able to do this if the discussion gets archived and will show it as a toast notification in the upper-right corner. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:15, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

The find-archived-section gadget (Special:Preferences → Gadgets → Browsing) will do the thing it says, which I think might be your main feature request, Fermiboson. When it comes to e.g., finding archived dramaboard discussions when someone just drops in the default {{ANI notice}}, there's not really a user script to help with that. Folly Mox (talk) 04:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I see, thank you. Fermiboson (talk) 08:12, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Fermiboson Reading these links, I see that the find-archived-section gadget was merged into the Convenient Discussions one, so you can use it alone or in combination with the other features the latter offers. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, I have noticed that as well. Fermiboson (talk) 12:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

COI declaration

Is this an acceptable COI declaration? I want to make absolutely sure that I am following due process. Thank you, Fermiboson (talk) 15:22, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely. NotAGenious (talk) 15:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

How do I make a userbox for my user page?

I want to make my user page more sophisticated. AJ Santaella (talk) 15:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

AJ Santaella see Template:Userbox. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:42, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi, unrelated to your query in question, but your userpage appears to contain some links to your youtube channel among other things. This may be considered a promotional user page - see WP:UPNOT. Fermiboson (talk) 16:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay. I'll remove it, thanks for telling me! AJ Santaella (talk) 16:19, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

No problem, happy editing! Fermiboson (talk) 16:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Password Help

I didn't set an email to my account but I don't remember my password is it possible to still send an email to an email address since I know my username?140.228.176.180 (talk) 17:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

IP editor. I'm afraid that is not possible. If you think about it, anyone could claim they had a particular username and hence gain access to the associated password. The best you can do is create a new account and state on its userpage that you once edited under an alternative, specified, account name. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:44, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

When was this a thing

So I got done editing the Ghostface page, then hit my page, then something NEW showed up. it was called "your impact", and showed things like my edit count, how many thanks i've gotten, etc. When was this a thing? Babysharkboss2 was here!! 16:17, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Babysharkboss2 It is a feature of the newcomer homepage, which you can switch off at the foot of Special:Preferences. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

no, i'll keep it on, it's cool, and neat. I was just kinda confused, since there wasn't a notification or anything. Thank's!! Babysharkboss2 was here!! 17:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Multiple sandboxes

I am sorry for asking this question because as an experienced editor I feel I should know already. I often have multiple ideas in my head and start writing multiple articles on chemistry and railways mainly but other subjects too. Over the last 3 years or so I have been using my sandbox to draft articles before putting them in main space. What I would like to do is have a minimum of two sandboxes so I can do science articles in one sandbox and other completely different themed articles in another. Is it possible to do that? User:GRALISTAIR/sandbox - Wikipedia https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:GRALISTAIR/sandbox GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:40, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

GRALISTAIR, of course. Any user subpage is acceptable for use, for sandboxing articles or for any miscellaneous pages. For example, I have User:Sungodtemple/sandbox/Non minor edits just sitting around. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks - I will give it a go GRALISTAIR (talk) 15:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You can have as many user subpages as you like, GRALISTAIR. The only thing that's special about one called "sandbox" is that (in a browser version) there's a shortcut to it under the "person" icon in the top RH corner. ColinFine (talk) 18:13, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Creating a new article

Hi - I recently created a new article for BayCare Clinic. It was denied - but it is fully reference with reputable third party sources. Can anyone help me out? It seems subjective what gets allowed and denied. If there is a key to getting an article approved - that would be useful. I cited around 30 sources for my article. Thanks. BMilinski22 (talk) 14:09, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

BMilinski22 Hello and welcome. I would first ask you to disclose your connection to this clinic, please see the paid editing policy and read conflict of interest. You claimed that you personally created the logo of the clinic and have made it available for anyone to use for any purpose with attribution.

Most of your sources seem to just document the activities of the clinic, and are not significant coverage of the clinic that describes how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Please review the information left by the reviewer, as well as the links therein. 331dot (talk) 14:18, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello BMilinski22. You may want to look for Wikipedia articles on other hospitals and medical facilities. If the articles aren't tagged for having problems look at what is covered, and not covered. I glanced at your draft and see you often state how much everything cost, how much land is owned, and lots of exact details that makes it seem like a report to shareholders or some other document aimed at a specific audience, and not for someone who wants an overview of the BayCare Clinic. I also see that your newspaper article references have the date of the issue, but the page is not given. That may be because you have a stack of newspaper clippings, and the page number wasn't saved, which makes it harder for others to find that article to verify what you write. Is it possible to look at online copies of those articles in order to get the page numbers? (Often those who pay a newspaper subscription fee can have access to back issues.)

It appears to me that you're trying to add every detail you can find, so I really recommend you read numerous other hospital / clinic Wikipedia articles to get a feel for what's considered important. Best wishes on your efforts. Karenthewriter (talk) 18:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Article review (3rd try)

Hi all, I try to write article Draft:Mergin Maps for almost a year now, with now it is like 3rd major rewrite. I am glad I learned a lot about Wikipedia doing it, but getting quite frustrated recently. Can you guys let me know if such article has a change of getting reviewed (let say by relevance of sources and so on) and it is just a problem with my styling/bias (I am part of this open-source project) or by secondary sources strength?

Thanks Peter4987116314 (talk) 08:47, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Peter4987116314: To maybe clarify what the reviewers have said a bit: before a Wikipedia article can be published, what it needs are citations to sources that are both reliable and independent of the subject, and contain significant coverage of the topic. Citations to sites like Lutra Consulting or the Mergin Maps website, while they do contain significant coverage, aren't independent of the subject, because they were published by the company responsible for the product. While I have not looked through every academic paper cited, it appears that while they are independent, they don't contain significant coverage of the product: they only mention it in passing while explaining their methodology. Generally draft reviewers are looking for at least three sources that are simultaneously reliable, independent, and contain significant coverage, and unfortunately it doesn't look like there are any provided. This is quite common with software – it's quite rare for articles to be published by reputable publishers about niche applications like yours. I'm sorry this is certainly not what you're hoping to hear, but without high-quality sources it's very unlikely the article will be accepted. Tollens (talk) 09:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

"it's quite rare for articles to be published by reputable publishers about niche applications like yours" - this is exactly the point. There are dozens of (web blogs, research articles, printed etc) that mention the software as a tools that were used. But because the software is a mostly the mobile app that is used for gathering the geo-data outside, the articles are not in-depth analyses of the software itself.

Still, by nature of the niche software/app, this entry level is very difficult to pass. Peter4987116314 (talk) 10:02, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I completely agree that it's a very high bar for software of this particular sort, but Wikipedia does have its policies for good reason – when the only sources available are written by the company or barely mention the product there's not really anything of good enough quality to write an article from. There's not a whole lot that can be done about that, unfortunately. Tollens (talk) 10:08, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. Just for me to understand. Is this article https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1755-1315/1189/1/012023 let say a good secondary source (let say one of the three reviewer would accept?) Peter4987116314 (talk) 11:05, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I only see one instance of the token "Mergin" when I search the text of that paper – while it would be a good source for the topic of mobile GIS, it wouldn't be considered to contain significant coverage of Mergin Maps because it does not discuss it specifically. (Academic papers are actually primary sources, as a side note.) Tollens (talk) 11:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You are right, it got rejected again... I am giving up, tried maximum, failed hard. Thanks for your insights. Peter4987116314 (talk) 18:32, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Deleted my information

I recently updated information regarding myself and it has been removed?! Please advise 89.242.167.18 (talk) 18:31, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Leam Richardson – dudhhr ^talk_contribs^she_her 18:33, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

My guess is that your updates were not accompanied by any independent published reliable sources. Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, the best thing to do would be to ask at the article's talk page - Talk:Leam Richardson, and invite those who reverted your edits to the conversation. Since this is an article about you, you have a conflict of interest and should not be updating the article yourself. You may post edit requests on the talk page and ask others to make the appropriate edits. GoingBatty (talk) 18:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

What happened to the other counterparts to the Teahouse?

