This is an archive of past discussions about Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.
My personal Wikipedia page was deleted, how to reinstate?
Hello, My name is Timothy Mckernan II, an American born Ice Dancer. My page seems to be deleted for some reason by someone and I would like it reinstated.
The page name was: Timothy Mckernan(born 1989), American Ice Dancer
There was some confusion over the page title. Thanks to Bsoyka for tracking it down. At the beginning, I wasn't even sure whether it was an article or a draft. LizRead!Talk!02:46, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
We have a Wikipedia entry we would like to update on behalf of our client. In doing this, it has raised some questions regarding licensing of images etc. For client owned logos and product photographs, as their marketing agency, are we allowed to upload them as 'our own work'? Or do we need to select 'This is someone else's work' and go through there. As mentioned, the imagery includes trademarked logos and product photographs that include the same trademarked logos. 2.218.110.111 (talk) 09:25, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. These articles have been read through and considered previously. Are you able to assist in anyway on my original query? 2.218.110.111 (talk) 09:47, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for acknowledging that. I usually start with the conflict-of-interest advice because it is a mistake that so many new editors make. Colin has addressed the image copyright question (an area I have zero expertise in). I would reiterate his suggestion to create an account (or accounts – one for each human) if you have not already done so and declare any relevant conflicts of interest there. If you log in and sign your messages here so that we know a bit more about who you are, and provide a link to the article about your client, that will make it easier to talk about specifics. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 09:57, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello. First, you must make a formal declaration of your status as a paid editor - this is part of the Wikimedia terms of service. (It is possible that you have already done so on the talk page of the article: since you don't identify the article, I can't tell. It is easiest if you create an account - or accounts, if there are several of you, since accounts cannot be shared - and make the declaration on the user page of each account).
Secondly, please note that you do not "have" that entry: it belongs to neither your client nor to you. You should not edit it directly (except for minor typos or reverting obvious vandalism), but instead should raise edit requests for any changes you would like to see made.
You may upload a photo as "own work" only if you personally created it - i.e. , you took the photo. If you own the copyright (or are authorised by the copyright owner to assign the copyright) then you may upload the image, licensing it as you go under CC-BY-SA: be aware that in so doing, you will be granting anybody in the world the legal permission to reuse or alter the image for any purpose, commercial or not, as long as they attribute its source. Think carefully whether that is what you want to do).
Logos are usually uploaded as non-free material - see logos for more information.
Marketing agencies who refer to themselves as "we" are not permitted to edit Wikipedia. Wikipedia is edited only by discrete individual human beings, not by companies or groups of any kind. Legitimate editors use "I". Also, marketing activity is strictly forbidden on Wikipedia, and will be reverted on sight. Any individual employee of such an agency who edits Wikipedia should have a registered account that makes the mandatory Paid contributions disclosure and limit themselves to neutral, well referenced edit requests on the talk page of the relevant article. Cullen328 (talk) 09:58, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
The draft review situation has a backlog of thousands of drafts, but the system is not a queue. A submitted draft can be reviewed within days, weeks, or (sadly), months. David notMD (talk) 11:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey there! So I looked through the draft and noticed that under the "Career" section there are no citations. The "Career" section itself is well written, it's just that it simply needs a source, which you have provided in most other sections of the draft. Same goes for the "personal life" section. Hope this helps! :) Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
That's possible, but in my experience, I've found articles like this (detailed unreferenced personal history, self-published headshot photo, seemingly non-notable, new/single-purpose editor, etc.) are most often autobiographies and just wanted to put the guideline out there. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Refs 11-34 confirm that Mardnli acted in these films and TV series, but none of that contributes to notability. What is lacking are valid references to what has been published ABOUT Mardnli. Also, all content in External links deleted. If some of those websites were to published content about Mardnli, recover and use as references. David notMD (talk) 12:03, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Handling unanswered edit requests that have been archived
I've recently been working to reduce the edit requests backlog but I've run into a bit of a dilemma; as evidenced by the bottom section of this category page, there are at least a few talk page edit requests that have gone unanswered and automatically archived. What is the protocol or recommended course of action for dealing with these requests? Left guide (talk) 01:10, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
@Left guide I'm not sure if there is a specific guideline for this. However my best suggestion would follow two principles: do not edit archived discussions and do not ignore requests just because they are old. To do so, I would simply copy over the request from the archive, link it to the original one, then answer it. Perhaps other editors have better suggestions. Broc (talk) 12:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Translation: IP Range Blocked
How to gain proper access to ro.wikipedia.org? I've created this account solely for page translations, yet my ip range is blocked from using this account there. Lunar Dynamite (talk) 07:41, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
You'll need to address that on that version of Wikipedia; each language version of Wikipedia is separate. They should have some sort of process for you to challenge the block, just as we do here. 331dot (talk) 09:27, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Ah yes, all I have to do is use the ban appeal template on my talk page. Except, oops, looks like I can't even create the account in the first place because my IP range is blocked!
@Lunar Dynamite there is no trace of you in our logs, so we'll need more information, such as the IP range you're using or the admin that did the block. Both should appear in the error message you receive on rowiki. Strainu (talk) 12:39, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the message I'm getting:
"November 7, 2023 00:30 Andrei Stroe changed the block parameters for user 2a02:2f07::/32 discussion with expiry timeout September 4, 2024 16:08 (only as anonymous, no right to create accounts, disabled email, no right to edit own talk page) (Abuse use multiple accounts (Sock puppetry))" Lunar Dynamite (talk) 12:48, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Emdosis. It is possible, but extremely unlikely. You can request the permission here, but the instructions say "Unless you are requesting confirmation for a legitimate alternate account your request will almost certainly be denied." You are about one hundred edits away from being extended confirmed. To avoid accusations of gaming the permission, I encourage you to focus on productive, substantial editing for the next couple weeks or so. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:32, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
How to check for copyrighted content? Copyvios Detector always gives errors.
Hi, I want to check the content on the page Kehloori Folk Dance, Himachal Pradesh, but it is giving me an error Google Error: HTTP Error 429: Too Many Requests. When I don't use search engine, it doesn't really verify the copyrights.
I have tried using the tool Earwig's Copyvio Detector before and it works well if I already have a URL to match the Wiki content with. How to check for copyright on the mentioned page?
@Waonderer Just click on the Earwig link you provided and copy/paste the title of the Wikipedia article into the box. You can use a revision ID if you prefer but the article title is the simplest if you think it has current copyvio. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:29, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
.... sorry, I may have misunderstood what you had already tried. The "too many requests" is an Earwig daily limit. You can do the search without it (I did and it said 0%) but that's a less reliable answer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks. I tried third party tools to do plagiarism checks. Seems it is not copyrighted material, although it appeared to be so. Waonderer (talk) 16:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I am new to contributing and I had a hard time finding resources for this problem that I encountered.
So on a lot of talk sections, there are speculations or discussions on things that are out of date. Is it okay to delete these?
For example, on the talk page for association soccer player Fabinho, there are like 4 topics discussing his transfer from AS Monaco to Liverpool FC. The transfer saga happened in 2018 and since then, Fabinho isn't even at Liverpool anymore.
Would it be apporpriate to delete these, and furthermore, what is the procedure if I come across something similar in the future? HYTEN CREW (talk) 14:43, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Awesome, thanks for letting me know. Are there any techniques to maybe suggest other's delete their comments by observing that they are out of date? That sounds terribly malicious but I'm just trying to clean up talk sections.
Also, if there were a situation where I leave a comment on a talk page and someone replies and solves the problem (like this current thread) would it be appropriate to delete after resolution or jus leave it? HYTEN CREW (talk) 15:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Archiving discussions means moving them to sub-pages like "Archive 1", "Archive 2", etc. In fact you can see that happening right here in the Teahouse! To reiterate: don't just delete old threads, move them to an archive page. The help page I linked to discusses common techniques. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 15:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Oops, I replied in the wrong place. I'll just add that we usually keep records of past discussions or of questions that have been answered, so that readers who have the same question in future can see what's been said, whether it's on a talk page or on an archive sub-page. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 15:44, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Archiving outdated discussions on a talk page is preferable to simply deleting them, and you would want to be sure that the conversation is definitely not still ongoing or unresolved. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 15:15, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
institute for justice auto-archive lowercase sigmabot
I setup a auto-archive with the subt from lowercase sigmabot, but it does not appear to be working. Can someone please check my work to see why it would not automatically archive some of the threads already present on the article and then continue to automatically archive more going forward? 103.240.101.5 (talk) 04:28, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse! The bot won't run immediately—I think you just need to give it some time before its next run. I'll check back in a day or two and see if it's done! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:33, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
is there a way to just push some button and trigger an auto-archive bot? How often do they "run" other than the period of time that you set them to? In this case 14 days it is set for. 103.240.101.5 (talk) 04:38, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
There's no button to trigger it manually, but it won't wait 14 days to run. Rather, whenever the bot comes across that talk page, it'll check to see if any threads are over 14 days old, then archive those right away. I believe the bot is continuously running, and my guess is it won't take more than a day to hit the Institute for Justice talk page. Plus, it's always worth noting there are no deadlines around here, so there's really no rush. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 04:45, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
In this case, I'm not exactly sure how often the bot checks pages. I just know from experience this particular bot tends to stay pretty on top of things. If you're really dedicated, you could probably look through its source code to figure the exact timing out. Again though, my advice is just to wait. There's no rush here—it'll get done when it gets done. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 05:11, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
The bot checks daily; my experience (or recollection of past investigation) is that it starts its daily run around 11pm pacific time. Note though, on this archive setup: fourteen days is far, far too short. The interval should be based rationally around how much discussion is generated on the talk page. Fast moving articles on 'breaking' matters might warrant an extremely short interval like that, but certainly not the IJ article, which has a slow, intermittent pace; the most recent thread began a month ago; the penultimate thread a year ago. I've changed it to 90 days, which itself is still pretty low, but tolerable. cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is.17:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
(A separate datapoint I left out - the bot takes many hours to run; Wikipedia is a big place! In practice, if I set up archiving, I wait at least a day before I second-guess whether I did it right!) cheers. anastrophe, an editor he is.17:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Adding a WikiProject for a region/ province
Hi,
Balochistan is the largest province of Pakistan but doesn't have a WP. All the pages under Balochistan tag are redirected to WP Pakistan. There is something that exists but it shows inactive: Wikipedia:WikiProject Balochistan, Pakistan
Hi @Tribal Explorer, WikiProjects were very active back in the early days of Wikipedia, but now many of them are dormant. I would stick to Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan where you are more likely to receive an answer in case of a query, as the number of active editors there is rather large. Broc (talk) 12:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @GalacticPediaNerd. I am afraid your sandbox article is not suitable for publishing to Wikipedia. We require significant coverage in multiple, secondary, reliable sources to prove a person meets our notability criteria for people.
Your sandbox cites his Youtube (not independent), and Fandom (not reliable). The other three sources also do not meet our criteria. Qcne(talk)19:53, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
My client is paying a 3rd party to write his Wikipedia page. As we are nearing the end of the process, they are requesting that we send them $2000 for a "semi protection lock", which assures us that in general it will not be possible to edit our page due to the semi-protected status.
I have searched the web and Wikipedia, and I could not come up with the same information. We don't want to make a mistake. How important is it for us to get the lock, and is it something we can do later?
You're almost certainly being scammed. Don't send them any money. Semi protection is a thing that exists on Wikipedia, but you cannot pay for it. MrOllie (talk) 19:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
@Grn1029 Just for the record, you can see all the levels of protection at WP:PROTECT. Semi-protection only prevents IP users and those whose accounts are less than 4 days old with < 10 edits from editing the article. That leaves thousands of serious editors who will be able to edit it. You are certainly being scammed. Please also read WP:OWN. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:31, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Grn1029 In general, locks are applied if articles are being vandalized. Also, if an account holder is being paid to create either a draft to be submitted for review (AfC) or to directly create an article in main space, that person must declare their paid status on their User page. Undeclared paid editing is grounds for accounts being indefinitely blocked. If the paid editor skips the draft process and creates an article, that will then be evaluated by a person in the New Page Patrol group. That person can accept the article, kick it to draft, nominate it for the deletion process (AfD) or nominate it for Speedy deletion. In short, the creation of an article is no guarentee that it survives. David notMD (talk) 22:05, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Quick question on Copyright permission.
I have a quick question on copyright permission. I contacted a user on reddit about the use of an image that they published on the site. They stated that they are the owner of the image, and stated that they give permission for the image's use on Wikipedia. How should I add this? Thanks, Lordseriouspig21:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
@Lordseriouspig: Hey there! You probably shouldn't. Per our image use policy, put simply, Wikipedia only accepts images that are freely-licensed for anyone to use or that are used under fair use. We can't accept photos that are licensed specifically for Wikipedia only. If the Reddit user would like their image shared on Wikipedia, the best course of action is for them to release the photo under a Creative Commons license and upload it to Wikimedia Commons. The user can use this email template to release the image rights. Hope this helps and makes sense! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 22:02, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
@Lordseriouspig: Yes, that should work. I would double-check with them first to ensure they're okay with releasing the image for anyone to use, not just Wikipedia. I believe they would need to use their legal name, but you can assure them their email will only be seen by a small volunteer team bound by confidentiality agreements, so their personal information is safe. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 22:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Formatting authors with journal citation template
How important is it to list each individual author of a journal article using last1=, first1=, last2=, first2=, ...lastn=, firstn= versus using author= and listing everyone at once? When n is large it gets tedious. Also, is it preferable to spell out first names or are initials OK? I ask because some people when they format a journal article reference either don't use a citation template or if they do lump everyone in author= and/or only use first initials. If Wikipedia uses names in citation templates as meta data it probably makes sense to list every author individually and spell out first names. Thoughts on this appreciated. Nnev66 (talk) 17:36, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks @SafariScribe for the citer tool link!! This link makes my question moot because it's easy enough to get the auto-formating - I wish I'd looked harder for such a tool. Sad about all the hours I wasted formatting references by hand. Nnev66 (talk) 19:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
If it makes you feel better, whenever I have discovered a tool that automates something I have been doing manually for weeks or months, I think, 'At least I got some practice doing this manually so I understand what this tool is doing'. ClaudineChionh (she/her · talk · contribs · email) 02:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
New page formatting issues
Hi, I'm having some technical issues with the Rick Waters page that I haven't encountered with similar pages created earlier. The entire content was unexpectedly bolded after publishing, and I can't undo this formatting. I'm also unable to edit any existing text while attempting to revise and expand. Does anyone have troubleshooting suggestions? Thanks! W9793 (talk) 02:36, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@W9793: Not entirely sure, there was an extra "'''" (Wikitext to bold something) at the start of the article without the corresponding ending quotations. I assume it was just a VisualEditor glitch. CFA💬02:48, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
recently I have submitted this new page. It got rejected "The content of this submission includes material that does not meet Wikipedia's minimum standard for inline citations. Please cite your sources using footnotes.
Freedomwriter90, you might think that you have done so, but vast swathes of your draft remain unreferenced, and your draft cannot possibly be accepted in its current state. You still have a lot of work to do. Cullen328 (talk) 10:04, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
All of your reference formatting is wrong. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to insert refs into the text so that the software program will add a superscripted number there and compile all of the references at the end of the article. David notMD (talk) 12:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Freedomwriter90 You claim that all eight of the photographs are your "Own work", meaning that in the Wikipedia definition of these words, that you personally took all those photos. Is this true? And that suggests you have either a peronal or paid connection to Dr. Manohar - is that true? David notMD (talk) 21:52, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Copyright is assumed. Delete all. Presence or absence of images has not effect on establishing notability of an article. David notMD (talk) 02:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
You have resubmitted it, so you can see what the next reviewer says. He may be notable as a government official, but you haven't shown that yet. Most of the coverage about him is very brief, or the sources just document his actions. It would help to have sources that specifically describe which conduct merited him the award. 331dot (talk) 08:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I need help with my draft please. Some suggestions and a bit of help editing it from the pros.
Much appreciated. Thank you so much. Dt12345673838 (talk) 05:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Dt12345673838: I see the draft has been reviewed and accepted. However, please stop removing the copyvio-revdel tag from the top of the article (this needs to be resolved by an administrator, if you disagree with it please post on the articles talk page. It's also considered bad form to remove maintenance templates from an article if you published it yourself, especially when other edits disagree with that removal. Mdann52 (talk) 06:37, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Is it ok if i publish any article directly without making Draft and getting reviewed.(Just asking is it possible or not,please dont get me wrong.) --kemel49(connect)(contri)04:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Yup! You can move your article from the draft space to the mainspace with the move tool. Note that we still will review article per New Page Patrol, but it has a lower standard, and we can't just decline it, it has to be tagged for deletion. Lordseriouspig07:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hmmm.I see in bengali Wikipedia that one can use draft prefix if only he wishes.otherwise he can directly publish it.and i was in confusion if english wikipedia applies similar role or not.However, in bengali Wikipedia,if you publish a draft:article you can also move it by yourself to mainapace. overall every wikis follows different standards maybe and thats what made me confused. --kemel49(connect)(contri)07:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Just to be clear, although perhaps not recommended, on English Wikipedia you don't have to use the Draft namespace if you don't want to, right? So we are the same as Bengali Wikipedia in that regard? Commander Keane (talk) 09:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Commander Keane Correct. Editors can create drafts wherever they like, perhaps never save/publishing them until they are finished. However, only autoconfirmed editors can then directly place their work into mainspace (e.g. by searching for the proposed article title and clicking on the redlink in the search output). WP:AUTOPATROLLED editors will usually do it that way. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
How to stop indenting on replies
I've used Wikipedia for a while now and I cannot figure out how to make replies not indent, especially when using * to make a bullet point. It always automatically adds : to the beginning when I press "reply" even if I use the source editor, and I have to go back and make another edit to remove the :. Should I not be using the reply button and just using the source editor for the whole page or something?? PersusjCP (talk) 20:30, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
@PersusjCP: Yeah, that's the "Reply" button adding the automatic indent. I don't think there's a way to disable it. When replying to a discussion where I don't want the automatic indent, I usually just click "edit source" for the section and add my comment manually. CFA💬20:37, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Sometimes, of course, you may be responding directly to a comment that already has a string of serially-indented replies that diverge from your point: in that case it's best to add only the appropriate 'one more colon', which is easiest using 'Edit source', but you can also use 'Reply' and then go immediately into Edit source to modify the number of colons. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.235 (talk) 11:17, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I’m a more established editor, and this is a secondary account for the purpose of unpaid COI editing. This is my first draft for which I have a clear COI.
Unfortunately, the reviewer (with whom I have a fundamental disagreement on what sigcov for a company constitutes) is does not appear to be reachable, which means that the primary issue (excluding visual editor screw-ups, which I failed to check) of notability remains unaddressed. Could some (who preferably but not necessary speaks German) check the discussions on my talk page and on the draft, just to verify that at least the new sources are enough to get over the notability line?
Note for non-German editors: FAZ is a newspaper of record, and Juve, LTO and Azur are the three “standard” online legal news sites in Germany. HelixUnwinding (talk) 10:02, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @HelixUnwinding: based on a fairly quick scan through the sources, they appear to be mostly routine business reporting, although I'd say #10 is quite solid, and #11 seems pretty good also. We normally require 3+ sources that squarely meet the WP:GNG standard as required by WP:NCORP, therefore my conclusion is that we're almost but not quite yet there. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 10:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you very much. There is also this, which isn’t in the article yet. I also have this and this by FT, and this work with refugees, though I’m not sure if that’s an RS? Nevertheless, it should get us over the line, right?HelixUnwinding (talk) 10:58, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
That first FT article looks good for notability. It is based on the views of people independent of Bryter who have used it and the FT is certainly a WP:RS. The second is an interview, so not useful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:33, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
The green and red numbers in the revision history of articles and talk pages denote how many bytes were added or subtracted by the user's edit. Perception312 (talk) 14:19, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Travelingsponge: For context, one byte is roughly equal to one single character, so a (−60) means that the page lost about 60 characters in that edit. A (+40), on the other hand, means that the page gained about 40 characters in that edit. CFA💬14:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
The House of Life is an important element in the ancient Egyptian temple tradition, it is also the name of the Mystery School I am now opening after studying this tradition for nearly 50 years. I have prepared a draft page in my sandbox (netertgold). I do not want to write a scholarly article on the subject but to present the opportunity to bring these teachings into the world through my books (see amazon) I do not want to offend the self-promotion rule which I perfectly understand. - (there are No fees involved in my school). so I am asking for your advice. My work is similar, though not identical to Dolores Ashcroft- Nowicki (SOL) who was my first teacher and also to the Fellowship of Isis - (both have Wicki pages)
Welcome to the Teahouse @Netertgold. You may not use your user page in this way. See WP:USER to see what is permitted on your user page. If you are now opening this school it is very unlikely to meet our notability criteria, and I think you will be wasting your time, but if you still want to go ahead I suggest you begin by reading Help:Your first article, and then follow the instructions on that page. Shantavira|feed me14:41, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@R2D2Poland Welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. This edit you made looks fine to me, using a scan that you did yourself. To be honest, if you were unsure as to whether it was necessary, it might have been better to have raised it on the article's own talk page. But I think it was a useful addition - so thank you very much.
You're welcome :D. I was just thinking that you might've wanted to try it yourself (or disliked people editing your personal sandbox). Anyway, have a nice day! GoldRomean (talk) 20:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
This is why patience is key
Oh dear, it appears that me decreasing the size myself hastily instead of waiting for the bot to do it has made it so that the bigger image didn't disappear.
How long will it take for the big image to disappear?
File: File:Seal of Ambazonia (Sako).pngKxeon (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
My name is Yinka and I'm new to wiki and have been trying to make as much contributions as i can and so far it's pretty much going well. I made a wiki article on a really notable political figure in my country which i think will be so great to have on wiki because he is well known nationally here but has little media coverage as he is of the far more older generation. In a history class i attended he was talked about and i decided to gather all the resources/references i can and create a wiki article on this figure. the problem is wikipedia is asking for more reliable sources and i'm in between two mountains of abandoning an article which is legit due to minimal "reliable sources" i cited or keep trying. Yinka Williams (talk) 10:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Broc ! He does have articles on reliable sources in my country and also sources on the WP:NGRS list. but i guess i will work on modifying the article to only state the facts sourced from sources on the reliable sources list. Yinka Williams (talk) 10:49, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Courtesy Ping ? you mean like this Courtesy ping: SafariScribe ? Haha ! please forgive me i am spending a lot of time learning the terms but at least i get better and fall in love with writing more everyday as i learn. Yinka Williams (talk) 11:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you ! I love this community. as a young researcher and writer who just turned 19 this is where to be ! I am making more adjustments to the article and i ran into a more few much more reliable citations using the list. I thank you so much for the guide ! Yinka Williams (talk) 12:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Bracketing the deletion request in nowiki was wrong, but it does not matter. An editor made this one article: Benjamin Benedict Apugo. And then the same editor nominated if for deletion. That process typically takes 7-10 days, as the end of which an Administrator makes a keep ort delete decision. During this time you can work to improve the article and also propose at the AfD that it be kept, providing your reasons there. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, It was a mistake that i marked this article for deletion instead of the other. I don't know if that is my fault. but editors need to consider that know how to navigate wiki and skill of getting reliable info are two different things. i spent months researching this article and i see far less reliable articles on wiki. Please how do i revert this decision ? Yinka Williams (talk) 08:40, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
You cannot revert an AfD nomination. You can, as you did, make an argument for keeping the article at the AfD, and also improve the article. David notMD (talk) 02:35, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
How to save a draft while editing so as not lose all the work of the day
How to save a draft while editing so as not lose all the work of the day. if I refresh the page then many of my edits and contributions do not show up Gvbkwikiya (talk) 23:00, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello. You click "publish changes". That should be understood to mean "save", it does not mean "publish this to the encyclopedia". It used to say save, but was changed to emphasize that all edits are public.(even drafts) 331dot (talk) 23:09, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I've been attempting to improve the Nonmetal article by editing its content on the historical discovery of nonmetals, such as hydrogen, carbon, and bromine. The context is that I'm trying to develop the article with a view to a (further) FAC nomination.
Recently, one editor has deleted all of this content, supported by another editor, on the grounds of irrelevance (eh?). It's now apparently up to me to achieve consensus for (re)inclusion of this disputed content per WP:ONUS. The content in question is here [3].
Really? This seems like a bizarre way to build encyclopedic content. The subject matter has been in the article since 2015. Through nine FAC nominations (2021–2024), there have been no objections or comments about its inclusion. The most recent content, was supported by five reliable sources. After nearly a decade, it is unlikely that this content has suddenly become non-notable. Removing such information could be seen as knowledge censorship, which contradicts Wikipedia's principles. Indeed, WP:FAC criterion 1b. is, "comprehensive: it neglects no major facts or details and places the subject in context".
I've suggested to the initiating editor that if they still feel so disposed, the most appropriate course of action would be to seek to obtain consensus for removal of the content via an RFC. My suggestion was ignored, the initiatng editor simply reverted the content that I had re-added.
At this time I'm not sure whether to seek the assistance of an Admin, or to consider another option.
I'm not a new editor; I've been editing since 2011 (ca. 28,100 edits), and have managed to get three technical articles to FAC standard, but have never experienced anything like this before. It's rather demoralising. Thank you. — Sandbh (talk) 13:03, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Sandbh. I'm sorry you're experiencing a frustrating situation, and it's one I've also experienced. We have a weird situation where no one is quite sure how ONUS is meant to apply to long-standing content, but attempts to clarify the policy have been unsuccessful. As slow—perhaps unnecessarily so—as it might seem, you should pursue some dispute resolution. Maybe WP:Third opinion, if only one other editor is involved, or an WP:RFC or the WP:Dispute resolution noticeboard if more people are participating. The good news is that the policy WP:NOCON says that the disputed content should probably be restored if no consensus can be reached.
You might also want to put a pin in that issue while you work through improving the rest of the article. It's likely you and the others will mostly agree on improvements to the article, and a shared experience in the trenches might make everyone a bit more amenable to compromise. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 15:50, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Firefangledfeathers: Thanks very much. ONUS says, "Consensus may determine that certain information does not improve an article. Such information should be omitted or presented instead in a different article." That is fine by me, once consensus is established. But how is consenus determined? In this case one editor, supported by another editor, removed the content. I objected and restored the content, which has once again been removed from the article. Does two against one represent "consensus" in favour of the two i.e. to delete? I doubt it. I'm not even sure this is the right place to ask such a question, and am happy to ask elsewhere if needs be. --- Sandbh (talk) 06:54, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
How to source PDFs
How do I source a PDF? I’m trying to source a pdf for an article but the default citation thing seems to return an error. I’ve accessed the link through a google search link - if that helps. SillySarah321 (talk) 19:27, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
No, the URL used should be for the PDF, not a Google search result. It might be that there's an error in the citation template syntax, SillySarah321. Could you paste it here so we can check it? Cordless Larry (talk) 19:47, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
To cite that, you should use something like <ref>{{cite web|url=https://www.scotborders.gov.uk/downloads/file/831/broughton.pdf|title=Settlement profile: Broughton|work=Local Development Plan|publisher=Scottish Borders Council|accessdate=20 July 2024}}</ref>, which would render as "Settlement profile: Broughton"(PDF). Local Development Plan. Scottish Borders Council. Retrieved 20 July 2024. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:56, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Most of what you need to know can be found at your first article. You've already shown that you can edit an article (although I'd like to see some reliable sources along with your edits), so I'm wondering if you had any more specific question? -- D'n'B-t -- 10:07, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Where would I suggest that the "Report an issue with dark mode" button gets a confirmation?
I've fat-fingered the issue button twice in 20 minutes, don't think this is unique to me and seems annoying for any developer to be sent on a wild goose chase trying to figure out whats wrong with random pages when there isn't a problem
Alright. I added it as an uncontroversial move, since this is the correct spelling of the book as witnessed by the book cover image uploaded from 1883 that I added today. Thank you for letting me know where to post this request. Iljhgtn (talk) 12:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
How do i use <\rfdef>
The term '<\rfdef>' is confusing, so how do i use it? I've seen it being used, but it's very confusing. Can someone help me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 51.6.120.103 (talk) 14:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello IP editor. Sorry you've had to wait so long for a reply. This is more of a holding response, as I'm not familiar with the use of the term myself. Could you link to where you've seen it in use please?
I can find no use of it here on English Wikipedia at all, though have found {{rfdef|en}} in use on our sister project, Wiktionary. There, it seems to be used to highlight a word where a definition is deemed to be needed, with the requirement of specifying in which language that definition is needed in. See https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/Template:rfdef.
I could only find one page here on English Wikipedia which even mentions that template (but not in the format you've shown), though it still relates to people fixing Typos and the need to have clarity on Wiktionary (see Wikipedia:Typo Team/Wiktionary cheat sheet).