I seem to remember two other counterparts to the Teahouse, where did they go? Did they get turned into the Help Desk and the Reference Desk? Shadestar474 ^(talk) 23:09, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Shadestar474: The Help Desk and Reference Desk predate the Teahouse, which was added later. Do you remember anything more about these other pages you are asking about? RudolfRed (talk) 23:40, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

No, not really, other than one was called something like the beer pub. 98.97.114.79 (talk) 23:43, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Not Wikipedia:Village pump? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:54, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

You're not thinking of the wikt:WT:Beer parlour in Wiktionary? ColinFine (talk) 11:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Maybe! Was there ever a time when the Teahouse had a link to the Beer Parlour and another help forum, to link the WikiProjects together? Shadestar474 ^(talk) 20:21, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I found Wikipedia:New_contributors'_help_page/questions which was discontinued in 2013. RudolfRed (talk) 23:45, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

And also Wikipedia:Editor_assistance/Requests which was also discontinued. RudolfRed (talk) 23:46, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

There's also the Wikipedia:Village pump. Rusty4321 ^{talk contribs} 23:48, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Invisible error messages? Spoooooky.

I'm working on an article (Draft:Mary E. Endress) and I keep getting CS1 formatting errors -- the message is "Script warning: One or more {{cite journal}} templates have errors; messages may be hidden (help)." I've followed the "help" link and added the recommended code to my common CSS page, but I still can't see anything to tell me what those errors are. How do I get Wikipedia to tell me which errors it's detecting?

I've since managed to fix the bug after noticing that the article was in [Category:CS1 errors: missing periodical], but for future reference, I'd still very much appreciate it if someone could help me figure this out. Thank you! -- Photosynthetic430 ❧ 22:59, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Photosynthetic430: Hi there! In this version of the draft, there's a red error in the third reference stating "{{cite journal}}: Cite journal requires |journal=". You fixed it in the next edit. GoingBatty (talk) 01:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You have hidden error messages turned on at User:GoingBatty/vector.css which is why you can see them :) Galobtter (talk) 01:27, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Photosynthetic430 I think you need to include this part:

.mw-parser-output span.cs1-hidden-error {display: inline;} /* display hidden Citation Style 1 error messages */

to see the error message GoingBatty mentions. Galobtter (talk) 01:26, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I already put that in my common.css, and it didn’t work. I’ll try putting it in my vector.css and see what happens. — Photosynthetic430 ❧ 03:36, 1 November 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Photosynthetic430 (talk • contribs)

@Photosynthetic430, do you mind tagging me and letting me know if that worked or not? I think I have the same problem: put the code in one of my css files, cite warnings still hidden. Thanks! Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:43, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

changing a title

Sorry but I'm a total noob. How do I change the title of this page to University of Missouri College of Education and Human Development? I was able to change all the text references. Stladams8 (talk) 20:48, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You have to move the article. See this page TenToe (talk) 20:50, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

OK, thanks! Stladams8 (talk) 20:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) TenToe (talk) 20:55, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Stladams8, you are not yet Autoconfirmed. Try Wikipedia:Requested moves. Cullen328 (talk) 20:56, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh that stinks. Possibly why I'm not seeing the move button. So I should wait 4 days or make a technical request? I'm really not going to be doing a lot of editing. Stladams8 (talk) 20:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I would go ahead and submit a technical request, @Stladams8. This seems uncontrovrsial enough that it should be listed there. Remeber to provide references that support your change NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 21:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Is a press release always disqualified as a reference?

I am trying to get my first article, Draft:Exeger Operations AB, accepted.

One of the references, reference no 15 (https://www.epo.org/en/news-events/press-centre/press-release/2021/451825), is questioned. What is your opinion on the following two things:

(1) It is labeled as a press release, but not sent by the company covered by the draft/article. It does not contain the usual press release content, e.g. promotional text.

(2) One could argue that the text referenced is

• in-depth (not just brief mentions about the subject or routine announcements)
• reliable
• secondary
• strictly independent of the subject

Bottom line - does the reference above qualify as such in an Wikipedia article, or not?

Derekhal22 (talk) 00:06, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Derekhal22. In my opinion, no: although this press release isn't from the company, it is from an organisation that has just given the company an Award, and is about that. As such, it isn't really independent of the subject. It can be used to verify facts, but cannot contribute directly to Notability.

That said, the Award itself is Notable and there is a Wikipedia article about it, and another about its parent organisation, so others may have a different opinion on this. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 00:37, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Derekhal22. A press release should probably be treated as a WP:PRIMARY source with respect to Wikipedia. It can be used in certain contexts and cited in support of simple factual details, but it probably would be considered reliable for any type of contentious claims or interpretations, either about the subject of the press release or any third parties. Moreover, as a primary source, it won't be considered acceptable in establishing a claim of Wikipedia notability. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Ensuring link stability when moving an article

Hi all, I'm looking at moving the article Wright Glider to "Wright Gliders" or "Wright gliders" in order to clarify in the title that the article refers to several aircraft, rather than a single one (c.f. Wright Flyer). As I go about doing this, the move article page does warn that the original article will be replaced by a redirect and that I am responsible for ensuring links don't break. What is the best way of going about this? How can I see all the links that point to this page and check them for function? Finally, will the built in redirect be sufficient for a (relatively) low-linked page, such as this? Thanks for all the help FraughtGYRE (talk) 02:17, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi FraughtGYRE. I think the answers to your questions (at least most of them) for can be found in WP:WLH. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Citations: title transcription, approximate date

When a source has a title totally in upper case or lower case, or some words in upper case and others in lower case, is it OK to capitalize first letters (apart from the normal exceptions) or is WP's style to transcribe the title exactly how it appears?

When the source is a poster/flyer announcing an event the date may be placed in the middle of page for emphasis. Should the transcription mention it in the exact order it appears in the source or is it OK to put it at the end of the event's description?

When a publication date doesn't appear but may be obvious from another source to within a day or two how is that indicated in the citation using VirtualEditor and source editor? Mcljlm (talk) 18:58, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

@Mcljlm For your first question, see MOS:T, especially the section MOS:CT, which suggests that sentence case is normally used. For your second question, I think you can (and probably should) re-order the transcription into what makes sense for our readers. The source is quoted only so they can verify the information. I don't know the answer to your third question! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:43, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

.... although in many cases the year alone would be sufficient, as the rest of the citation should supply enough information for a determined reader to find the actual source. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:47, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reference to the relevant MOS section Mike Turnbull. In the case which prompted my question the source - a webpage (which looks like a flyer) with details of the upcoming event - isn't dated but from a series of social media posts mentioning the upcoming event it's possible to guess the publication date within a day or so.

I'd like to include the probable date but am not sure how to do that with VE or SE. Perhaps someone will tell both of us how to do that. Mcljlm (talk) 18:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

@Mcljlm If you use {{Citation}} or {{cite web}}, which would be the standard way to do this, then you have to stick with the available parameters, either |date= or |year=. If the flyer was for an event in 2023, I think that most people would be happy to use |year=2023 and not worry too much if in fact the flyer had been first published in 2022. As far as I know, there is no way to signal "this is an approximate date", and probably no need to do so. If you were lucky, you could use the Wayback Machine to see when they had first captured the flyer, which would be a possible exact date to use and which could be verified. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:07, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull The event mentioned in the source which prompted my question is the Israeli Supernova festival which ended with the 7 October massacre. The source was archived at the WM but only on 8 October. It's been archived at archive.today but only since the evening of 7 October. Presumably till then it wasn't considered significant enough to archive. An approximate date can be guessed from September Facebook posts. Mcljlm (talk) 15:36, 31 October 2023 (UTC)

Remembering Mike Turnbull there are pages dealing with specific aspects of editing I found https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources and posted my date question there. You may be interested in seeing the replies at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Citing_sources#Approximate_source_date. Mcljlm (talk) 04:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