Maybe other users here have encountered this. Sorry I can't help further, but I just didn't want you to think your query was being completely ignored. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:39, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Landontogoodinnitu: Welcome to the Teahouse! Please read the entire message at the top of your draft—it explains exactly why your draft was declined and what you can do now. Note that correct doesn't mean verifiable—everything in your draft needs to be supported by reliable sources. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 14:43, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Bus Route Colours
Hey all, I'm currently editing a page on Mordialloc, Victoria, and I'm just wondering what colour box colour should I use? i.e., the 903 bus route on wikipedia is generally red with the colour tag of d7171f like this: 903. If anybody knows about an organised colour system for bus stops, please let me know! Thanks! AntiMono (talk) 23:55, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello - I have been using {avoided double redirect} incorrectly and creating categorization redundancy. I would like to request anyone with experience with automation to run a (hopefully already existing) script to prune redirects created by my account. Alternatively, any helpful pointers to completing this task on my own would be appreciated (should I try AWB?). Tule-hog (talk) 20:21, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
I often upload book covers when the image is missing, but findable. Which book cover should I add when both are available and both are only a couple years apart, the earliest edition (in a foreign language), or the earliest edition in English (since this is the English Wikipedia after all)?
This is the English edition book cover from 2012, and this is the original book cover which was in French published a few years earlier in 2009. I can upload one image to the infobox, but I want to make sure that I am making the right choice about this going forward and not just using my own best judgment. Iljhgtn (talk) 13:49, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Spino20012023, welcome to the Teahouse! The current Wikipedia page for Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade includes a summary of all the Macy's parades throughout the years. In general, in order for something to have its own article, it must meet certain criteria (please read Help:Your first article for more info!). The event must be notable and have been reported in reliable sources, such as newspapers. I see that 1997 Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade has its own article, but from what I gather the event went wrong and was therefore picked up in many news outlets and the parade became historically notable. From a quick Google search, I can't see anything particularly notable about the 1998 parade. Perhaps you can see if anything in one of the existing articles needs improving and start there? Unexpectedlydian♯4talk‽20:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
@Synoptics: Hi, I've fixed some of the citation errors in your draft that were causing some references to not display. Regarding your submission, it was declined because it needs more reliable sources to support the information. You're on the right track, but there are a few issues: Wiktionary is not a reliable source on Wikipedia because it is an open wiki and thus is user-generated content. SoundCloud also generally should not be used because it is more user-generated content. I don't know much about the three news articles you've cited; they seem to be local Christian newspapers so I don't see a reason they wouldn't be reliable. I'd imagine it'll be accepted if you find a few other news articles to use as citations. CFA💬01:52, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I made suggested changes as far as I know. But I cannot get the lyrics and critical reviews to show up. Could someone please help me further? I am making great progress due to the help of two of you very gracious people. Thank you. I published the improvements I made. But did not resubmit yet. I want to make sure we get it right. Synoptics (talk) 03:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
You are so, so kind. I assumed you made the lyrics and critical reviews appear. If you did, thank you. I added the reference from the Baptist Messenger. The Baptist Press was already mentioned. But the K-love reference appears in the citations twice. Would you please make sure it does not appear twice if it's not supposed to appear the second time? I am so indebted to you. Synoptics (talk) 03:57, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Synoptics: Done. Fixed the duplicate reference. Not sure why the sections weren't showing before, but I didn't do anything to fix it. Probably just a glitch. Let us know if you need any more help. Happy editing! CFA💬04:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I am sorry to bother you again. I think I did something to make the critical review section disappear. What I did was paste the Metro Voice News reference after the first paragraph in the critical review section, and I pasted the abbreviated reference for the K-love radio article after the two last critical reviews paragraphs. The reference numbers showed up fine. But then after awhile, the critical review section disappeared. So I deleted those references, but that critical review section has not reappeared. Could you please help me figure out how to put those referenced after the first paragraph and the last two paragraphs? Also the Baptist Press reference needs to be pasted after the last sentence in the second paragraph. I did paste the appreviated reference there for the Baptist Press, and the footnote number showed up. But I deleted it, too, along with the others. Synoptics (talk) 05:25, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Also, the Lyrics were quoted by the Metro Voice News Artcile. I pasted that one after the last line of the lyrics, but the Lyrics disappeared eventually, not right away. When the Lyrics disappeared, there were deleted. I deleted the reference from Metro Voice News and pasted the Lyrics back in and they did stay. Can you please help me paste the Metro Voice News reference after the Lyrics to document that that's where they came fromt? Synoptics (talk) 05:32, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
You can ignore my last two messages. I fised some things. There are just two things I'd like to know if you would please help me. After the lyrics, the Metro Voice News reference needs to be placed after the last line. And at the end of the first paragraph in the Critical Review section, the Baptist Press refereneces needs to be added. I messed both up when I tried doing it. But I added two other great sources. Synoptics (talk) 06:18, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I just found a wonderful way to make the info box superb, but do not know how to do this. Would you please make it look like the info box of Eternal Father, Strong to Save? In mine, Service Hymn of the Royal Navy would say Service Hymn of the Space Force. Navy Hymn has a sample audio. The sample audio for Space Force Hymn is at a link here: https://www.sheetmusicplus.com/en/product/creator-of-the-universe-the-space-force-hymn-21691914.html
This would be an outstanding touch with the title Creator of the Universe above the info box like the Navy Hymn does. Please help me. Synoptics (talk) 16:43, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
The music in this audio is done by my friend: Sung by Dan Kreider and Hymnworks.com That could be below the audio just like Sung by the US Navy Band's "See Chanters" is below the audio on their info box. Synoptics (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
To do it like Navy Hymn's info box: his goes in the info box too:
I managed to get the audio uploaded. Will you please help me put a nice header on it like on the info box? You are extremely nice. Also, I sourced the first paragraph. It's the same reference as the last paragraph. Did I do this correctly? Synoptics (talk) 05:55, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
SafariScribe seems stressed out. Nothing makes this article suitable to SafariScribe. i've complete revampled this to no avail. Synoptics (talk) 15:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
@Synoptics, although I am stressed, that doesn't mean you should keep resubmitting a draft without improvement, or seeking enquiry. However, you did well. I have moved your draft too. Congratulations! Safari ScribeEdits!Talk!16:01, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
The audio you linked is presumably copyrighted and can't be uploaded to Wikipedia. I looked on Commons for a free version but I couldn't find one. If you do, I'd be happy to add it to the infobox for you. CFA💬17:08, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
There is no copyright license listed anywhere, so I assume it can't. It gets a bit more complicated when it involves the government/military. If it was recorded by the Space Force itself then it would likely be in the public domain. I'm not the guy to ask about media copyright; maybe try asking a new question here or at the Help Desk. Happy editing! CFA💬17:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
reference error
I modified the wikipedia article "kidney cancer" by changing the 2018 incidence and mortality data to the latest IARC 2022.
What's a good example of a good or featured article about an American city? I want to use it as a guide to help me improve a city's article. TWOrantulaTM (enter the web) 05:21, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Why is the short description, usually at the top of the wikitext, invisible when viewing the page? I feel it would be useful to see the description that serves as a summary to the entire article, functioning as a WP:HATNOTE would.
Am I missing a setting to enable that, was this an intentional decision, or is this something I can propose at some forum? Cheers. LR.127 (talk) 06:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I am confused about use of name wikipedia by a pastor
A pastor, Cliffe Knechtle, widely on the internet advertises his name as "Cliffe Knechtle wikipedia." I use wikipedia frequently to get info, but can NOT find any wikipedia commentary on Cliffe Knechtle. This is confusing... 2601:189:4580:D6C0:951B:C958:89C7:E1F2 (talk) 12:07, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I doubt it's himself who says "Cliffe Knechtle wikipedia." There was briefly an article at Cliffe Knechtle on two days. The HTML title would have been "Cliffe Knechtle - Wikipedia". It was probably copied by some software. Lots of websites copy our articles. It's allowed if they satisfy Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
@SpeeroD You might be best to first create the article on Grand Prix d'Horlogerie de Genève [de] to show that it really is considered the finest award in the watch industry. That would help with the notability claim for Delaneau. The German article exists but wouldn't be acceptable here as it, too, is poorly sourced. The French one is much better but still has issues. However, I see that there are nearly 30 articles which mention that prize on the English Wikipedia. Taking sources from these would, I'm pretty sure, be a good start. It is even mentioned in clock. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much for taking the time to answear Mike.
Would you mind taking a look again, i spent a few hours adding more
@SpeeroD I made an edit which removed the external links, which we don't place within article text. I think that your references to the independent write-ups will get this over the line for notability. I reduced the reference for thejewelleryeditor to a single cite to the group of articles there, which I think is a better way to do that. Let's see what the next reviewer says when you re-submit the draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Got this error several times when resubmiting? I tried reading the explaination but i dont understand whats wrong.
An error occurred (ratelimited: You've exceeded your rate limit. Please wait some time and try again.). Please try again or refer to the help desk. SpeeroD (talk) 00:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
"On 1 January 2000" and "In January 2000" – and commas
Hi folks. I seem to remember a Wikipedia page, perhaps one part of the Manual of Style, explaining that "On 1 January 2000" has to be followed by a comma and "In January 2000" can be, but doesn't have to be followed by a comma. But I cannot find such a page, neither in the Manual of Style nor through a web search of Wikipedia. Does anybody know whether such a page exists? Kind regards, Robby.is.on (talk) 21:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Usage of dates is stated in MOS:DATESNO. Templates like {{Use dmy dates}} ensure correct view of references, but for in-line text, a lot of visual editing is wasted on ensuring consistency of these formats, instead of leaving tedious tasks to a bot. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
My apologies, I thought you were referencing distinction between MD,Y contraction versus DMY. Use whatever you want, until someone corrects you with an obscure policy. Imho, the most important consistency is within the article itself. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello @Bebo12321. Are you asking why no one has created an article for the Mecca Mall in the city of Mecca? Usually an article about a topic does not exist for two reasons:
1) a volunteer has not gotten around to making one yet.
2) the topic does not pass our notability criteria and therefore does not merit an article at this time.
Malls are not inherently notable, so you would need to find significant coverage of the mall in multiple, independent, reliable sources in order to meet notability. Qcne(talk)14:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I think it's more notable because mecca mall jordan is a stub and theres a lot of articles about makkah mall in mecca, and i dont know how to really write an article so can someone make it? Bebo12321 (talk) 15:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I am currently significantly expanding and improving the article Matthew Webb, but have some questions about the reliability of this book. The book is published by G. P. Putnam's Sons, but is not peer reviewed.
WP:Scholarship mentions that books should be vetted to be considered reliable, which is done by some reputable publishers. I have three questions:
Is there an online tool for checking the reputation of a publisher? If not, what is the best way to find out a publishers reputation.
If a publisher has not fact checked the book, is it considered unreliable, even with non-controversial topics?
If the source is determined to be reliable, are there any restrictions on how extensively it is used? There are a large amount of sources on Matthew Webb, but this is the only one that goes into detail in many areas of his life. Not using most of it would make the article much less comprehensive. It is a wonderful world (talk) 14:17, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
@It is a wonderful world the publisher is certainly well-known and long-established. The back cover of the book has number of quotations from reviews, which you could seek out to judge how well the book was received (bearing in mind that there may be bad reviews they didn't include!). I can't tell from the snippets I can read in the archive whether Watson quotes her sources: clearly the book would be most useful if it did. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:52, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia's notability guidelines for people and more specifically the notability guidelines for writers. Generally, a subject must have significant coverage in independent, reliable sources to be considered notable enough for a Wikipedia article. A good number to look for is 3 independent, reliable published sources that go in-depth about the subject. Currently, most of the references in your article only offer trivial mentions of the subject, which are not enough to establish notability. CFA💬15:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
The draft has been Declined twice, which is not the same as Rejected; the latter would have indicated that the reviewer saw no hope for success. David notMD (talk) 16:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
My draft keeps getting declined.
Hello! I have spent hours in gathering information, sources and references, but my draft Draft:Rafael_Baghdasaryan keeps getting declined for "non-reliable" or not significant coverage. I have provided some of the most famous sources from Russia and Armenia, popular news websites which are trusted, criminology books, a video, and several more. I am ready to give more sources, but on the Russian and Armenian wikipedia article for him there are only few sources, of which I've mostly used, but still, in contrast, I get declined. Yeghishedaviti (talk) 19:08, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Your draft has lengthy content that is not referenced. Either add references or deleted the unreferenced content (even if you believe it to be true). David notMD (talk) 23:40, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
For just one example, the Death section has seven paragraphs, but only the first has references, even though the others have quotations. All quotes must be referenced. David notMD (talk) 03:27, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes - you can use the same reference more than once. If you're using the Visual editor then you just need to copy+paste the [1] to everywhere that it applies. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I need help on how to deal with an unreasonable deletionist.
On 2024-05-22T20:48:31 I added a complete list of publications by John B. Goodenough, a Chemistry Nobel Prize recipient, who recently died at the age of 101.
3 weeks later, a deletionist removed my list, as recorded here:
John B. Goodenough: Revision history - Wikipedia
2024-06-11T08:08:44 Mikhail Ryazanov talk contribs m 41,597 bytes −224,070 →Works: MOS:CAPS, WP:NOTDATABASE (unformatted data dump isn't needed at all) undothank .
My question is: I feel, that the publication list is appropriate for Wikipedia, but I do not want to start a war with the deletionist. How do I proceed? Walter Tau (talk) 08:13, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello and welcome. While you don't need to start a "war", you do need to discuss your concerns with the other editor and explain why you see merit in your edit. If that fails to resolve the dispute, there are avenues of dispute resolution.
I would note that the user offered a policy to support their position. Wikipedia is not simply a collection of information about someone- notability and other policies, as well as consensus, determine what is included. 331dot (talk) 08:18, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
There are other Lists of Publications on Wikipedia:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_publications_by_Ottaviano_Petrucci .
Thank you for your suggestion. I will send samples links with existing Publications Lists on Wikipedia.
What do I do, if the other editor dismisses the existing examples of Publications Lists?
Walter Tau, a massive 224 K byte complete list of publications is not appropriate. It is excessive. A properly written Wikipedia biography is not a complete curriculum vitae. Instead, compile a much more concise curated list of his most frequently cited works. Since you are one of Goodenough's past colleagues, you have a conflict of interest and should defer to editors lacking a conflict of interest. Cullen328 (talk) 08:36, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for your reply, Cullen328 . I understand your rationale.