I changed a word by another one and it got deleted

why did it get deleted Ririlegris (talk) 02:05, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ririlegris: The source cited says southern Israel – it does not say Palestine. Tollens (talk) 02:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Special:Diff/1183080458 Tollens (talk) 02:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ririlegris: According to the message on your talk page, your change is not supported by the source cited in the article. You should discuss your proposed change on the article's talk page, along with sources. RudolfRed (talk) 02:12, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ririlegris: You might have only changed one word, but not all words are created equal and the one you changed is an important word contextually that siginifcantly impacts the meaning of the sentence in question. Assuming that you made this change with the best of intentions and in good faith, you can discuss it on the article's talk page as suggested above. If, on the other hand, you were just looking to stir the pot or were motivated by other things, you probably should drop this, move on and not try and do the same thing again. Edits related to Palistine-Israel issues fall under Wikipedia:Contentious topics/Arab–Israeli conflict and as such tend to be heavily monitored and scrutinized. Even if Stenodactylus petrii doesn't appear to be such a article, the change you tried to make could be perceived as being contentious. So, you should tread lightly here, particularly giving everything that's going on in that particular region at the moment. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:20, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Small error correcting

Hi, there. I would like to know how I would find errors on Wikipedia that are simple fixes. Thanks! Acrsimia (talk) 01:31, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Acrsimia

Hello! If you are fixing a simple error (i.e you want to change a spelling error such as 'arcadde' to 'arcade'), that is called copy editing, and is marked as a minor edit (refer to Wikipedia:Basic copyediting for more information). Press the edit button shaped as a pencil and fix the error. Write a summary, usually just saying 'copy edit' is good. Mark the edit as a minor edit, and then submit it!

To get more info about what is not a minor edit, check Wikipedia:Basic copyediting for info.

Firesword9140 (talk) 01:53, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Acrsimia: To find such typos, just search for them. For example, if you search for "Octber" (with the quotation marks), you'll get these results. GoingBatty (talk) 04:48, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Acrsimia You might like Wikipedia:Lists of common misspellings. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 05:51, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Acrsimia If you are looking for articles that contain spelling errors and similar faults (grammar, punctuation, etc.) because you would like to correct them, you could try CAT:ALLCE. Alternatively, go to WP:TASKS and scroll down to the "Copy editing" section. Mike Marchmont (talk) 11:09, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

how do i add it to the physics portal?

Terminal velocity Catlover1519 (talk) 20:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Catlover1519, Welcome to the Teahouse! Add the following code to the bottom of the article: {{Portal|Physics}}— Davest3r08 (^_^) ^(talk) 21:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I would also recommend trying to edit Portal:Physics. — Davest3r08 (^_^) ^(talk) 23:15, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

It depends exactly what you are trying to do. The first suggestion above would display a link to the portal within the article, which seems like a good idea. The second would display an excerpt from the article within the portal. However, because we have so much content related to physics, this portal only showcases featured articles and good articles. Sadly, Terminal velocity has not yet reached that standard, which is why it is currently excluded from the portal. Certes (talk) 11:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Article to be published

Hello All,

I struggle with having my content published. Anyone can help me with that?

Thank you 🙏🏼 Sarah SMM (talk) 10:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Sarah SMM: I assume you are referring to Draft:Rich Bake Company. If that is the case, please note that each Wikipedia article must demonstrate that its subject has been discussed in reliable sources by providing references to those sources – reviewers are typically looking for at least three references that are reliable, independent of the subject (so the website of the company does not count), and contain significant coverage, rather than simply a passing mention of the subject. Currently the only source in the article is to the corporation's own website, so it does not meet this requirement right now. Tollens (talk) 10:35, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello Sarah. I assume this is about Draft:Rich Bake Company and/or User:Sarah SMM/sandbox. I have three pieces of advice:

1. Don't maintain rival copies of the same draft. I know from experience that this can cause confusion — to their creator, to anyone who tries to help, and to reviewers.
2. Read Help:Referencing for beginners.
3. Before you write anything, find several reliable independent published sources with extensive discussion of the subject. Then base your article on what they say, citing them as you go. The one source you have given is from the company itself, and so not independent. Maproom (talk) 10:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Maproom .. That was extremely helpful.

Would a reference like that considered as a valid reference?

https://www.findinegypt.com/c/modern-bakeries-sae-rich-bake-148683

Thanks in advance 🙏🏼 Sarah SMM (talk) 11:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Sarah: No. All that does is confirm the company exists. It is not an article about the company. David notMD (talk) 11:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

UPDATE: This account has been blocked indefinitely as a sockpuppet of User:Rich Bake. David notMD (talk) 11:44, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Right Wing / Left Wing political parties

your description of left and right wing is not accurate, in fact no where near accurate, please can you advise how this can be changed, what is the procedure ?? NJG007 (talk) 11:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources say about a topic. If the preponderance of such sources refer to a political party as "right wing", then Wikipedia does(or should) too. If they don't, then Wikipedia shouldn't. If you feel any such political party is described in such a way in error, please discuss your concerns on the article talk page and offer any sources you have to support your claims.

Note that American politics in particular is a designated contentious topic area, with its own special rules. I will notify you of these. 331dot (talk) 12:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Nomination for Deletion - Did I do it correctly?

Hello! I attempted to use the template to nominate an article for deletion. I then created this page - Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Relacom. Was that correct? Was there anything I missed doing? It's my first time doing a deletion nomination so I wasn't sure. Thank you so much for your help! Libs4Libraries (talk) 15:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

You want to take a look at WP:AFDHOWTO. In particular, you need to place the subst:afd2 template on the article deletion discussion page, and put it on the logs for today Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Log/2023 November 1 using the template subst:afd3. It is also considered a courtesy to notify the authors and any editors who have made substantial expansion to the article of the deletion nomination using subst:afd notice. Fermiboson (talk) 16:11, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Libs4Libraries in the future you can use Twinkle, an extension that can do all the technical details of things like nominating an article for AfD/PROD, reporting a vandal, etc. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:17, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Sungodtemple and @Fermiboson. I will check out Twinkle and make sure everything is buttoned up! Libs4Libraries (talk) 13:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Question about a citation use

Hello. I came across a brilliant article which I wanted to use as a citation link https://carnegieendowment.org/2020/02/06/citizenship-law-in-india-populist-polarization-pub-81023

I feel I can extract some useful information from this link as it is such an elaborate article. I wanted to check if this can be used for referencing on a Wikipedia page. ANLgrad (talk) 14:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@ANLgrad According to the foot of the article, it was originally published in what they call a blog. Hence you need to check WP:BLOG as sources like that need to be from experts in their field. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

G3

Would Motihari airport fall under G3? Also the creator of the article keeps changing places to Motihari. 115.188.140.167 (talk) 07:46, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@115.188.140.167 Hello, welcome to the teahouse. I didn't find why it is a G3 page, can you explain it a little bit? -Lemonaka‎ 11:36, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Because it's not real according to the city's official website. I've documented what I could at Talk:Motihari airport. As for the article creator's other edits, I'm wondering if a rollbacker should look at it. Might be easier for them to remove the insertions of "Motihari" in various articles that IP has contested here. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Should be nominated for AfD?

Should this article be nominated for deletion? There is almost no information about the former state of this website online other than the Wikipedia page. However, it is owned by Fandango. Should this article be deleted and the page redirected to Fandango? TenToe (talk) 20:29, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I have gone ahead and proposed it for deletion NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 20:32, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks. Do you agree that a redirect to Fandango would be the best move? TenToe (talk) 20:37, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@TenToe It was WP:PRODed by User:NightWolf1223 but it has been de-prodded. The only way to have it deleted now is if it goes through the full WP:AfD process. Do not convert it into a redirect unless that is the outcome of the AfD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:13, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Oh I see. If it was deprodded though, does that mean it does not meet the criteria for deletion? TenToe (talk) 16:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@TenToe No, it just means that one specific editor objected to what was supposed to be an uncontroversial case (see WP:PROD). A full discussion can still take place, provided the correct AfD process is followed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Is a charity's own website an acceptable reference source?

A UK renowned charity is changing some of its remit. They want to update their Wikipedia page. The changes are detailed on their website. So I'm wondering if when an editor makes the changes, whether the charity's own website is an acceptable citation source or if it needs to be a third party. Thanks. MsContent (talk) 10:25, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @MsContent: yes, primary sources can be used for non-contentious, factual information. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much @DoubleGrazing. I will pass the information on. MsContent (talk) 11:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@MsContent: However, since the charity would have a conflict of interest by editing the Wikipedia article about their charity, they shouldn't edit the article themselves. Instead, they can submit an edit request on the article talk page to have another editor review their request and make the changes. GoingBatty (talk) 14:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Yep, they know to use an independent editor.