I want to ask now about the "conflict of interest" policy,
Usually, people, who have conflicts of interest, are the ones, who know the most about the subject. I am sure, I am not the first person in such situation. What is the proper way to handle it? Walter Tau (talk) 08:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
I am a bit confused how these suggestions reconcile to MOS:LISTSOFWORKS, which says: "Lists of published works should be included... The individual items in the list do not have to be sufficiently notable to merit their own separate articles. Complete lists of works, appropriately sourced to reliable scholarship are encouraged..." (my emphasis) --Gronk Oz (talk) 13:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
I think that implicity refers to things at least as substantial as very short books - including every article by an academic (or every article by a journalist for that matter) seems to be against the spirit. For instance this is obviously inappropriate. Perhaps the style guide should be considered in light of this example. -- D'n'B-t -- 14:25, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
The recommendation for a "complete list of works" does not extend to listing all science journal articles for which the person is an author or co-author. Again, the article already contains Selected works and Selected books. That is sufficient. David notMD (talk) 17:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
The "PGA" posting contains incorrect information, but I am not an expert in how to change the error. It is related to the section called "Fall Series (now defunct)". The PGA does not award FEDEX Cup points during the events in November and December. The players (usually outside the top 50 for the current year) add to their season points the points earned during those events to determine their place in the top 125 players for the subsequent year. The PGA has made the new process very difficult for fans to understand. Someone from the PGA needs to assist in the correct explanation on your posting. 2601:680:CC01:6100:44B4:BC54:6B43:17D1 (talk) 17:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Which article are we discussing, specifically? I'm not finding a section heading with the text "Fall Series (now defunct)" anywhere. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:03, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I know articles about countries that speak English natively are supposed to use the "formal"/"official" spelling and grammar used in that country (such as British English, Australian English). But what about other countries like India? Are they allowed to create their own standards as a descriptive rather than prescriptive process, so that Wikipedia has to follow them? Like in Rajendra Singh (RSS), we're supposed to use local phrasing, such as
During emergency he went underground and toured whole India.
He was born on 29 January in 1922 in village banail district buladshahar city of state Uttar Pradesh, when his father was posted there as an engineer.
What do you mean by "Article uses Category:Varieties of English templates"? That article doesn't. Also should "Indian English" be assumed to mean however average people speak English in India, even though average people in India aren't fluent in English? 2601:644:9083:5730:4597:6B0E:53F0:7347 (talk) 23:58, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Gandhi is famous around the world, not just to Indians. That article doesn't seem too different than British or American English, and doesn't have any of the unusual features that would be considered incorrect in the UK/USA/Canada/Australia/NZ/Ireland. Maybe articles that are written by Indians/Pakistanis, for Indians/Pakistanis would be written differently. 2601:644:9083:5730:4597:6B0E:53F0:7347 (talk) 01:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes, Indians are allowed to develop Standard Indian English. Are you suggesting that a string such as "in village banail district buladshahar city of state Uttar Pradesh" would be okayed by the copyediting/proofreading team of a respected Indian periodical or publisher, and that it complies with Standard Indian English? -- Hoary (talk) 03:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
[Edit conflict] Presumably because they needed it in the past, before the protection was added – feel free to search their 'View history' tabs. Note that they are only Semi-protected, which bars only users with no account (like me!), and those with accounts less than 4 days old and fewer than 10 edits.
Protection is not only an anti-vandalism measure, it also mitigates against good-faith but poor-quality edits by very inexperienced users, which subjects such as these seem likely to attract. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.235 (talk) 11:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
I've also observed that some editors are removing sourced content from Islam related articles. I also observed that some editors are getting blocked for adding sourced content if it is critical of Islam (like Kaalaka).-Ganeemath (talk) 11:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
BuddyHeigh, if you find a page wrongly protected, or if the protection is unlikely to be necessary, or it has been so long that you think the situation might have changed and would like to check if it has, you should contact the protecting admin/s. Any editor is also able to request modification, including removal, of protection settings at WP:RFP. Saddam Hussein was protected in 2010 by an admin who's still active. So, you could ask him whether he'd be open to removing protection to see if people have lost interest. The same thing was apparently tried on the Gaddafi, and protection reinstated this year, after it became apparent that it was still necessary. If you have enough examples and reasons to believe the problem is systemic, you can start discussion about it on a central venue. Why the hell would you assume it has anything to do with their ethnicity??!! — Usedtobecool☎️11:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Ganeemath, no he couldn't have. He is WP:INVOLVED. It's been less than two weeks since your account was created, which was less than two weeks after Kaalakaa was topic-banned. What made you think we're so easily bamboozled? — Usedtobecool☎️11:32, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Not only was I involved, but I cannot unilaterally override an Arbcom decision just because I might disagree with it. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
I Googled this (as you could have done) and "As of 2024, the Highest IQ ever recorded is of YoungHoon Kim from South Korea whose IQ is 276". Shantavira|feed me16:39, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Intelligence quotient says: "For modern IQ tests, the raw score is transformed to a normal distribution with mean 100 and standard deviation 15." By this definition, IQ 276 would mean intelligence like 1 out of 2.3×1031 people. That's clearly nonsense. The mass of that many people would be about 500 times the Sun and they would end up as a black hole. However, a search shows the 276 claim is based on a definiton using a standard deviation of 24 instead of 15. Then it corresponds to 1 out of 8.9×1012. That makes a little more sense but it's still 1000 times the World population. I call bullshit. It's not sensible to claim that even if there were a thousand times as many humans, this person would probably still be the most intelligent. They must have used a test which doesn't give meaningful results at extremes. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
With standard deviation 24, IQ 252 would correspond to 1 out of 8.3×109. That's around the actual World population and the highest IQ claim I might accept. Using the more common definition with standard deviation 15, it would be IQ 195. With this definition, IQ 276 changes to IQ 210. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
For future reference, the Reference Desk is the place to ask questions not directly related to Wikipedia. The volunteers there will be better equipped to answer your question. CFA💬16:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Best practices for citing page number in a book in epub format
I'm going to cite a text that's only available in EPUB format (at least, for now) and which I have read on a mobile device. That's different for me because I normally source from print books that I hold physically in my hand. What's the best way to cite the pagination, or make pagination clear that it's from an epub addition (as when/if a print copy or .pdf copy is available, presumably the pagination would vary in a big way)? JArthur1984 (talk) 20:00, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
@JArthur1984: I believe that is what the format parameter in {{cite book}} is for, although that requires a URL. H:CS1 also says "Other notes about reprintings, etc., should be placed after the template, and before </ref>." CFA💬20:09, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Are you supposed to change citations if the webpage for example sources another webpage with the same yet original info? Fewsnake (talk) 16:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Fewsnake, and welcome to the Teahouse. I don't quite understand your question, but i think you are talking about a source which cites another source. The relevant policy is WP:SAYWHEREYOUSAWIT. ColinFine (talk) 17:07, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello. If you felt like giving us just a smidgin of an idea of what kind of help you wanted, and in relation to what article (not "profile" - we don't have those in Wikipedia), maybe somebody would be able to help you. ColinFine (talk) 21:36, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Edits by Christians about places they know nothing about
I live in Slovakia and I have been reading many of the edits made by other editors which have distinctly discriminatory and inaccurate information about some places that have cultural value in Slovakia.
In particular, any mention of Slavic gods is accompanied by a reference to a single paper by Catholic activists claiming that there never were any Slavic gods.
This is extremely problematic and offensive.
Many of the churches and monasteries in Slovakia are established on known holy springs. Those churches supplanted much older pagan worship temples.
This is well documented and known by most of the population.
Please do not interject your beliefs in order to erase the beliefs of others.
AntiDionysius, I am looking at you. Brusnice (talk) 22:44, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
This situation is a good example of that; I have absolutely zero opinion of or knowledge on the status of pre-Christian Slavic gods (except one time I did go to a traditional springtime festival in Czechia and drank mead and watched them burn an effigy of the personification of winter, which was fascinating, but I digress). I reverted your edit because, like I said in my message on your talk page, I was passing by and saw you changing something in an article without providing a source. I have no stake in the content dispute. I hadn't read the article before your edit. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:49, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Then the alterations in the English version of Wikipedia needs better review. Because I just went to the Slovak version and it included the fact that the monastery was established in the 1300s, with Roman coins showing habitation to the 9th. Who is disputing it? Brusnice (talk) 23:35, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
I don't know. You're the one who said there are people making changes; presumably those are the people disputing it.
I agree, English Wikipedia could always do better. Part of keeping the Wiki up to high standards is stopping unsourced additions of content; that's why I reverted your edit. It's no deeper than that. If you want to re-make the edit with reference to a source, then go ahead. AntiDionysius (talk) 23:38, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
@Brusnice, does the information in the Slovak version have a reference? If so, and assuming that reference meets the criteria at WP:42, you could add the information with that reference. Otherwise, on English Wikipedia, unsourced content is usually removed by whoever sees it, regardless of their religion, nationality, or anything else. If the information is well known in Slovakia, you should have no trouble finding a good reference to back you up. Sources don't need to be in English, but they do need to contain the information you're adding (or returning to the article if it was previously deleted).
Please also refrain from making comments that sound very much like personal attacks, such as 'do not interject your beliefs in order to erase the beliefs of others'. You are assuming that the editors removing information are doing it to attack your country's history due to their religious bias, rather than taking the removal in good faith and assuming they - like you - are trying to improve Wikipedia. StartGrammarTime (talk) 04:04, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Brusnice, your guesses about what other editors know nothing about are not helpful. All that matters on Wikipedia is accurately summarizing what reliable sources say, not any editor's individual perception of another editor's knowledge or lack thereof. Cullen328 (talk) 07:28, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
I wish this editor would also actually name any sources they are objecting to. And stop adding unsourced to Krásny Brod as well as Waymarking.com which is crowdsourced. Doug Wellertalk15:06, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
This author took the information from the sign in the gallery, and from the information provided by the Slovak government when I was there last week.
Your sources are all theologians from supposed experts with no background in Ruthenian pagan practices, no degree from any Slovak or Ukrainian university, and who have never been to any of those places.
The single source that you all have quoted, repeatedly, in nearly every town referenced in eastern Slovakia or anything to do with Ruthenian gods is a Catholic activist that no one anyone in Slovakia has ever heard of.
It is clearly an attempt to rewrite history to suit evangelical biases.
Most of the villages and towns in the area have been established in the 9th century, but all the years given are in the 1400 to 1500s. This seems incredibly suspicious.
The Slovak version of Wikipedia gives much better historical information, yet the English version seems to have been written by GPT with a vendetta against paganism and Ruthenians.
Please remember that assuming good faith is something you are actually required to do here, not just asked to. But also, logically, it is just more likely that some people happen to have read different things to you and therefore internalised a different historiography than that there is a grand conspiracy at work. And it's really just not in your interest to assume everyone is on some crusade against you - this website works on consensus, so if you immediately get combative with neutral observers who are asking you to explain what you think, you make it less likely that the discussion goes your way.
Even aside from the intentions of the people who wrote the content you object to, you need to stop making everyone you're talking to responsible for those edits. You did that to me at the beginning of this discussion - saying that I was "interjecting" my "beliefs", when I had absolutely nothing to do with writing the article in the first place. Now when uninvolved editors ask you about what your specific objections are, you refer to "your sources", "the single source that you all have quoted" - again, equating the people on this message board with the writers of the article. English Wikipedia isn't written by a dozen people all in contact with each other, you know. AntiDionysius (talk) 22:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Creating a New Wikipage
Hello,
I recently attempted to make a new Wikipedia page, but it was declined. I thought that my 8+ sources would have done the job, but I might've missed something along the way. Could someone help me out with the creation and/or explain to me what went wrong?
Hello, Benjamin Arts, and welcome to the Teahouse.
While you are permitted to delete messages from your user talk page, it seems rather unkind to anybody who might want to help you to remove all the evidence of ever having created and submitted a draft from your user talk page!
As Draft:OrcaSemi has been deleted as unambiguous advertising, only admins can look at it and see what was in it anyway, but the reasons for the draft being declined were there on your user talk page before you blanked them.
Since I can't see the deleted draft, I can only give you general feedback; but I presume that you made the very common beginners' mistake (especially for those with a conflict of interest) of making your draft say what the company wants people to know about it, and it was probably based mostly on sources that come from the company.
Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
Furthermore, My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.. I realise that, as a paid editor, you may be unwilling to do this. But how on earth would you expect to do a professional job in a completely new area (for you) without spending any time on training in the necessary skills? (You made twelve edits to various articles before you tried this, some of which were wrong because you were unaware of Wikipedia's policy on ENGVAR. There is no shame in this, but it is an example of how you are not yet familiar with Wikipedia's policies and procedures). ColinFine (talk) 21:53, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
My apologies. Still learning the ropes. I saved the feedback onto a separate sheet for orderly purpose. I believe that neutral point of view can be utilized more for sure. Thanks for the feedback. Benjamin Arts (talk) 22:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Sample: OrcaSemi's mission is to address the challenging design problems faced by engineers that large tech companies demand. It furthers this mission by providing customer's real-world analog problems and innovate [sic] solutions that enable life-changing products to be realized. Wikipedia cares little for companies' "missions", and instead wants descriptions of and commentary on the companies from disinterested reliable sources. Thank you for saying that the company is paying you; am I correct in inferring from your user page that you are planning to create an article about yourself? -- Hoary (talk) 22:05, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
That's a good point. I will be sure to take into account more description-based writing on the page. As I am reading more, I am noticing that items like that a personal page might not be the best move... Benjamin Arts (talk) 22:22, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
@Andrybak, Hi thanks for your reply. Do you think I could put up some sort of banner on the top of the article linking to the talk page discussion? Coulomb1 (talk) 02:16, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to ask if there is any qualification needed for a song artist to get a separate page for their discography, maybe a minimum number of albums or songs? George13lol2 (talk) 06:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
When the discography would get so bulky that, if it remained in the article about the "song artist" (singer?), that article would be horribly bulky. Of course books aren't discs, but they have similarities; if the content of what's now "Bibliography of Gianni Berengo Gardin" were instead a (large!) part of the article "Gianni Berengo Gardin", the latter would be grotesque. -- Hoary (talk) 06:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Hmm I see so I guess there is no specific guideline for that then. Thanks.
Hello, my name is Rosalyn, I am an employee at Klesch Group and wanted to reach out to the community for assistance around refreshing the A. Gary Klesch Wikipedia article. The article currently has two warning boxes for neutrality and referencing and I would like to work with neutral editors to ensure only well sourced information is used and the tone of the article is balanced.
As someone with a connection to Gary, I am keen not to make any changes unilaterally, but instead collaborate with neutral editors. I have left a recommendation for the article to be updated on the Talk page and wondered if anyone would be kind enough to review, share feedback and action?
Hello, Rosalyn, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for being open about your paid status.
You have generally gone about this in the right way.
However, (and this is just my opinion) by requesting one huge monolithic change you may have made your change less likely to be picked up. Remember that we are all volunteers here, and people work on what they choose.
As you have presented the request - carefully worked though it is - an editor is going to have to take it on as a whole, which may take considerable time. It's possible somebody may decide to do so; but if you presented a series of separate, more focussed requests, I think it is more likely that people would take them on, one at a time.