Thank you. MsContent (talk) 14:45, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MsContent. While I don't disagree with DoubleGrazing's reply, I'm not convinced that "its remit" is something that belongs in an article, unless supported from an independent source. A charity's declared objects are sometimes no less aspirational than a company's "Vision statement". Wikipedia is concerned about what commentators say about an organisation, not what the organisation says about itself - and least of all with what the organisation says its goals or aspirations are.

It depends just what you mean by "its remit", of course. And I hope that by "use an independent editor" you mean "make a request that an independent editor may consider, and decide whether and how to edit the article". ColinFine (talk) 16:55, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

(not clickbait)

for articles on topics like movies (specifically the one on mockbusters), which type of image would be better to add in?

• the cover of a random or "particularly notorious" mockbuster (to which i would use the little panda fighter's)
• the cover of a movie and its mockbuster side by side (to which i could put two of them together in like 5 seconds)

cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:57, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Unless the relevant images are licensed for free reuse (which is unlikely) you won't have the option. Most posters are not free, and so can only be used in Wikipedia in ways that comply with all the non-free content criteria. No 8, "Contextual significance" has usually been interpreted as saying that you can use a poster or cover in an article specifically about the work illustrated, but not anywhere else. I can see that there is a case for arguing that the two side by side would be justified, but you will have to argue that case. I suggest you ask at WikiProject Film. ColinFine (talk) 21:03, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

that could work

thanks cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 16:59, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Guideline vs majority rule

(Follow-up to Wikipedia:Teahouse#Appropriateness of hatting or archiving of a thread guidance?)

What should an admin do when guidelines are being ignored, e.g. the ones that state, "A discussion which has been closed with the {{subst:Archive}} or similar template is intended to be preserved as-is and should not be edited." and "Do not unarchive a thread that was effectively closed; instead, start a new discussion and link to the archived prior discussion." ? RudolfoMD (talk) 19:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@RudolfoMD: Since the Teahouse is the "Friendly community hub for guiding and supporting new Wikipedia contributors" (emphasis added), I'm not sure you're going to get an answer here about admin procedures. Maybe Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard would be a better place (or Wikipedia talk:Teahouse if your question is specific to Teahouse conversations). GoingBatty (talk) 21:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@RudolfoMD I can't seem to find that past discussion. I think the answer to your question depends upon the circumstances, and shouldn't necessarily require administrator involvement. If a page has been archived (say this Teahouse forum) then any editor can 'revert' an edit made to a past archive, and leave an edit summary to instruct the editor where and how they should post their follow-up question. That may have been done in good faith, so a gentle steer is all that's needed. You could leave a clear message on their talk page to explain what they did that was wrong, and why a post to an archived page will not get them anywhere. Put the archive on your watchlist and 'move on'.

But, if the user keeps posting on archived pages, and their edits are seen as disruptive or as obvious vandalism, then you could start to revert and warn them (possibly using WP:TWINKLE to make life easier). If they continue past final warning, then a report to WP:AIV or even WP:ANI might be appropriate.

The recent manual hatting of a thread could be seen as more of one editor's person opinion that a discussion should cease. This one just above us could be a good example, and I had considered hatting it myself. But my opinion might not tally with someone else's who felt the discussion could usefully be extended. I might be disappointed that they'd continued with the thread, but I wouldn't come down on them like a ton of bricks, nor would I expect anyone else to. But depends on the value of their contribution within that thread as to whether I'd revert or gently warn them. A silly follow-up edit on a hatted thread can easily be reverted. But, once again, continuously ignoring community norms of behaviour can result in someone collecting enough evidence (via diffs) to present to that user and ask them to cease being disruptive.

New users are unlikely to understand our conventions, so it's up to us to explain things clearly if they accidentally breach them. It would then be up to an editor to decide whether they wanted to report these relatively minor, repeated breaches of our norms for admin action (at WP:ANI) if the level of disruption caused becomes too much to be dealt with normally.

TL;DR: Common sense applies. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:38, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Alert

What is the point of Wikipedia:Alert? It seems to be a generic help page with some information about a bunch of random topics, and there are random links to updates from 2009. Kk.urban (talk) 16:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia culture was different in 2009, is all I can say. DS (talk) 18:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Kk.urban, it is an essay. Anyone can write an essay that will be kept unless it is disruptive in come way. Some essays are influential and cited frequently. Others are pretty much ignored. This essay is in the second type. Cullen328 (talk) 21:42, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Help

Hello,

Currently, my userpage isn't functioning, because the text in my introduction is for some reason going inside of the userbox that I have inserted in it. I would appreciate if someone could edit this in my userpage and explain to me my error.

Firesword9140 (talk) 22:04, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

 Fixed – Firesword9140, it appears the {{Userboxbottom}} template that should be present at some point after {{Userboxtop}} was missing; I have added it for you. Tollens (talk) 22:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Tollens

Thanks so much for the help, I appreciate it!

Firesword9140 (talk) 22:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

my homepage

did they just change something about the homepage? It used to show my total edit count, but now it just shows some other random numbers and information. why did they change it all of a sudden? can i change back to the format that i saw as recently as yesterday? Iljhgtn (talk) 11:09, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

this is the link in case there is any questions regarding which page i am referring to. Iljhgtn (talk) 11:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn Hello, the template you add is not something automatically count your edit numbers. You need to count them manually if you use that template. -Lemonaka‎ 11:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn You are referring to the newcomer home page, which has been modified recently. If activated at Special:Preferences it will give you a new tab on your UserPage with summary information about your "impact". You ought to be able to comment on what you like or dislike at one of the Talk Pages associated with this WP:Growth Team features. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:46, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

lemonaka, the old newcomer homepage (yesterday) totatled it for you. the new one does not do this apparently. Iljhgtn (talk) 22:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Can I get my IP address hidden?

I made an edit before I created an account. I would now like to have my IP address replaced with my account information. How do I accomplish this? Thank you. Mandyd73 (talk) 22:45, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry Mandyd73, but that cannot be done. - Arjayay (talk) 22:49, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

@Mandyd73: While it cannot be replaced with your account information, you can request the IP address be redacted by contacting the Oversight team. Please provide a URL to the edit so that they can find it. Tollens (talk) 22:51, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Mandyd73, before asking the Oversight team, ask yourself whether obscuring the IP address is so important that another person should spend their time reading and evaluating your request and carrying out the redaction. (It probably is not.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:58, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

it's not that I care about getting credit for the comment, I'm just worried about having my IP address visible to the public. Thank you. Mandyd73 (talk) 23:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mandyd73 Your IP address will not be visible to the general public as long as you continue to log in when you edit per WP:LOGOUT; WP:CHECKUSERs can see it, but they're required to agree to not publicly disclose such things per WP:CUIPDISCLOSE. So, pretty much nobody really will know that the IP address associated with that old edit is you unless you tell them as much. Per Hoary's above post, you can probably just ignore this and just keep it to yourself unless you made something in that edit that can clearly be used to connect it with your current account. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:32, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

What can I do to improve my article (Draft:Daniel Jeddman)

A bit frustrating to be honest. After several months of waiting, yet another negation. Please after your thorough inspection, what may you suggest is missing on subject’s article I created to his credibility ? Blackan007 (talk) 22:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Blackan007, your draft is substantially the same as a previously deleted article, per Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Daniel Jeddman. Cullen328 (talk) 22:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Blackan007: I have tagged a few issues on your draft. I have not reviewed your existing references. GoingBatty (talk) 01:23, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Userpage formatting help?

Silly question, how could I keep my Service Award template from running through my userboxes on my user page? Page formatting is not my forte. miranda ^:3 01:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Try adding {{clear}} just before the Service Award template; it will shift the award out of the way of the userboxes. Ca ^{talk to me!} 02:02, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

That did it! Thank you so much! miranda ^:3 02:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

What should I do for my article? Draft:0 (Ichiko Aoba album)

My article Draft:0 (Ichiko Aoba album) was denied earlier today for a lack of sources. I added some stuff, but I'm wondering what exactly I should add and where. Thanks! Rooves 13 (talk) 00:51, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Rooves 13 - Additional independent album reviews would be helpful. GoingBatty (talk) 01:10, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

WP articles need to meet WP's requirements for notability - WP:N. For an album, there are guielines at WP:NALBUM; and then there is a general guideline at WP:GNG. I think the article right now is missing independent sources that provide significant coverage of the album; you have a single review, discogs, and two shops. Per GNG, "multiple sources are generally expected". --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:43, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Deleting a draft article

So My draft about the Diplomatic Relations between Bhutan and Indonesia was not accepted due to lack of references, which is a result of not much involvement of Bhutan in Indonesia's diplomatic outreach. Because of this, I had to decline all the things that I've typed on the article. Meanwhile, User:EmeraldRange told me "Having an article draft declined at Articles for Creation can be disappointing" so how do I delete said draft? Underdwarf58 (talk) 13:49, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Underdwarf58: If you were the sole contributor to the draft, just add {{Db-author}} at the top of it, and an administrator will delete it. Deor (talk) 13:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

RVIA and top tech challenge

I appreciate and respect the COI issue. I was hoping you could, or you know someone who could create and edit a post about the RVIA and their Top Tech Challenge. At best I would hope to provide some first-hand knowledge to the creator, editor, or publisher. I so much enjoy being a part of the RV industry and community that I am hoping to generate more appreciation for it. It seams like a great idea to get it posted on Wikipedia. There are many articles about the competition and the participants. What the tasks were that made up the competition. I thought it would be a worthwhile addition to the culture of the knowledge base of this community. By no means did I intend to write, edit, or publish this myself. I do not see myself as a writer. I am looking for some guidance on how to get such a historical record into the Wikipedia database. Are you able to point me in the right direction, or assist in some way? Thank you for your help, I am sure together we can make the difference. Brandon as Top Tech (talk) 00:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Brandon as Top Tech: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you're looking for someone to create a new article, try posting your request at the appropriate subpage of Wikipedia:Requested articles with the best three independent published sources you have. If you're looking for assistance with an existing article, then I suggest posting on the article's talk page. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 01:12, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

To be blunt, the Recreational Vehicle Industry Association (RVIA) is an obscure organization, and it having a contest for technicians to diagnose and fix RV problems (the Top Tech Challenge) is also obscure. Your COI - you having won the Top Tech Challenge - does complicate your intent, but not impossible. The larger problem is your statement that you do not plan to attempt creating an article about the topic. Is there anyone else in the RVIA who might be willing to take up the task? As for how to approach this, an article about the RVIA, with a section about the Top Tech Challenge would be more likely to succeed than a submitted draft about just the challenge. David notMD (talk) 09:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, David, for your bluntness and great information. I appreciate straight talk very much. RVIA being obscure is true, there are those who know of it and those who do not. I hope you can have a wonderful day! 64.178.233.44 (talk) 14:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

So very helpful. Thank you for taking the time to lay that out for me. Have a great day. 64.178.233.44 (talk) 12:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Konstantin Kedrov

 Courtesy link: Draft:Konstantin Kedrov

Please help me to finalize the article Konstantin Kedrov, sincerely Ivanaivanova (talk) 09:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I improved the grammar, but draft needs more work. David notMD (talk) 14:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

biology

why do girls require less energy per day than boys 41.210.165.14 (talk) 12:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

This page is for asking for help with editing or using Wikipedia. You may have more luck if you ask at the reference desk, but I think your premise may be flawed. Shantavira|^{feed me} 12:24, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Actually, the premise is correct. Muscle has a higher caloric requirement than fat. For equal body weight at average activity level, i.e., not trained athletes, girls have a higher percent body fat and a lower percent body muscle, so daily calorie needs are lower. Later in adolescence, boys are taller and heavier than girls, so size also factors into a higher calorie needs, activity levels being equal. David notMD (talk) 15:00, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Adopt me missionedit!

Missionedit is not adopting me! I dont know why! --Anotaomo (talk) 13:02, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Anotaomo. Missionedit's user page states they are busy with real life and they have not edited Wikipedia in a year. I would suggest they are currently an inactive editor, and therefore have not seen your adoption request. I would recommend finding an editor who is more active. Qcne (talk) 13:13, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Qcne! :-D --Anotaomo (talk) 13:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Anyone suggest a Adoptee for me? --Anotaomo (talk) 13:41, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Anotaomo You may have already been assigned a mentor, what does Special:Homepage say? Does it have a tab that says 'Your mentor'? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:07, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Anotaomo Please read the introductory information at WP:ADOPT to appreciate that 'Adoption' is intended for relatively new users who already have some basic knowledge of editing, but who want to gain an in-depth understanding of the more complexities of how Wikipedia works. To be frank, it is not best suited to users who claim to be totally new to Wikipedia. If you have specific questions, do please ask them here.

Adoption takes a lot of investment of time and effort on both sides. At the moment the account you are using has not attempted to edit one single mainspace article. As such, I doubt anyone would consider investing their time to train you in Wikipedia editing until you have demonstrated a degree of commitment and willingness to 'have a go' yourself. That is not intended to be rude -simply the reality that this Teahouse can meet your needs more effectively should you genuinely need help.

TBH: We do expect new users to 'have a go' and you are evidently competent enough to create and add Userboxes and join lots of WikiProjects, and I have already left some helpful links and advice on your talk page. Please work through some of them, and feel free to ask questions again once you've had a go and encountered a real practical problem that you are unable to resolve by reading our help pages. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:35, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Cant see it homepage is always loading. --Anotaomo (talk) 14:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

You have had a Wikipedia account since October 8th, have made between 150 and 200 edits, none of which have been to improving existing articles. Editors who are not here to work on the encyclopedia (WP:NOTHERE) can be indefinitely blocked from editing. David notMD (talk) 15:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Draft Timeline

Hey everyone! I just submitted my first article draft for review, woop woop! Since articles are reviewed in no particular order (I know it says about 3 months), I was wondering how long typically drafts take to be reviewed and if it would be worth me plugging it here or asking the live chat. Sorry if this is a redundant question, I know there's a million tools available for help and I'm still getting around to them.

Thank you all so much in advance for your help and time! :) Dannycool3000 (talk) 02:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@dannycool3000: it can take anywhere from two weeks to six months, honestly. and don't ask anyone to review it, it's not allowed here. ltbdl (talk) 02:45, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Ah, got it! Thank you so much! Fingers crossed it's more on the 2-week spectrum of things, haha. Dannycool3000 (talk) 02:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I reviewed it. I don't suppose you'll like the result much :( --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Dannycool3000: I've also marked the page for speedy deletion. The website of the subject happens to contain the same string as the username of the author - Dannycool3000. Amateur mistake. Please don't try to use wikipedia for self-promotion; it's not what it is here for and it is actually offensive. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:21, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Attempts at autobiography almost always fail (see WP:AUTO for reasons). I hope you find other paths for contributing to Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 09:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

 Note: The draft has been deleted under the G11 criterion: unambiguous advertising or promotion. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Seeking input on a company merger

Six Flags and Cedar Fair are merging, and the combined company will be called Six Flags. Both articles have extensive histories. Merging both articles would be difficult to do. Need some ideas on how to best proceed once the merger is complete in 2024. Please see Talk:Six Flags#Merge with Cedar Fair. Thank you! --GoneIn60 (talk) 17:15, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Probably keep the Cedar Fair as a standalone article about the pre-merger company, as was done with Compaq, for example. I wouldn't worry about it much until the merger actually happens. RudolfRed (talk) 18:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

RudolfRed, thanks for weighing in. You're right, we may be getting ahead of ourselves a bit, but I was hoping to get a sense of how a merger of this magnitude would be typically handled. The problem with just adding to the Six Flags article after the merger is that the extensive history of Cedar Fair would only exist in a separate article, whereas the Six Flags history would be completely retained in the same article. Technically, Cedar Fair shareholders will get a bigger stake through the merger (51.2% vs 48.8%), though the merger itself is being described as a "merger of equals". I was thinking something along the lines of Sirius XM, where the history of each former company is briefly summarized, but a hatnote links to separate articles that discusses each former company in more depth.