I have't looked at your request in detail, and perhaps there's no way to break it up. But I encourage you to look and see if you can. ColinFine (talk) 09:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi ColinFine, I appreciate the guidance as I'm new to this! Thanks for the guidance on structuring the update suggestions - I'll have a look at breaking it up into smaller sections and update the talk page Rosalyn15 (talk) 09:51, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
A list of small proposed changes will be an improvement on one humungous rewrite, but it'll still be off-putting to us volunteers who actually do the work. How about starting with one small change to fix an error, and including a reference. If that goes well, then try another one or two. Maproom (talk) 11:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
NEED HELP TO PUBLISH MY QUANTUM ECONOMIC MODEL
Hey guys, I'm new to wikipedia, my first article was declined today because it lacked formality and sources. I was said that it sounded more like an essay. I'm the orginal owner of the concept, I have all rights to concept, its a product of my pure human ingenuity. can someone help me re-edit it so I can submit it for review. would be lovely if someone can help. article is here, Draft:Quantum Economic Model, The future of economics - WikipediaKrypton369 (talk) 09:27, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
No Wikipedia article should ever advance an argument, conclusion, or recommendation, unless it is summarising an argument, conclusion, or recommendation from a single, attributed, reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 09:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Your "original source" (researchgate)) is your own unpublished document from 2021. I concur with "Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought". David notMD (talk) 10:31, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
I edited a wikipedia page about Michael Wallis-Brown, head of Mobile Financial Services at Ericsson back in March. Now I noticed the page is gone. Can you please help and see what has happened? Original link: Michael Wallis-Brown
.... note that this was a "soft" deletion and you can request it be reinstated if you believe there are now suitable sources to meet the notability requirements. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:53, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Ofalk88. I can't see the deleted article, but judging from what was in the deletion discussion, I suggest that you look for sources each of which meets all three of the criteria in WP:42: reliable, independent, and with significant coverage of Wallis-Brown specifically, and ignore/remove pretty well all other sources. If you can't find at least three sources which meet this standard (and @Dclemens1971 said they looked for them last month) then give up. ColinFine (talk) 13:05, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Ofalk88. Here you stated that you work for Ericsson. This makes you a paid editor for any article associated in any way with Ericsson, and it is a condition of the terms of use of Wikipedia that you make a formal declaration of that fact, preferably on your user page (details in that link). Please do this before making any other edits. ColinFine (talk) 13:13, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you. I have added more details. Couldn't find a clear template but added aspects that Wiki seems to ask for. Ofalk88 (talk) 14:10, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
User page template for autistic editors
I am autistic and due to that I frequently misperceive tone in text; sometimes I can come across a bit defensive when I misread people as being offensive. Ideally there would be an appropriate template I could put on my user page to communicate that:
I am not being purposefully dense, obtuse, or rude, but I might've missed some nuance
You'll have an easier time communicating with me if you're direct
PS: I still hold myself and expect to be held to WP:RULES including WP:CONDUCT; I am not asking for a free pass to be unkind, rather trying to clarify my communication style to editors who come across me. LinuxNCats (talk) 10:55, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Up until now, Wikipedia has written about the band W.E.T. (Work Of Art, Eclipse, Talisman) in English, but now I can't find it. Only in German. What is the reason for this? 46.139.144.117 (talk) 09:46, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
The article W.E.T. (band) was deleted on 20 February 2017, the reason being (A7: Article about an eligible subject, which does not credibly indicate the importance or significance of the subject) - That deletion was over 7 years ago, so hardly "up until now", but I can't find it under any other title. Arjayay (talk) 09:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
I remember that even this year they wrote about them in English. I thought about them:
I see no relation between your link and Wikipedia. W.E.T. (Q4016784) has links to articles in German, Italian and Portuguese but no English link since W.E.T. (band) was deleted in 2017. If you used a browser with machine translation to English then it's possible you actually saw one of the three non-English Wikipedia articles. Wikipedia itself does not offer machine translation. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
That is not what Lectonar and PrimeHunter are trying to say. I believe they are talking about how the Wikipedia article has been deleted, but the band still exists. Regards — 48JCL11:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
I found it in German, but not in English. They even wrote about them in English this year. Is it possible that it was deleted because it is being edited as the new album might be coming out which is still no news? 46.139.144.117 (talk) 13:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
That's the front page of Facebook. The content is tailored to the viewer. You keep posting links where nobody else can find anything related to Wikipedia. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:45, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I don't know any other way, because I can't find it either. Even this year, Wikipedia wrote about them in English. Then suddenly I couldn't find the English wikipedia about them. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 17:39, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
The jpeg that you linked to above is from this article from 2018. The site blabbermouth.net prevents people from opening links directly to their images so that competitors don't use up all their bandwidth. The solution there is to link to the actual webpage you were reading and not an image you found on it. The same site posted another article in 2020, they're mentioned in passing in 2023, again on blabbermouth.net which seems to have more coverage of this particular band than anywhere else. In particular the English Wikipedia hasn't had an article on W.E.T. since 2017. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:56, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
I remember how it was. If it hadn't been, I wouldn't have seen it in English at the beginning of 2024 either. I saw it in English then. But I can't find it for a few days. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 19:17, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
No. It really was wikipedia. I don't know which day it disappeared, because I last looked for it sometime in the spring of 2024, since then I looked for it for the first time and I couldn't find it anymore. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 19:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)
No. It really was wikipedia. I don't know which day it disappeared, because I last looked for it sometime in the spring of 2024, since then I looked for it for the first time and I couldn't find it anymore. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
There are articles about the bands Wet, Wet Wet Wet, Wet Leg, The Weathergirls and Travis - could you possibly have read one of those? The article on W.E.T. absolutely was deleted in 2017 and I'm struggling to get why you're so adamant that this isn't the case. -- D'n'B-t -- 14:12, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Because I remember that it wasn't canceled then, because if it had been canceled then, I wouldn't have seen it at all this year. Really. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 15:35, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
We've given you the most likely plausible explanations for what it is that you saw. You are, of course, free to not accept these, but we have nothing else to say about it. 331dot (talk) 09:10, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
If this article had been deleted in 2017, I would not have seen the albums listed in the discography. I would never have found this article before. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 09:20, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
I searched for 4m, but I couldn't find it either. Maybe they could delete it because it is being edited because of the new album (which will be released this year)? 46.139.144.117 (talk) 09:51, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Why was the last Wikipedia article I found about them at the beginning of this year removed? I am waiting for an answer from whoever deals with such edits. 46.139.144.117 (talk) 11:05, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
Your question sounds to me like "There's a tree over there, so how can there be a cloud in the sky?"
What has that FB post to do with WP? Just because something exists, it will not necessarily have (or keep having) a WP article, does that help? Articles on WP can be deleted. Fwiw, Wet (band) exists. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:41, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes, that's right. Wikipedia doesn't deal with hypothetical future releases with nothing to be said about them - see WP:SPECULATION for more info. If a reliable source were to come out with a release date, a name or anything more concrete than that one band member is working on it, then something could be added to article. To say that an album will be released 2024 is pure speculation, as even the Facebook post above doesn't say that and its well known that creative endevours can be years in the making and even abandonded at any stage. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:48, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Main Page vs Sub Page
I have a (current) main page that I would like to make a sub page and create a new main page. How to? Thanks.
@GARYRUE If you created a topic more niche than needed you can do two things. Firstly, you can just rescope the topic, i.e. add more information about the general topic to the article. If the more niche topic is independently notable and shouldn't be merged in it's entirety into a larger page, simply give a small section summarizing the daughter topic in the central article and link the daughter article with {{main article}}. If you give the specific example that you are talking about, I can go into more depth. ✶Quxyz✶15:47, 21 July 2024 (UTC)
I think what I'd like to do is delete the unpublished page I had created, keep my account and start over. But I don't see how to do that. (My apologies, I'm so very new at Wikipedia.)
If you're the sole editor of a page then you can add the template {{db-self}} to the page and an administrator will come along and delete it for you. That said, I can't see where you've created any pages. -- D'n'B-t -- 17:38, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
If Sleeperink is also you, then you should abandon one of the two accounts, as it is strongly encouraged to keep to one account per person (and one person per account). If you really want that page deleted, the you could log in as Sleeperink and add {{db-self}} to the page. However will get deleted anyway after a period of time once it's apparent that they're abandoned. Whichever one of the two accounts you stick with, you should definitely read some guidance on editing with a Conflict of Interest. -- D'n'B-t -- 18:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
How to create list of references
I'm writing an article on an artist, Peter Stilton. I've put in text and short references. I've got an alphabetical Word list of the references with fuller information. How do I use it to create a full reference list at the end of my article?
Also: how do I insert photos of the paintings? Do I need to have each photo in a separate file? (I cannot copy and paste?)
Thank you!!
Evelyn
No, this handy plugin states that that's a "Generally unreliable source", which means it's on WP:RSP. The listing there states There is consensus that Daily Kos should generally be avoided as a source, especially for controversial political topics where better sources are available. As an activism blog that publishes user-generated content with a progressive point of view, many editors consider Daily Kos to inappropriately blur news reporting and opinion.CommissarDoggoTalk?17:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Yep. So here is where you have to use your judgement. Other people's judgement may differ from yours, then you can talk about it. However, context matters. What from Vox do you want to use as a cite for what content on WP? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:54, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
That is what I was searching for! I was looking for source that say she support medicare for all beside being caucus member. 174.135.36.220 (talk) 20:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
"Suggested Edits" question
In regards to the selection of edits, should I try to stick towards topics i know about? or should I just help where I can with as many articles as i can HyperNover (talk) 06:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
You can do either, as you prefer. ("Knowing about topics" isn't as helpful as "knowing how to find reliable sources about topics".) Maproom (talk) 10:50, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
HyperNover, Monoid ring is an example of an article that's on a topic that I don't understand and that I therefore avoid. In the state it was in when I first encountered it, Kościuszko at Racławice was an example of a draft (now article) on a topic of which I have close to zero knowledge but of which I think I have a degree of understanding that can help. Piotrus has a far better understanding of it than I do, but I think (and hope) that I too contributed to improving it. I suggest getting stuck in to one article at a time, each in a topic area that you understand; and always, as Maproom suggests, depending on reliable sources for any additions. -- Hoary (talk) 22:20, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Additional help with a new wiki entry
Hello,
We are creating new wiki entries for several Canadian artist with the aim of bringing visibility and recognition to artists who, for some strange reason, do not have a wiki.
Draft:Victor Arroyo Declined four times so far, all for not adequate references. IMDb is not considered a valid ref. Refs that he has lectured at several institutes of higher learning do not contribute to establishing notability. Also, each Wikipedia account must be for one person only, so no "we" allowed for actual editing. David notMD (talk) 15:49, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the feedback!
Arroyo is notorious, as stated in several secondary sources. Being exhibited at the CCA (twice) and other museums, art galleries, and film festivals is not a small feat.
- In this particular case (visual artist and filmmaker) IMDB is a necessary source. Would you recommend then, removing altogether IMDB as a source?
- Would MUBI be considered a reliable secondary source?
https://mubi.com/en/cast/victor-arroyo
- To your knowledge, is there a dispute process for declined wiki entries?
- Is there a process for requesting a different reviewer, probably, specialized in fine arts?
Hi @Aguilaosol: your sources are almost entirely primary, and therefore cannot establish notability according to our general notability guideline WP:GNG. Unless you can find multiple sources which meet that standard, your only other option is to show that this person satisfies our special notability guideline for artists, WP:ARTIST. In so doing, you must produce evidence that clearly proves they objectively meet at least one of the four criteria in that guideline.
And no, there is no process for requesting a different reviewer, as such; in any case, two separate reviewers have already declined this draft for the same reason. Also, a reviewer does not need to be a subject-matter expert in order to assess whether a draft meets our guidelines and policies; as reviewers, we don't judge whether the subject "deserves" to have an article, but whether the draft satisfies our core requirements for publication. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:32, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
@Aguilaosol, what we're looking for are secondary, independent sources on the artist or their work. This is a good one - you want more like that.
When you submit your drafts, make sure to tag them for WP:CANADA on the talk page. This will increase the likelihood that you get a reviewer who knows what you're talking about, and also will probably increase the likelihood you'll get someone who won't skip the draft because it has French-language sources. (Reviewers can review from the pile in any order, and most tend to stick to areas of interest/competence.) -- asilvering (talk) 16:59, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Aguilaosol . Please note that "with the aim of bringing visibility and recognition to artists" is called promotion, and is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 18:30, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Henri Mercier and Edouard Mercier are easily confused, because Henri's first name is Edouard; he is known by his middle name, Henri. I could not meet the challenge of inserting "not to be confused with" at the top of each article. Is another editor up to it? Thanks. Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:41, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
P.S. Edouard Joseph Mercier has an accent over the "E" in the Wikipedia article, but not in the title of the article. Edouard Henri Mercier does not have an accent over the "E" in his article, and the title of the article does not use "Edouard." I don't know in which cases an accent is appropriate.Maurice Magnus (talk) 23:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
I am attempting to create a draft article for "andamiro" (https://www.andamiro.com/global/), as it is a red link on many dance-game related articles.
However, the article seems barren without a proper company logo beside it. I am unsure how to add this, due to the process of actually adding the image talking about sorts of "CCL"'s that i personally have no idea about. HyperNover (talk) 23:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Andamiro logo@HyperNover: Welcome to the Teahouse! I've uploaded the logo to Wikimedia Commons, the media repository used by Wikipedia. Since this logo is simple enough, it falls doesn't meet the threshold of originality and is considered to be in the public domain, free to use. It's now located at File:Andamiro logo.png, so you can add that to your draft article using [[File:Andamiro logo.png|thumb|Andamiro logo]] to achieve the result shown here. Hope this helps—let me know if you have any further questions! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 00:07, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
@HyperNover: Sure! The main issue here, from a quick look, is that you haven't added any sources to the article that would establish Andamiro's notability. Per our general notability guideline, A topic is presumed to be suitable for a stand-alone article or list when it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Andamiro has to pass this test before an article about it can exist. Out of the four references in your draft so far, two are links to the company's website (not independent), and two are to user-generated content (a forum and Wikipedia itself, not reliable). You'll need to do more research to find better sources before your draft will pass a review. Bsoyka (t • c • g) 00:23, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Can you give me some examples of what to look for?
Not really sure what independent sources i'm supposed to reference, i thought that meant like personal discussions separated from company
i got the alert that i wasn't supposed to reference wikipedia itself.
Is this like, news articles?
The whole company seems pretty notable to me, i'm not sure how to prove that either.