For anyone else looking to chime in, please do, but perhaps weigh in at that linked discussion above so the discussion is in one place. Thanks! --GoneIn60 (talk) 16:19, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

A bit of help on notability of people, please

Being interested in the history of the British Isles, among other places, lots of articles in the English Wikipedia are about people whose contribution to their times or to posterity is either not evident or is clearly non-existent.

Where this is particularly prevalent is with (a) owners of lands or titles whose only apparent achievement in life is to have lived long enough to inherit, (b) spouses of such people, and (c) children of such people. In some cases this is just due to the idleness or ignorance of the article creator and a bit of research could reveal evidences for notability. For married women this may be tough, however, since law and practice in past centuries tended to see them mainly as baby-producing adjuncts to their husbands.

To get to my question. If I've got no personal interest in or aptitude for improving the article, is it considered helpful or hostile to tag it for deletion or merge? Belle Fast (talk) 15:52, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Absolutely do not tag it for deletion or merging without a WP:BEFORE. It is preferred to improve articles rather than delete them, so if you have no personal interest, don't edit them. Industrial Insect (talk) 16:30, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Hello, Belle Fast: I think it might be regarded as hostile. In Wikipedia jargon, Notability has nothing whatever to do with how meritorious someone was/is, or whether they have "contributed to their times or to posterity." It is only about how well documented they are/have been in Reliable sources that are independent of them. In other words, it's not that they "are notable" (in general terms), it's that they "have been noted."

With regard to people who have had places in lines of inheritance of titles and/or significant lands, the title/lands are themselves considered notable (because they are both significant and have been well documented) and the individuals concerned are necessarily part of that.

We have a principle that "Notability is not inherited", which means someone who isn't significantly documented except as a spouse or (non-inheriting) child would not qualify for an independent article, but I think most editors would regard the lineage-holders themselves as notable.

Of course, this may be seen as inherently unfair because past and present social attitudes to e.g. women mean that sources themselves are biased, but Wikipedia cannot help that: it is explicitly not intended to Right great wrongs, which would verge on Original research; rather it only summarises (reliable) sources.

I hope this (my personal perspective) helps. Doubtless others may wish to comment, and may well differ in their interpretations. {The poster formerly knowwn as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 16:34, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

It would not be helpful. Your pitch that "in some cases this is just due to the idleness or ignorance of the article creator" is offensive and suggests you do not think that WP:AGF applies to you; and those are both problematic. As others have pointed out, above, you do not seem to undertstand wikipedia notability, and so your judgements may well just be plain wrong. We're probably all best off if you do not touch articles in which you have no interest or aptitude. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:08, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks for all advice, which is certainly noted, and I'm sorry if my language was careless.

In saying that some subjects of biographical articles do not seem significant, I meant that they do not appear to left a trail of valid references about their lives which would satisfy general scholarly and specifically Wikipedia criteria, which can often be the case with married women.

And I should never have criticised article creators who lack the time or the skills to develop the text further, for which I apologise. Belle Fast (talk) 08:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Historical downplaying of women's lives and achievements in available sources is indeed a problem for Wikipedia, but we cannot afford to relax our established strictures for this or other underrepresented groups, or 'mere anarchy will be loosed upon the world' (to paraphrase Yeats). Many Wikipedians work hard to try to overcome the inherent biases in many sources: are you familiar with the Women in Red project? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 16:47, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Date formatting

The latest revision of Swissport changes all the dates in the body of the article from MDY (e.g. October 30, 2023) to DMY (e.g. 30 October 2023).

Since this is the only set of changes that was made, and this nominally violates MOS:DATERET, can/should the edit be reverted? Echohawkdown (talk) 03:11, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

As an aside - asking because I wanna unify the date format of all the refs in the article to YMD (like ISO 8601) & want to have the article standardize on a single date format for the article body. Echohawkdown (talk) 03:11, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

fwiw, I think DMY works well. MDY would also work, I guess. YMD, in my view, would not work at all well. "In 2018 June 30 blah blah blah" just is not done. I don;t suppose I can convince you to leave it as it is? --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I'm fine w/ leaving the article body dates formatted as is, in its current DMY state if that means one less edit in the edit history, considering that it doesn't really impact the legibility of the article.

I suppose I'm just asking because I find that changing the date formats in the article body (which seems to be a thing that Priory ties's edit history seems to confirm) just to conform w/ the user's own date formatting preferences is grating as it doesn't really improve the quality of the article.

However, I would still like to switch all the date formats for the references to YMD to unify the date refs, since they're split between DMY & YMD at the moment. Echohawkdown (talk) 03:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

That works for me. --Tagishsimon (talk) 03:38, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Arbitrarily changing date formats is disruptive, and there is no prohibition on reverting. That said, this is a Swiss company that uses dmy on its website, so there is an argument for leaving it. You could put the references in a different format to the body, but be aware there are a couple of in-article maintenance templates that shift all citation template references to dmy or mdy. CMD (talk) 03:32, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

This is a Swiss company, so in my opinion, the date formatting most commonly used in Switzerland should be used, which is DMY. I say that as an American who uses the MDY format in my daily life. Cullen328 (talk) 03:38, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I'm still getting used to contributing to Wikipedia, so could you clarify which in-article maintenance templates switch dates to DMY or YMD by default? Because I wasn't aware that there's a difference between the date format rendering in the different Citation/Cite web/Cite X templates. Echohawkdown (talk) 03:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Echohawkdown: {{Use mdy dates}} and {{Use dmy dates}} will change how dates in citation templates are displayed, but not dates in the article text. GoingBatty (talk) 04:15, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks - I ended up going with {{Use dmy dates}} w/ the cs1-dates=ly param per documentation to fix the formatting.

Ended up having to go through the article (Swissport) to convert all the refs to use cs1 templates but I think it was well worth the effort. Echohawkdown (talk) 16:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Need help with learning how to archive

Hi, My talk page is filling up and I want to archive it, but I do not know how, can anyone help me? -- Grapefanatic (talk) 16:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Help:Archiving (plain and simple) explains the easy way to do it; WP:ARCHIVE goes into the gory technical details Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 17:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Can anybody help me with making an article

Hello, here is my sandbox which i need help with User:MrBeastRapper/sandbox

Im trying to write out an article, but I usually just do minor edits, so I am not used to writing entire articles. can somebody who is experienced at writing give help or tips that will help with the creation of this articles. MrBeastRapper (talk) 16:26, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@MrBeastRapper: Welcome to the Teahouse! Take a look at List of Internet phenomena, and you'll see that each meme has a reference to a published reliable source that provides significant coverage of the meme. In order for your sandbox to become an article, you'll need to gather multiple published reliable sources about the topic, and then write your draft based on what the sources say. Help:Your first article has a lot more great information. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Can anybody help me with making page for my player

Need help with editing thanks Wickedjourno (talk) 16:10, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Marvin Oshaba

@Wickedjourno: Welcome to the Teahouse! You'll need to gather multiple independent sources (i.e. not published by the league or club) that provide significant coverage of his career, and then write your draft based on what they say. Help:Your first article has a lot more great information. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:14, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

new page

hello I have just entered an entry and there seems to be no reference to "surrationalism". here there are some: https://philarchive.org/archive/SIMSAB-7 http://www.autodidactproject.org/quote/bachsur1.html https://philpapers.org/rec/RISBEV https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11016-017-0238-2 https://riviste.unimi.it/index.php/AMonline/article/view/2417 Dedonau (talk) 17:10, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Surrationalism

@Dedonau: Welcome to the Teahouse! You'll need to add those references to your draft - see WP:EASYREFBEGIN. Help:Your first article has a lot more great information. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

How do I change the subject head of an article?

The title of this film has changed to OUT OF DARKNESS. I haven't been able to figure out how to update the top headline part, only a couple things in the body and nothing seems to be saving?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Origin_(film) 74.72.170.112 (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source and reach a consensus on the talk page, then you may "move" the article to the correct title. Industrial Insect (talk) 18:18, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Article Submission

Draft:M. Urooj Rabbani Turkshahnawaz (talk) 18:16, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Turkshahnawaz did you bother to read my decline notice? Articles about living people require in-line citations. Do not re-submit without fixing that. Qcne (talk) 18:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Article on a non-profit without many reliable sources yet

Hello! I drafted an article on a new non-profit. It was rejected because of a lack of reliable resources. Because it's new (founded 2021), it hasn't yet been referenced in any mainstreams news agencies, journals, etc. It has been referenced in several local newspapers where it is active. Aside from waiting until it's referenced somewhere more traditionally seen as reliable, is there anyway to get the article published? Thank you!

Draft:Lumen Accreditation ITCE CUA (talk) 15:43, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

ITCE CUA Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If a topic does not receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources, it does not merit a Wikipedia article at this time. That doesn't mean forever, but it appears to be too soon for an article about this organization.

I see you declared a COI; if you work for this organization, you must make the stricter paid editing disclosure. 331dot (talk) 15:48, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, 331dot! I'll make the stricter paid editing disclosure and otherwise will wait until there is more significant coverage in independent reliable sources. ITCE CUA (talk) 15:49, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, ITCE CUE. Note that it makes absolutely no difference to Wikipedia whether an organisation is non-profit or not. All that matters is whether adequate sources exist. ColinFine (talk) 17:00, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Makes sense, thank you! CatholicEdDC (talk) 17:01, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@ITCE CUA, @CatholicEdDC, you may wish to continue harvesting secondary refs- a couple popped up on a simple search and have been added to the draft- HTH, Yadsalohcin (talk) 19:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @Yadsalohcin! I'll keep looking and adding. CatholicEdDC (talk) 19:42, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Publishing an edit

I'm trying to publish an edit to a page after I moved it to a new name (after the subject got renamed), but it says that there is no stashed content found. Mseingth2133444 (talk) 17:03, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Mseingth2133444 welcome to the Teahouse. I can't be certain, but after a bit of Google searching (see here and here), this sounds like a browser issue where you've had the editing page open for a very long time (possibly more than 24 hours, and/or in Visual Editor) and the edits that are stored locally on your machine failed to get found or converted back into a form that becomes the next edit to the source code of the article you were woking on. Making very long, unsaved edits can result in this issue at times, I believe. So, in future, don't leave an unsaved edit window open for too long, change the location name of the page you're working on in another browser, or hibernate your computer whilst editing. I hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:01, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Help to build page

Any one want to help me and i.will help them 95.145.104.243 (talk) 17:57, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse,. IP editor. Folk here at the Teahouse offer help and advice to people having difficulty doing specific tasks on Wikipedia. However, you're unlikely to find anyone to collaborate with you (presumably on creating a new article?). But, as you didn't actually specify, we're all rather left in the dark as to what you're actually referring to.

If you need specific guidance, do please explain clearly and precisely what help you need, and we'll be happy to point you to the relevant explanatory pages. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

IP editor: It will be much easier for you to collaborate if you create an account. There are other advantages, too, explained at WP:ACCOUNT Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:46, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Always Declined

I published three articles but non of these approved by Editors. The articles was :

• Draft:Namak Haram
• Draft: Fairy Tale 2
• Draft:Aena Khan

No article was accepted above. Please Help me to improve these articles to approved. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Nnn edits (talk • contribs) 20:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Nnn edits All three have moved beyond "declined" to reach "rejected". There is a big stop notice on each, so please do just that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:08, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

What does reflist do?

Hi, someone added "reflist" to an article I wrote, Mosque crawlers, but I can't see any difference before and after they added it. What does it do? Thanks Ironic sensibilities (talk) 20:33, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Ironic sensibilities It instructs the software to draw together all the references in the source code between <ref> and </ref> tags to one place at the end, which is the standard way Wikipedia does citations. See WP:CITE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess it's just confusing because it looked like it did that anyway before the reflist was added? Do I need to always put this in articles? Maybe it doesn't show up right for some people if I don't? Ironic sensibilities (talk) 20:41, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

You are correct that the software will place the references at the end even without the reflist. However, some articles have sections like External links and Bibliography which by convention go after the references. Hence the "reflist" template is needed in those cases to do the placing where needed. On Talk Pages, you need {{talkref}} to keep references within the section to which they refer, rather than move to the very bottom of the page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:52, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I see. Thanks. I'm looking back at some other articles, and I see "references" in what looks like an html tag. I didn't put it there. Maybe it was put in by the visual editor. Does that do the same thing? Ironic sensibilities (talk) 20:59, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Yes, they serve the same purpose. The template {{Reflist}}, as documented there, is a wrapper around the <References /> tag with some extra optional features. In many cases they're effectively the same but some articles on English Wikipedia use the extra features the Reflist template provides. Starting a new article, in general you should go ahead and have with a References section in the correct spot (see MOS:SECTIONORDER) with a Reflist template in it. There are lots of articles either because they predate Reflist or the editor otherwise picked the HTML tag that have that instead. (You can visit meta:Help:Template if you want to read a high-level description of templates on MediaWiki wikis.) Skynxnex (talk) 22:17, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Ironic sensibilities (talk) 22:19, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Advice on my first article

I'm working on my first ever article, and I'd just like to ask about my phrasing and citations! (As a lesser side note, I'd also love to know how to make a fancy signature!) Thank you in advance :) Dialupnetwork (talk) 20:20, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Dialupnetwork and welcome to Wikipedia! Writing acceptable articles is quite a difficult task and we normally recommend that new editors learn by editing existing articles first. The problem is that you need to show your topic is notable as Wikipedia defines this word and your current sources (Youtube and X) don't do that. You need about three sources meeting these criteria: read that link carefully! As to signatures, these are a bit of fun but not really important to improving the encyclopaedia. See WP:SIGNATURE for full details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:36, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I actually feel a bit more intimidated by editing existing articles, but I'll definitely work on that some more. Thank you very much!! Dialupnetwork (talk) 20:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dialupnetwork, and welcome to the Teahouse and Wikipedia. I suggest you start with small edits - have a look at the "Help out" section of the community portal for ideas. As you gain confidence, you can work deeper - in particular, moving to finding and supplying references, which is a (literally) indispensible part of creating a new article: until you have found some suitable sources for an article, there is essentially nothing at all that you can validly write in the article. ColinFine (talk) 23:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Draft's notability

I submitted the draft for a historical textile company and it was twice rejected as the sources didn't show notability. I'd like just to hear more details why the sources in the draft are not good:

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Croscill

In short, some of the sources are copied from other notable encyclopedias (including encyclopedia.com) from the Pre-Internet era. Other sources are more easily verifiable in the references. This is my final request and in case I get the same feedback supporting questionable notability, I'm ready to abandon this project. Otherwise, please, advise. Bormenthalchik82 (talk) 01:19, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

I think there must be some doubt about whether sources like hometextilestoday and bizjournals are reliable sources, or are reprinters of company PR. There is an ecosystem of print publications and websites which give the appearance of being journalism, but which are in effect marketing companies. Taking the latter, for instance, the article you linked to is a couple of clicks away from their claims that "The Business Journals Content Studio has partnered with hundreds of clients since 2016 to publish more than 15,000 pieces of client content across more than 18 industry verticals." Wikipedia should not be a venue for company promotion, and the use of sites like these to provide citations supporting articles about otherwise unremarkable commercial enterprises can be seen as an attempt to co-opt wikipedia into being a marketing platform rather than an encyclopedia. --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:27, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the detailed response. I agree with you on that. Do you have any information on how to identify those promotional sources? Bormenthalchik82 (talk) 23:59, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Halocene Band article

I have been trying for over a year to show that the band halocene is noteworthy enough to merit an article. I keep getting shut down despite meeting everything I can see. I need help figuring out what I need to do get this article published. Draft:Halocene Brian.butt (talk) 23:24, 1 November 2023 (UTC)

Let's be more precise, . On 26 April, Anarchyte rejected the draft, fixing a conspicuous "STOP" sign to it. But you didn't stop, and on 11 May CNMall41 rejected it again. Since then, some IP in Washington state has continued to fiddle with it (without doing anything to make the subject look more noteworthy). Regardless of their skills, originality, etc, most bands simply aren't notable (as notability is defined hereabouts). Please stop. -- Hoary (talk) 00:11, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] Hi, Brian! In case you haven't already done so, have a thorough read of Wikipedia:Notability (music), and ask yourself as objectively as possible "Has this band met the required criteria yet?" and "Does the draft demonstrate this with citations to 3 or more substantial, independent Reliable sources?"