@Hoary@Bsoyka How's this for references? I tried to stick towards articles and news postings, rather than forum pages and alternate miscelanious websites. Other than what i've found, and basic knowledge that would be confusing to challenge, it's been difficult to find other references. HyperNover (talk) 02:46, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
My submission was declined for not enough references
while this is unfortunate, i'm seriously at a lack for finding what i'm actually supposed to add
the pages regarding referencing and high quality sources are far too advanced for my english skills, and i'm not exactly sure what else i'm supposed to reference HyperNover (talk) 06:55, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
HyperNover, remove any reference to Wikipedia. Remove any reference to the company itself for any achievement (such as that the company "was qualified as a military supplied security measurement company"). Remove any remaining reference that isn't what en:Wikipedia regards as a reliable source. Make sure that all the content does have a reference to what en:Wikipedia regards as a reliable source, and that the draft has references to sources that discuss the company in depth. When you've done that, submit the draft. -- Hoary (talk) 02:04, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
My (personal) quick guide to successfully creating an article:
Find at least three reliable independent sources with significant coverage of the subject. Critically evaluate each one against all three of the criteria in WP:42.
If you have found at least three (and not otherwise), forget everything that you know about the subject, and write a draft summarising what those sources say and nothing else. There's room for some editorial discretion here as to what is appropriate, but make sure you don't leave out something just because you disagree with it.
Approached by a company offering free consultancy for Wikipedia articles
Hello all, I recently received an email from a company sharing that they can provide free consultancy services for drafting and editing Wikipedia articles. I also noticed that their company name is listed on this Wikipedia workpage here under the "List of paid editing companies." I am uncertain if this is an acceptable practice. May I seek some advice? Thank you! Ccyfferent (talk) 03:58, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
Ccyfferent, undisclosed paid editing is prohibited. Disclosed paid editing is allowed, however very few of us actually think it's a good thing, it is mostly just tolerated, begrudgingly. Any paid advocate would still be editing for their client as an individual editor, and would have to abide by all the rules same as everyone else, plus a few more:
They need to disclose their client and employer.
They may only submit drafts and make edit requests on the talk page of articles. Direct editing of articles would be limited to fixing typos and vandalisms.
Incompetence and time-wasting is tolerated less. They may not, for example, keep rehashing the same issues, keep posting walls of text and demand that volunteers review their proposals on their schedule.
If you do hire a paid editor and their conduct is poor, it will forever tarnish the reputation among Wikipedia editors of whichever topic they happen to be working for. If the topic is of wider interest, the misconduct is often even picked up by the media. The subject will invite closer scrutiny in the future. For example, a new article on a borderline notable topic is much more likely to be tolerated or not urgently sought deletion of, if created by an independent volunteer with some track record, than if it has prior history of having been pushed by paid editors or single purpose accounts with apparent conflicts of interest. Generally, I would advise that you refrain from hiring a paid service to write for you unless you are okay with losing your money and getting no results, with some likelihood of it getting back to you and tarnishing your reputation in real life. That is the most common outcome. Regards! — Usedtobecool☎️04:34, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
"Free" can be bait-and-switch, meaning they offer a "free" service, but for a fee can assign you to one of their more experienced editors. And so on, and so on. David notMD (talk) 17:02, 22 July 2024 (UTC)
@Cogsan. I'm not sure what you mean by "get the r", but as far as I am aware, all redirects are manually created and no templates are involved. Does that answner your question? Shantavira|feed me16:28, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@Agnieszka653 I'm afraid that Teahouse hosts tend to be generalists who provide advice about editing, and are not specialists in arcane literature. On the other hand, that list has 85 page watchers, who are, presumably, interested in it. You should use the Talk Page to ask your question and perhaps mention you have started a discussion on the Talk Page of the Horror Project which relates to it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:16, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
As a fan of the Mythos, I think your 'standardisation' plan for this article is an excellent one, and I don't think overall length is a problem, since the Contents box enables easy navigation. I encourage you to continue. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.235 (talk) 11:12, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
"Error: unknown archive URL"
Hello, I just added a lot of sections to the article "Line drawing algorithm", which I translated from the german version. A couple of the references (which I also took directly from the german article while only fixing the formatting of the dates) have "Error: unknown archive URL" displayed behind them. I couldn't quite figure out how to fix this, is this an issue and if yes does anybody know how to fix it? Yoneda-Emma (talk) 19:18, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, is there a way I may edit the subtitles of an audio file (.ogg)? I was reading one and saw an error I desire to correct. Thank you! ButterCashier (talk) 19:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I am new to Wikipedia. The page Africa Social Impact Summit is yet to reviewed; it was created about 9 weeks ago. Please can it be reviewed, it is taking so long? thanks. Nnamdi93 (talk) 12:29, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@Nnamdi93 You either created the article in mainspace or you moved it from draft straight to mainspace, either way it doesn't seem to have gone through the articles for creation process.
If you create a page in mainspace then one of two things will happen before it can be shown on search engines; either a new page patroller comes along and decides whether it's ok or not, or 90 days passes, after which it's automatically shown on search engines.
Although both new page patrol and articles for creation are both formal reviews, if you want to have the page be reviewed through articles for creation (which is the normal process for newer editors), I will happily move it to a draft so it can go through the articles for creation process, however do note that that process can take up to 3 months due to how backlogged they are. CommissarDoggoTalk?12:48, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you @CommissarDoggo, the article has already spent about 50 days unreviewed. I will however see that it be moved back to draft to unable you work on it. Thank you. Nnamdi93 (talk) 13:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@Nnamdi93 Welcome to Teahouse! Africa Social Impact Summit is already published. It is still awaiting a review, which is more an additional quality assurance. I notice a heavy reliance on WP:PRIMARY sources, and fewer secondary sources. Some citations link to empty websites, for example msn.com. You are encouraged to continue making quality improvements to the article in the meantime. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 12:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Nnamdi93. The draft reads very much as what ASIS wants people to know about itself, with a fair bit of meaningless PR-speak. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 14:21, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@Condonfnm: Welcome to Wikipedia! If you visit your Homepage, there should be a sidebar on the right that displays your mentor (if you were assigned one). CFA💬21:19, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
The Wikipedia article titled "2023 Hamas-led attack on Israel" has a section in it that I believe to be vandalism. It reads:
"This article is about 2023 attacks on Israel from Gaza. For American attack on Afghanistan in 2001, see United States invasion of Afghanistan. For the war initiated by the attack, see Israel–Hamas war."
The bolded sentence is obviously not something that could be confused with the article's subject. Where can I report this to someone with WP:XC edit permissions? JohnR1Roberts (talk) 16:19, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
i really want to write articles in wikipedia.But i dont know what topic is suitable.What should i do?
Thank you. Junurita (talk) 09:52, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
@Junurita a suggestion I give to new editors is to start out with simpler tasks, such as the ones listed at Wikipedia:Task Center. Writing a good quality article is no easy task. If you still want to do it, I would pick a topic in which you are familiar and for which you have access to sources. Broc (talk) 10:56, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
@Junurita I notice from your Userpage that you seem to be interested in chemistry. We have an active group of editors for that topic, which you can join. See WP:CHEM and its linked pages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:58, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Population density values in Wikipedia articles are very often wrong
I've observed this in many articles over the years. I can understand that population varies over time, but to be honest, sometimes I don't understand where they get the values, because they are often way off. I think the solution to this is to modify the Geography template we currently use to one that just divides the population into the area.
I'll give you one example of what I'm talking about. Let's look at this article: Morocco. In the template it says that the population density is 50. But if you divide the 2022 population into the area, you get 85. It's way off. Where did they get the 50 value? 12qwas (talk) 06:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Looks like old vandalism that has not been noticed: diff, a change in 2018 from 79 to 50. Thank you for reporting this. MKFI (talk) 08:53, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
It wasn't vandalism. It's about how to treat the disputed territory Western Sahara. The infobox showed two areas at the time but only one population and density. Somebody changed the density to match the other area. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:42, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Account creation question
There seems to be some code/bot that is creating accounts at assorted wikis (multiple languages) by copying from
meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:... I came across this as someone thought I had just joined the swwiki and sent me a welcome message. It is continuing, and via my global account info I was added to sw.wikipedia.org on July 23 and ka.wikipedia.org on July 25. Does anyone know what is going on here?
N.B., this may not be the best place for this question, I am just starting here -- suggestions for better locations would be useful.
@Ldm1954 AFAIK, local accounts for each project are created automatically when you first log on to that wiki. Some wikis, such as swwiki, have set up auto-welcoming systems. There isn't really a way to delete your local accounts or opt-out of the welcomes. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs)09:36, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
@CanonNi, I was not clear enough. I did not sign into or log into either swwiki or kawiki. These (and many others) user accounts were created without asking me. By searching the global creation logs and selected pages it is clear that the information was copied from metawiki.
As an illustration, did you create an account at zh.wikisource.org on July 17 as well as the many others, see your global accounts. Perhaps you did;
N.B., I only found out because a newish user was doing swwiki welcomes to what he thought were newly registered users, but are buggy bot creations. Ldm1954 (talk) 09:54, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
@Ldm1954: If you are logged in at any Wikipedia language or other Wikimedia wiki when you view a page at another wiki then your account is automatically created there if it doesn't already exist (unless something prevents the login from being detected). If a wiki imports a page with page history from another wiki where you edited the page then your account can also be created even if you have never visited the wiki. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:06, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I did, but IMHO that should not have automatically created an account for me, I think that is a bug. Anyone, now I know what is going on so I will move on to my never shrinking "To Do" list. Ldm1954 (talk) 12:39, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
@Ldm1954: I think it's a nice feature that you automatically remain logged in when you visit another Wikimedia wiki. It for example means that your IP address isn't revealed if you make an edit, your Special:GlobalPreferences are applied, and you can get notifications from other wikis. But welcome messages to your local talk page can be annoying. I have a proposal at meta:Welcoming policy to disallow it for users with no edits. If a system could be made where you could remain logged in without creating the local account unless you edit or log in with your password then that might have merit too. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:58, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Anti-Vandalism
Hey! I recently went onto the task-center page, and I found out I can do anti-vandalism. Is there any way I could join the CVU? WhoIsBean (talk) 13:17, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
@WhoIsBean Almost all long-term editors here will notice vandalism and revert it. Those who join the WP:CVU are volunteers like the rest of us but want to highlight that more of their time will be spent on that task than alternative ways to use their time here. Note that we have a special definition of what we mean by WP:Vandalism, so reading that page should be your first step. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:25, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, relatively new Wikipedia editor here. I've created a page yesterday for Sierpiński's theorem on metric spaces. In the citations, I'd like to give pointers like "Theorem 1.9.6" or "Exercise 7.12" in addition to page numbers (this is often easier to use when reading the book as PDF, since PDF readers can jump to the n-th page of the PDF file, but often cannot jump to the n-th page in the book's own numbering, in the absence of metadata). What's the preferred way to do this? I didn't find a suitable parameter for it in templates like Template:Cite book. Thanks! Jean Abou Samra (talk) 11:51, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
@Jean Abou Samra Another possibility is to provide a Google Books link as the |url= parameter in the cite and then arrange things so this points to the section (or keywords etc.) of the book you want to highlight. Whether this works depends on Google allowing "search inside" but is often successful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:31, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I want to create a wikipedia page for someone else, whom I admire. Can I do that?
Gaurav Kishore Rungta, "admire" is a very vague word with a very broad meaning. If you simply read about a notable person, found them impressive with no further connection, and want to write a Wikipedia biography about them, then no problem. On the other hand, if you have a close personal connection with the person, such as being a relative, a close friend, a colleague or joint members of the same organization, then you have a conflict of interest which you need to declare openly You should then use the Articles for Creation process where volunteer editors without a conflict of interest will evaluate your draft article. Cullen328 (talk) 09:54, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Gaurav Kishore Rungta, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.
It's great that you want to contribute, but I would advise you to go slow. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.
i am not having strong relivent source online but i have hard copy and books which is not more popular as it is in reginol language nagpuri so my draft is declined every time what should i do Nagpuri writers (talk) 14:38, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I had my first submission declined due to not being supported by reliable sources. See article attached Draft:Alina Stanila I have edited the article since it's been rejected. I would very much like to get someone to proofread/guide/help with this article. Thank you very much Artyschool (talk) 00:32, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@Valereee thank you very much for your reply - would you be able to let me know if recognition from MP , newspaper and award certificate are considered as being reliable sources, also in which format should I upload this? should this sources be aded as jpg attach, pdf, or link? Thank you very much for your help. Artyschool (talk) 16:47, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Depending on the newspaper and the length of the story, maybe. You can read more about what are and aren't reliable sources at WP:RELIABLE. Recognition from a member of parliament, generally not. Awards such as an Oscar or a Pulitzer or a Nobel, certainly; if the award doesn't have a Wikipedia article, highly unlikely to help support a claim to notability. Sources should be added as citations, which you can read about at WP:CITE. Valereee (talk) 18:58, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @Valereee , again thank you very much for your replay. I had a read through the links shared and looked up the award and the newspaper on Wikipedia and found that both the award, the person who awards the award, the newspaper and the MP who represents the Minister for Culture, Communication and the Creative Industry have Wikipedia pages. See ref. ;
World of Wearable Art - World of Wearable Art - here it is noted that World of Wearable Art is a competition; " The competition features wearable art entries, which are judged on durability, the safety and comfort of the models, and the impact of the design on the stage". The living person who awards the award too has a Wikipedia Page Suzie Moncrieff .
Oxford Mail - Oxford Mail - this newspaper was first founded in 1928; the article was featured both digitally and in print on the 6 June 2014. The day on which the article was released coincided with the commemoration of 70 years since the D-Day.
On the advice given by @David notMD I have stared the article from scratch. I have cut out any phrases that may sound laudatory or promotional and give a neutral point of view on the article. Would you be able to help with readproof and advice on the notable resources provided?
The draft was Declined (not Rejected, which is more severe), but subsequently Speedy deleted by an Administrator, so it and its history of edits can no longer be viewed by a non-Admin. You have the option of starting over, but content needs to be neutral point of view facts, not laudatory. And refs need to meet the standards mentionned above. David notMD (talk) 10:49, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
I do not yet see a new draft. It matters not that the person who awards the reward, the newspaper that announced the award, nor the MP have Wikipedia pages, only the award itself. David notMD (talk) 21:33, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@Artyschool, I'm still not finding your draft. From your previous draft, it looks like she was runner-up for the "first-time entrant" category of this not-very-notable award? It's highly unlikely that would make her notable. What we really need are three instances of significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. All of those are clickable links. Valereee (talk) 22:52, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
@Hoary I am not sure I understand your question? The photograph represents the designers in question work - garment / the photo which you have find on njal represent a garment which was made by the designer , if the photo has been taken either by the person in question or by photographer with agreed w full comerciale reales of the photo back to the designer and or free used for adv. etc. I am not sure what are you trying to dig? I am really sorry but I do find everything on here being passively sceptical about absolutely everything. Rest assured that I am not in the game for fame without work! Hope I have answers your question. Best Artyschool (talk) 02:23, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Artyschool, the question is very simple: Was it you who took the photograph? (I'm not sure what you mean by "passively sceptical", but yes, I'm sceptical about many matters, and one of them is the copyright status of this photograph.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:41, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
@Artyschool, Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons have very strict policy about not violating copyright. The person who took the photo (or the person who commissioned them to take it) owns that photo, and it is their property. No one can use it without their permission, and in order to upload it to Wikimedia Commons, they have to give up almost all rights to it -- that means anyone in the world is free to use it however they want -- which means the photo would be less valuable to its owner. So when we see professional-quality photos, we try to make sure the person who uploaded it (and gave up those rights) actually does own the photo. Valereee (talk) 10:25, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi. Ive gotten feed back that every asserted fact needs a source. Some info like his date of birth and things he did during his early career are going to be difficult to substantiate. Also his television work is all on imdb which is not a reference. I feel the article is merited because he was a key player in the development of one of the most important incubators for comics during the mid 2000s, and at one point had a wikipedia page that was lost due to expired links. Can I get someone to review more specifically and help me pinpoint the troubling errors with what needs a reference. Also just a general opinion on whether or not being cited as an important part of that Comedy movement in two sources is enough to be considered worthy of notoriety. MickeyGray85 (talk) 15:43, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi @MickeyGray85: can I ask, if you cannot find a source to substantiate this person's DOB, how do you know it yourself? What we're asking for is that you tell us where you got the information from, by citing your sources. If those sources are reliable, great. If not, then a better source needs to be found, and if that's not possible, then the information in question needs to be removed.