My own judgement, having read the draft, would be No to both. It may be just WP:Too soon in terms of their career and the consequent independent coverage of them – remember the old showbiz adage: "It takes 20 years to become an overnight sensation." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 46.65.231.103 (talk) 00:22, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

The band is not notable, Brian.butt. I strongly recommend that you abandon the draft and move on. Cullen328 (talk) 00:48, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

@Brian.butt@Cullen328@Hoary They're definitely notable, for point 1 alone, which is all that's needed for a music article.

They just need someone to add all the references.

They have nearly 196 million views on their own Youtube channel, from a total of 633 videos, so an average of 310,000 view per video, not to mention other Youtube channels they've appeared on with many more millions.

There's 30 stories which mention them on the news section of Google, albeit roughly 10 of them are talking about the same Masked Singer Australia story.

And there's many more news stories on the main Google page, but it'll take a while scrolling down to find them all, now that Google has got rid of page results.

I know nothing about them, but with that many views I suspect they've charted in at least one country, have been certified Gold or higher, and/or have won awards.

There's countless people from my city who get between 10,000 and 250,000 views per video on average, sometimes creeping up to a million or more, who have also had multiple articles written about them, and who are also eligible for a Wikipedia article but don't have one yet, so this band definitely are. Danstarr69 (talk) 12:47, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

Suspicion that they have charted/won awards/hit Gold is not evidence that they have indeed done so. What are the sources that establish that this band meets point one of the notability criteria? 331dot (talk) 13:27, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

The problem is that the charts do not look at streaming numbers. When I asked for help I did not expect to just be told stop trying. That is not help. Brian.butt (talk) 17:44, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

The honest opinion of the majority of responders above is that you should stop trying, and they are trying to help you to stop wasting your time. The fact is that streaming numbers on YouTube, Spotify, etc., even if impressive (and I don't find those quoted by Dannstarr69 above particularly impressive) are not in themselves a criterion that Wikipedia takes notice of in assessing a band's Notability. They might count if an unconnected third party had written about those numbers at some length in a publication considered to be a Reliable source.

Even if the numbers were considered a prima facie proof of Notability, there would still be the problem that a Wikipedia article would have to be mostly a summary of the contents of several (usually 3 or more) different, substantial-length, cited pieces or passages primarily about the band (not about a competition the band has been in), written independently of it, and published in Reliable sources, without inserting any WP:Personal knowledge, Original research or Synthesis. If too few such pieces are available, then there is insufficient basis for an article, and so far three different reviewers have decided that your draft indeed has insufficient basis, even after nearly 2 years of effort by yourself and others. Dannstarr69 has asserted that there are such pieces, but has not linked them – it would be helpful if they and/or yourself would do so on the draft's talk page so that they could be assessed, but be aware that a flurry of passing mentions will not be useful. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.5.208 (talk) 23:39, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Fine I will give up. Even though I think they meet the notability requirements. Brian.butt (talk) 00:00, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse Mobile

There seem to be some issues with the formatting at the top of this page on mobile view. I don't think I would be able/allowed to edit it; can someone with the proper authorization get this fixed? And if this is the wrong place to ask about it, where would the correct place be? Brack3t Redacted (talk) 23:40, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

Brack3tRedacted, I'm not able to see the problem on my end; could you please post a screenshot? Thanks! — Frostly (talk) 00:36, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

What is a sandbox?

I got asked a question involving one and I wasn't (and still am not) sure of what one is. Can you perhaps explain it to me?

Thanks, from OddyAwesome OddyAwesome (talk) 11:54, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Forget it. Instead, dare to make a constructive, intelligent change to an existing article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1.33.56.248 (talk) 12:09, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, I will! Thanks! :) OddyAwesome (talk) 12:19, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@OddyAwesome See H:SANDBOX. Every account-holder is able to create a personal sandbox in which they can practice editing or develop part-articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:37, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@1.33.56.248 No, before you adding something unsure whether it will make a mess to the article, the better place for it is in Sandbox, not to article directly. This is specific for some test edits, or using/changing templates you are not familiar with. -Lemonaka‎ 12:45, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Within H:SANDBOX there is mention of Wikipedia:Sandbox. That is a place everyone can use to practice stuff. It is periodically blanked. Your personal sandbox(es) is/are places for you to practice or store content. Not periodically blanked. Common examples of use of your own Sandbox are to copy a section of an existing article, edit it to your satisfaction, then paste it back into the article. Another is to format references in your Sandbox, and only when correct, paste into article. David notMD (talk) 12:47, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay! Where are 'personal sandboxes', though? OddyAwesome (talk) 12:50, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

The page you have already been directed to at H:SANDBOX explains all that. Mine is at User:Michael_D._Turnbull/sandbox for example. Yours would have your Username instead. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Your personal sandbox is User:OddyAwesome/Sandbox, or you can see the right up corner of your page. -Lemonaka‎ 13:03, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

How to upload a photo to Commons considering copyright issues

Hello, I am writing a draft about an actress (Link). I would like to add a photo of her. I have learned the hard way (speedy deletion) how not to do it. There are a lot of photos of her over the internet and I also have contact with a person related to this actress.

I wonder if you can recommend me a path how to get a photo to add it to my draft with minimum effort for the persons involved and the eventual result of a problem-free useable photo for my draft. Thanks in advance! Bernhard.rulla (talk) 21:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Bernhard.rulla Your first task is to get the draft accepted: the presence or absence of a photo won't matter since the hurdle is to show that she is notable. Later, you can either 1) ask the person you know to take a picture and upload it to Commons (Wikipedia does not allow WP:NONFREE photos for living people) or 2) use the email processes outlined at c:Commons:Email_templates to upload a photo on behalf of the copyright holder and then get them to confirm they did release it under a suitable CC license. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:56, 3 November 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thank you very much! Yes, I will proceed with the draft first! :) Bernhard.rulla (talk) 14:15, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Banned or locked steward?

Hello, is there any banned or global locked steward in Wikimedia history? That's a strange question but I'd just want to have acquaintance about such cases if there are. -Lemonaka‎ 12:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

The closest I'm aware of is Mardetanha's removal of steward permissions ([11] [12]) that apparently came with a temporary global lock ([13]). ~ ToBeFree (talk) 15:11, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

How to make an article

I joined Wikipedia a couple of hours ago, and I have learnt how to edit. But I'm still not sure of how to make and post articles, can someone help? (Currently on Chromebook) OddyAwesome (talk) 12:49, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Standard asvice to newbies is learn skills by improving existing articles before attempting to create an article. If you still want to pursue the latter, see WP:YFA. David notMD (talk) 12:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay! I've started that already! OddyAwesome (talk) 12:52, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Hello, OddyAwesome, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please don't make the mistake of assuming that the only way, or even the main way, of contributing to Wikipedia is by creating new articles! We have over six milion of them, which probably means that we have over five million which are desperately in need of some TLC.

Hundreds of new articles and drafts are deleted every day. In a sense, the work put in by the creators of those articles represents negative value that they have put into Wikipedia - negative, because they have taken the time and attention of experienced editors to determine that they are not suitable and delete them.

I remember when I started, many years ago, how much I wanted to "make my mark" by creating a new article. Actually, in 18 years and 23 000 edits, I've only ever created about a dozen. ColinFine (talk) 14:10, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Got it! :) OddyAwesome (talk) 16:48, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

@OddyAwesome Hi, for creating an article, you may want to have a try for WP:AFC -Lemonaka‎ 12:51, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Okay, what is WP:AFC? OddyAwesome (talk) 12:53, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Article for creation, a process that newcomer can create a draft, then reviewed by Active AFCH reviewers before publishing. -Lemonaka‎ 12:55, 4 November 2023 (UTC)

Nice! OddyAwesome (talk) 16:48, 4 November 2023 (UTC)