Also noting that this draft currently cites two sources, both against the same statement, with the vast majority of the information unreferenced. So my example of the DOB is really only that; an example. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 16:05, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
I was wondering if you think without that first summary paragraph. Ie with just the television work available on imdb and then the summary of the events at the Lyons den do I need to reference the television work again? MickeyGray85 (talk) 20:29, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
he has a website that has his personal biography on it. i dont mind truncating that first paragraph almost entirely its basically summerizing the biography on his website, but we cant reference that. Basically the fact that he was referenced almost 12 years after the fact as being a key player at the lyons den is the entire i guess "arguement" im making that he is a notable person, considering he at one point had a wikipedia page. so I'm happy to remove all the personal stuff and keep it related to that. MickeyGray85 (talk) 20:36, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Please see the message that was left on your talk page about why User:Grabup reverted your edit (I did not linked his username as it will ping the user and they will get a notification). If you have questions about it, respond back to this user on your talk page by pressing the "Reply" button. Soafy234 (talk) 02:43, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for drawing my attention to the article John da Silva, which, in view of the number of more or less dodgy edits recently made to it, I have just now semi-protected. (Incidentally, I sleepily cited the wrong reason for doing so. This is not a living person; it's a matter of poorly sourced additions.) You are welcome to use Talk:John da Silva to ask for specific improvements to be made to the article. -- Hoary (talk) 02:55, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I also thought it was a BLP. The IP was adding unsourced strong allegations against the person, which is why I instantly removed it. Even if it is not a BLP, adding unsourced allegations like this is not acceptable. GrabUp - Talk03:03, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
The edit was not unsourced; it included the text "as evidenced in the Royal Commission into the Abuse in Care report". Note that the article already included The [[Royal Commission of Inquiry into Abuse in Care]] reported in 2024 that "young people's lives were ruined from the abuse they suffered" at Whakapakari.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.abuseincare.org.nz/reports/whanaketia/case-studies/case-study-whakapakari/executive-summary/|title=Boot Camp: Te Whakapakari Youth Programme A case study of State-funded violence and abuse of children and young people needing care and protection—Executive summary|publisher=Abuse in Care - Royal Commission of Inquiry|access-date=25 July 2024}}</ref> Survivors reported physical and sexual abuse from supervisors and da Silva.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.abuseincare.org.nz/reports/whanaketia/case-studies/case-study-whakapakari/chapter-3/|title=Chapter 3: Nature and extent of abuse and neglect at Whakapakari|publisher=Abuse in Care - Royal Commission of Inquiry|access-date=25 July 2024}}</ref>Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits13:27, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Pigsonthewing, it was indeed sourced, but here's one addition that I think is written far too sloppily: He routinely abused children and young people as cited in the Royal Commission into [https://www.abuseincare.org.nz Abuse in Care Inquiry.] The report also reveals he appeared on a rape charge. This subject requires careful thought and careful writing. (Yes, more care than I displayed when selecting a reason for s-protection. Mea culpa....) Would-be editors are welcome to suggest changes on the talk page; none has yet done so. -- Hoary (talk) 22:49, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I find that the Wikipedia content regarding the GOP-led Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 legislation is seriously inadequate and misleading. I've spent a mountain of time on the subject and I'm preparing some edits, and I hope to have a chart included in Wikipedia. I hope that somebody out there could help mentor me, I've never tried to edit anything in Wikipedia. BRUCE NORVELL
Norvellb (talk) 21:43, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Jim, thank you for reaching out. We grew up in the same region, Pontiac for me. Woodward Avenue I think was the world’s first paved road, I used to take the trolly between Detroit and Pontiac.
I’ve sent a 688 word (without footnotes) to several publications, and I now don’t know what I’ve sent to Wikipedia for consideration. I sure appreciate your guidance, as I do not understand key Wikipedia instructions.
Your apparent suggestion of directing my concerns to your suggested link has me puzzled, because there is no info of consequence a that site. See attached screenshot.
a) I would start a new paragraph with the word “Some”, and
b) I would end the new paragraph with the following text “Also, the TCJA creates wid disparities in taxing “Specified” and “Qualified” business income.
I would include the attached chart to illustrate the sharp disparities in tax reductions for what I call “Favored” and “Disfavored” income, and I’d include narrative discussing examples of disparities.
Wikipedia seems to want me to learn from its “Teahouse” website re how to edit an article, but I am simply incapable of understanding content at that site.
Thanks for reaching out, Onorem – I feel like I need some direction.
I composed two Excel sheets that quantify the consequence of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017 to all income groups, and a chart. Both of which I attach. I would love to put these items in my Dropbox account but doing that radically goofs up both the chart and the Excel sheets.
I would love to get your suggestions on proceeding. I believe that the TCJA is of high importance to many in the USA community.
You've been pointed to the policy on original research because it sounds like you're looking for a place to publish materials that you have personally come up with - but Wikipedia is not a venue for doing that. Wikipedia only summarizes what published sources have to say, and those sources must be published in ways that meet Wikipedia's requirements. We cannot use Excel sheets you have composed or charts you have made as sources - not until those materials have been published elsewhere, such as in a academic journal or a newspaper. MrOllie (talk) 01:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Norvelib People new to Wikipedia often find their edits to articles reverted (reversed) not because the added content was not true, but because it was not verified by valid references added at the same time. In general, Wikipedia advises editors to be bold in their edits, but if reverted, start a discussion at hte Talk page of the article in an attempt to reach a consensus with other editors. What qualifies as valid references is described at WP:42. How to format a referance at Help:Referencing for beginners. You have mentioned a chart and spreadsheet of your creation, which clearly sounds like original research, which is forbidden, per the above advice. Last, you mention attaching stuff, but there is no evidence you have attached anything anywhere. I suppose that if you want people to look at something you could put it in your Sandbox, but again - original research. David notMD (talk) 02:47, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
The teahouse is only really here for help with the English edition of Wikipedia. For creating a whole new Wiki you might want to look at mw:Hosting services for a list of services that specifically host the MediaWiki software. -- D'n'B-t -- 05:46, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I think you may be asking how you can have a Wikipedia article published about you, not how to create a wiki, which is an entire platform like Wikipedia itself. If so, you should be aware that most people do not meet Wikipedia's guideline for topics that should be covered, which is based on whether reliable sources have already written a significant amount about you (this is called notability on Wikipedia). It is also strongly advised that you do not write an article about yourself (see Wikipedia:Autobiography); if you are notable as defined here someone else will write about you eventually. Tollens (talk) 06:09, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
My first article wasn't accepted, I guess I need more links. But where I am going to get more links if related info is not available online. Mongolia is kind of new to online thing and most info is only available in paper. Please advise me how I can get it accepted. Naila Oto (talk) 04:02, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I'd like to ask a question, but I'd like to add context. In the following pages: List of diplomatic missions in Indonesia and List of diplomatic missions in Jakarta, IP user 118.136.39.87 keeps on making disruptive and unconstructive edits on both articles since the end of last month by adding Israel to the list of embassies. What's worse is that his edits are poorly sourced because his source (https://www.rri.co.id/internasional/752779/damaikan-israel-palestina-prabowo-dukung-two-state-solution) doesn't even state that Indonesia has recognized Israel now or if an embassy is established with a Charge d'affaires A.I appointed. The first time he did this, both articles were protected for a week. Today he is here again doing the same thing. If you look at his contributions, you can see that he has vandalized a number of articles by adding Israel having a representative office in Tunisia or a commercial office in Oman, as well as the UK having a consulate-general in George Town, Malaysia, without a single source. He (and I) broke the 3-revert rule in June, and he doesn't want to discuss the topic at hand in the talk page. I don't want to break the 3-revert rule again which brings me here on why I want to ask this question. How can I request an administrator to block this user? Underdwarf58 (talk) 12:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello @Underdwarf58 and welcome to the Teahouse. IPs can be taken to WP:ANI, just like users with accounts, and the procedure is the same; just read and follow the instructions at the top. Be sure to include links to some of their disruptive edits. If they're using a range of IP addesses, include that in the report so a wider block can be imposed if necessary. 57.140.16.8 (talk) 13:55, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Template update help
Hi, I have made a version of Template:At_school where I added 2 new options ("vocational" option for type and a new option called occupation). I would like someone to check my spelling and help me decide the best name for the occupation option. Also, I am unsure if I should merge my version into the original template. I am new and don't feel comfortable immediately merging the pages without someone reviewing it first.
My version: User:ArttuErland/At_school. Thanks, ArttuErland(talk) Leave me a message!He/Him (alt. they/them)08:11, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
@ArttuErland: Looks OK to me. Here's a tip: In future, when you're forking a template in that manner, start by saving an exact copy of the original. Then, we can use diffs to see what changes you have made. Please be sure to update the documentation when you merge your edits into the original template. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits09:20, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks! Also, what would have been the correct way to save the exact copy? ArttuErland(talk) Leave me a message!He/Him (alt. they/them)09:58, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm having an discussion and argument that does not seem come up with a resolution with other Wikipedia Editors, can some of you go to Olivia Rodrigo talk page, please?
I opened up a discussion regarding her Infobox: Instruments of what to include or not, Olivia can play guitar and piano. I tried to add ukelele and electric guitar but other editors said that it is not applicable, citing the reason as WP:Coatrack but we allowed the other musicians biography - infobox-instrumentals to put all the instrumentals on their biography from vocals to guitar to piano to bass guitar to drums to ukelele and so forth without any objection. Now, one of the editors removed on Olivia's - Infobox: instrumentals -- the guitar and piano and only retaining"Vocals" but when i viewed other musicians biography, these are not happening on others artists. Why are some editors are citing different rules and impose strictest rules when it comes to Olivia Rodrigo biography but not on others?
Hi @Forgiveandloveoneanother, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you're getting into WP:CANVASSING territory here - getting other editors involved is a good idea, but you need to leave neutrally worded notices. Also, the Teahouse is not really a place to leave such a notice, though asking for clarification about Wikipedia's often confusing labyrinth of rules is fine. 57.140.16.8 (talk) 13:59, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Would it be Ok to ask to delete a redirect so I can make an article through Afc?
If I wanted to submit an article through Afc as a technically different page from a redirect that occupies its place, then would I be allowed to ask for the redirect to be deleted? Abdullah raji (talk) 14:48, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
@Abdullah raji: Welcome to the Teahouse! Assuming your draft is accepted, the reviewer will take care of all that, requesting deletion as needed. Until then, there's no need to delete the redirect. I hope this helps, and happy editing! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 14:58, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I have submitted a few comments on the Up TV talk page. I have not made direct edits to the article due to COI (noted on talk page). It has been a few days. Is it likely someone will reply, or will my comments go stale? Austinchrps (talk) 14:23, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I've added the appropriate template to your first request. An editor will eventually review it. Your second request is blatant advertising and I declined it. CFA💬14:40, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Austinchrps. Thank you for being open about your status as a paid editor.
Generally, it is best to use the edit request mechanism in cases like this, because the template will put the request in a list of requests waiting. That doesn't guarantee that it will happen quickly, but if you don't do so, then it's possible that your request might not get noticed.
Notice also that page also advises you how to construct your request. Your second request is neither specific, nor supported by an adequate source.
While I see that your first request is uncontroversial factual data and has already been actioned, your second appears to be pure promotion. Unless you can show (by citing it) that somebody wholly unconnected with Up TV has been sufficiently interested in its 20th anniversary by writing at some length about it (not merely noting it in passing), why on earth should an encyclopaedia be remotely interested? ColinFine (talk) 14:40, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Colin - I have submitted another request on the talk page (unrelated to those you reviewed previously). This time, I believe I have used the proper edit template. Can you confirm this was submitted correctly? Thank you! Austinchrps (talk) 17:15, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
On July 6, 2024 the Wall Street Journal published an article online titled: "It was the last slave ship to reach the U.S. Or was it a Hoax?" Sub deck: ""The Clotilda wreck brought global attention to Mobile. But now there are questions"
The story appeared July 13 in print as: "Ship Divides Historians." Sub deck: "The Clotilda wreck put Mobile, Ala, in headlines. But now there are questions."
The current Clotilda site presents a history of that ship that several prominent historians have disagreed with. I want to make a few edits to flag the presence of this disagreement. I'm a former editor and foreign correspondent for the Wall Street Journal, and a former writer for Fortune Magazine. In 2007 St. Martins Press published my book: "The Wanderer: The Last American slave ship." It was updated in 2021. Ericorlando (talk) 15:09, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
The Talk page of Clotilda has a discussion about whether the Clotilda history is true or not, settled at that time as true. It appears that the WSJ story is (very) recent. Consider starting a discussion on the Talk page before editing the article itself. And maybe waiting to see what responses there are to the WSJ article. David notMD (talk) 15:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
The author of the book "The Wanderer: The Last American Slave Ship..." is Erik Calonius, as is the author of the WSJ article. You state that you are the author of the book. If you are also the author of the WSJ article disputing the Clotilda history, then you definitely have what Wikipedia describes as a conflict of interest (WP:COI). I now strongly recommend that you not edit the article directly, but instead propose, with independent references, changes to content to dispute the facts in the Clotilda article. Do not use as references your book or your WSJ article. David notMD (talk) 15:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks, David. The author of the WSJ story is Cameron McWhirter, a nation writer for the paper. He interviewed me for the piece. The Wanderer book is not connected to the Clotilda inquiry. I'm not making any money from Clotilda and have no products to sell. Ericorlando (talk) 19:27, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Ericorlando. Whether or not you are making any money is not the point. Wikipedia's policy on conflict of interest is intended to preserve the neutral point of view , which is a core policy. Citing your own work or you own research - or an interview with you - is something that a Wikipedia article might do, if it is published somewhere reliable; but you should not be the one to add the citation or the text which the citation supports. ColinFine (talk) 20:47, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you Colin. Whoever posted the present Clotilda article did not, in my judgment, express a neutral point of view. They said that the Clotilda was a real ship that brought slaves from Africa. That accounting is not neutral. It does not included the critical point: Several prominent historians disagree, and believe that the Clotilda slave ship was a hoax, perpetrated by southern extremists, and not a real event.
So I want to note the Wall Street Journal article of July 6 and 13 ("Historians disagree," etc) and name the historians and their books. I'm trying to establish neutrality in a Wiki story that, at the present, is not neutral! Ericorlando (talk) 13:40, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Again, No. Given your conflict of interest, you are to not edit the Clotilda article. Rather, you are permitted to propose what you believe needs to be changed on the Talk page of the article, for a non-involved editor to either implement or refuse to implement your proposed changes. And given that the WSJ article is an interview with you, you should not use that as a reference. You can reference other historians and their books. David notMD (talk) 19:10, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
How do I filter revisions by multiple tags?
I'm trying to read the revision history for Wikipedia:Content removal, but it's got so much vandalism. I can filter out reverted edits by putting mw-reverted in the "Tag filter" field and ticking "Invert selection", but the reverts are still there, so I want to filter out mw-rollback and mw-undo too. I tried commas like mw-reverted,mw-rollback,mw-undo but that didn't work. I also tried semicolons and spaces.
I skimmed WP:Tags but didn't see anything helpful. (Note to self: "edit filter" is something else.)
By the way, how do I search for a tag in the "Tag filter" list? I type something in but nothing happens; instead I have to scroll through the whole list to find the tag I want. I thought typing something in would filter the list of tags. As a workaround at least, I can Ctrl+F on Special:Tags.
Thank you. It's very frustrating. Primary sources and YouTube are not considered. Likewise with books or articles which are not digitised. I'm running out of options. BuffyO'B (talk) 23:43, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
@BuffyO'B, if you go to that youtube video and look at the description, the list of sources for it is given there. Your answer is probably in one of those. -- asilvering (talk) 00:36, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
A blanket statement that YouTube is not a reliable source is not true. YouTube is not a source, just as a bookstore or a library is not a source. YouTube is a video hosting platform. The reliability of an individual YouTube video needs to be evaluated on a case by case basis. A large majority of these videos are unreliable, but the content on YouTube channels operated by reliable media companies are just as reliable as their print editions. Cullen328 (talk) 01:43, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I'll note that before adding my comment, I checked, and I would not consider this youtube video a reliable source. -- asilvering (talk) 02:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
How do you correct a mistake on Wikipedia?
On the Mathew Grimson page it describes "Question Everything Records" as being Curphey Forrestall's record label. I release material on this label as well but it is Greg Kendrick's label. I am Curphey Forrestall I should know. Greg Kendrick was in ther band Skinned Roadie with Mathew. Matthew_Grimson - Curphey Curphey (talk) 18:57, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
It doesn't look like the sentence in question has a reference to anything so it can probably be deleted. If you have an article or some other source that details the 2024 release and/or the ownership of the record label, that would be great - I can't find anything, which is exacerbated by a very similar record label owned by members of Brockhampton. Reconrabbit19:06, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello Curphey Curphey, your edit was the right thing to do. Wikipedia has loads of policies, and the relevant one here is Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons (BLP). It says, "Contentious material about living persons (or, in some cases, recently deceased) that is unsourced or poorly sourced—whether the material is negative, positive, neutral, or just questionable—must be removed immediately and without waiting for discussion." Take care, Rjjiii (talk) 04:01, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I need information on how to reference correctly please
@5tgiilytyjn2 You have not added any images to our sister project, Wikimedia Commons. Can you please be more specific about what you are trying to do and what error messages you are getting? Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:56, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
5tgiilytyjn2, this is your most recent edit to en:Wikipedia. Perhaps you might put more effort into intelligible, constructive text before you attempt anything involving images? -- Hoary (talk) 21:29, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
An automatic filter stopped you from uploading the images. It looks like you are trying to upload images about video games; please note that screenshots or images of packaging are usually copyrighted and can't be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. MKFI (talk) 08:06, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Why was my draft declined
I just want to know why it was declined. It was an article on Minecraft Consulting Pty Ltd, who they are, and people accidently going to "minecraft.com" and seeing their companies website. 60.227.148.47 (talk) 00:22, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm fairly sure this organisation wont be notable enough for an article, if the only thing to say about it is that it has the same name as something else. -- D'n'B-t -- 09:40, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Articles not appearing on search engines
Hello everyone,
I have noticed that two articles I have created, Subhūticandra and Vāgīśvarakīrti, are yet to appear on Google search results. If possible could these be re-reviewed so that they could start to appear on search engine results?
@Ixudi articles will be indexed by search engines (such as Google) when they are marked as reviewed by a new page patroller or when 90 days have passed since its creation. Please be patient; there are over 15 thousand unreviewed articles in the queue. '''[[User:CanonNi]]''' (talk • contribs)11:29, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
@Ixudi Ok, so here's the process for making an article straight into mainspace. If you do that, you either have to wait 90 days or have a New Page Patroller come along and review your articles in order to have them appear on Google searches.
Now daily used at golf courses and resorts worldwide, this is the documented history and introduction of the first Golf Car Beverage Unit. Bobbrewer1000 (talk) 17:47, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
If you would like to write about the "Golf Car Beverage Unit", you would benefit from using references other people have wrote to support your writing. Wikipedia:Your first article is a place to start. Otherwise, your user pages will continue to be deleted. Reconrabbit18:25, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
WRONG PLACE. You User page is not the place to create drafts, hewnce Speedy deleted. Per above comment, use WP:YFA to create a well-referenced draft. David notMD (talk) 18:37, 23 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes, well spotted. I see that you have commented on the Talk Page of Wikidata. The Wikidata page is locked, so I can't add the link but hopefully someone with the correct level of authority will do so. There is a template wikidata:Template:Edit request that will draw attention to your suggestion. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
@William Martin Boyce To quote from the link just given to you, "If your life and achievements are verifiable and genuinely notable, someone else will probably create an article about you sooner or later, but creating an article about yourself is strongly discouraged: we want biographies here, not autobiographies"
The notability criteria that have to be met for a person to have a Wikipedia article about them can be read HERE. A quick search on Google yielded a few results about deceased people called 'William Martin Boyce', but nothing in the first few pages of an extant one by that name. Without sounding rude, you might wish to supply us with links or references to sources that have about you and we could assess whether or not you would be likely to meet our notability criteria for inclusion in this encyclopaedia. Exclusion from Wikipedia is not a sign of failure in life, nor is inclusion always a good idea. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 19:06, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Could you phrase your question a bit clearer? What article are we talking about, specifically? -- D'n'B-t -- 17:03, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
If you're asking why a a Status Quo (band) album is on 1972 in heavy metal music but their albums aren't in not in other "[year] in heavy metal music" articles, it could be a variety of reasons. It could be reliable sources don't consider the other albums to be in the heavy metal genre. It could be that Piledriver (album) is in the 1972 page by mistake. It could be that there are reliable sources, but no one's gotten around to adding the other albums to the other pages. Rotideypoc41352 (talk·contribs) 23:00, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
For what little it's worth, I have been a fan of heavy metal since 1970, and also like Status Quo, but I would never have characterised any of their albums, including Piledriver, as heavy metal. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 94.2.67.235 (talk) 00:48, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi. We can't help with stuff on Roblox. We're a different site. Please contact their support department. Did you also have a Wikipedia account hacked by any chance? -- zzuuzz(talk)19:30, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
This is Wikipedia, a project dedicated to build an encyclopedia. If you're talking about external accounts please refer to respective support teams. Please search "Roblox support" on the web, not here on Wikipedia. Thanks. Ahri Boy (talk) 11:50, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
What to do if a template is unavailable?
Hey, hi, hello, hi. So, I'm looking at translating some pages to swedish, and a common theme i find is this error/warning saying "Template unavailable". what do You do in these cases? Miyunya (talk) 12:15, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Miyunya, welcome to the Teahouse. Templates from other Wikipedia languages cannot be used. Translate the template (helper templates may also be needed), find a similar local template, or avoid using a template. I don't know the Swedish view on translating templates. This is a help page for the English Wikipedia. We have no authority over other languages. Template pages often have interlanguage links where there might be a Swedish template but other languages usually have much fewer templates than us. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:26, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
What part of "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources." do you not understand? Your draft has paragraphs without references. Also, you copied content from ref #1, which is a copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 15:16, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Virtualiter, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Some of your sources may be acceptable, but it is hard to tell, because you have not formatted them with the important information (title, author, publisher, date) easily visible. Please read WP:REFB.
Since the purpose of a citation is to provide verification for a piece of encyclopaedic information in an article, there is not usually any point in citing library catalogues. ColinFine (talk) 16:57, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
The article has 4+3 excellent citations. I have now formatted them - as best as I can - although Citation-Bot can probably do a much better job of this, as I have seen.
I have shortened the first paragraph further. (ref #1)
Can the quote about his early repertoire from an unpublished interview with M. Alpert from 1990 remain? I have no idea how to paraphrase this. --Virtualiter (talk) 17:56, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
I have now pasted together paragraphs that apparently have no sources - although I would find it more pleasant if events in Tashkent, Lodz and LA were easier to distinguish. Is that better? --Virtualiter (talk) 18:16, 25 July 2024 (UTC)
Paid obituaries, or those that are published by private individuals, are self-published sources that are wholly or primarily about a third party (the deceased) and which may be partly about other third parties as well. They should never be used as third-party sources about living people. (WP:BLP applies, in some cases, to the recently deceased.)
Can I use a paid obituary source for an academic who died in 2018? I see that the university's in memoriam page repeats some of the claims made in the paid obituary, so would that make those claims more reputable?
In memoriam (Scroll to Sylvia Osborn and click read more)
A separate question: How do you use a page for a citation if the actual text is embedded in a read more click that doesn't change the URI of the webpage? CoolAndUniqueUsername (talk) 04:01, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Self-published sources can be used for non-contentious information such as full name, place and date of birth, place and date of death. See WP:ABOUTSELF for exactly what they're used for. So long as the article also has plenty third party sources for other statements, you should be fine.
I don't think there's a specific way to guide readers to click read more when they're checking a source but the at= field can be used to direct them to where they should be looking. In this case at=Sylvia Osborn. -- D'n'B-t -- 06:59, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Can a paid obituary be used as a source? Absolutely, for non-contentious facts, as stated above. Does it contribute to notability for a subject who doesn't have an article yet? Definitely not.D'n'B's suggestion of the |at= parameter is a good one, and the general case is that we don't have specific template parameters for how to access information in a cited source. For complicated situations, instructions can be left after the citation template but within the <ref>...</ref> tags. Most are like "search for X" or "click Y", but I've seen instructions as complex as "select Z from dropdown 1, select W from dropdown 2, select the top radio button for variable 3, etc. ... submit". We should be able to rely on readers to try to find information in cited sources on their own if they've gone through the trouble of clicking through, but I've also seen editors tag sources {{failed verification}} because the information wasn't immediately visible without interacting with the source website in any way, so it's a judgement call. Folly Mox (talk) 13:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
@Scratchinghead Forgetting for one moment the actual subject matter, and talking in generalities: it's OK to add a Wikipedia article to a List article if it can be proven to meet the criteria of said list. To meet that, the criterion either has to be mentioned in the Wikipedia article, or a citation has to be supplied within the List article to allow anyone to VERIFY that its inclusion is valid.
Failing any evidence to support inclusion, I would advise leaving it out. The fact that someone has asked you to include it, without being able to demonstrate the validity of that inclusion should be grounds enough to leave it out. Once your List article has been reviewed and accepted, you could always post on its talk page your desire to include it once evidence to support inclusion surfaces. It might encourage others to look for such sources. It is, in my view, unwise to include anything in an article or List page simply because someone else says it should be. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:55, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Ok... I did realise that
But then, the person who posted an article request (he didn't ask me, i fulfilled it out of boredom) has ONLY posted the article Karachay-Cherkessia. He hasn't posted Post-Soviet states which i'm pretty sure contains 90% of all significant entries. There must be something about that article which can be proved?
Are there Wikipedia tags that are to be used in mainspace only?
I have an article in draftspace (awaiting review) for which I used the stub and BLP tags. I see another editor modified the page to remove both tags saying that these tags are for mainspace only.
Thank you. That link seems to be details about tags that can be added to an article requiring cleanup. It assumes the article is in mainspace and doesn't explicitly mention draftspace or mainspace.
My question is more along the lines of whether an article in draftspace should avoid using certain tags in the first place? I see that draftspace articles are not included in search results unless explicitly asked for, which means it shouldn't really matter? CoolAndUniqueUsername (talk) 15:08, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
@CoolAndUniqueUsername See Wikipedia:Content assessment for information on quality assessment tags such as 'Stub', 'Star, 'C'->'FA'. These are all intended for Wikipedia Articles, and are not relevant to Drafts, as these are not (as yet) proper articles. Give it time to be reviewed and accepted, then feel free to add a quality assessment. Personally, I would never rate one of my own articles beyond a C-rating - at least not until other editors had had a good chance (6 months or so) to assess it for themselves.
Ah, I see. I was under the impression that an article in draftspace that has been submitted for review should be as complete as possible, including adding tags that another reviewer would add.
The three linked "related articles" at the bottom of each article page are showing their thumbnails in photographic negative for me. A temporary glitch, a problem on my end, I don't know -- standard images in-article look fine. I wanted to let someone know in case there is an issue to fix, but if there's a better place to post such a note, please let me know. Al Begamut (talk) 15:04, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
I too have been confused by that help page. Through exploration of articles using the template and trial and error, I learned that if an efn tag is used in the body of the article, you must add to the bottom of the article body the notelist tag in order for it to work properly. I am not an expert, but I hope that this information helps you to understand. Al Begamut (talk) 17:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Eseteka danji haranda Fuso Nawajiu Sunaxaranja?
Tanji an Minna no Rasanji dan Tengoku (tusu Minna no Rhythm Tengoku) Saxarana Xi Qiunji tsunkanaxu Tarananku (Dekahanutsu Karinji hebo turu) Sana Senjenji janji Karanji? (Sana ken tsuko rexaqinji ba tuso) — Preceding unsigned comment added by QeedVann (talk • contribs) 18:43, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
This is the English language Wikipedia. We cannot help you in other languages and Google Translate cannot make sense of what you wrote. Cullen328 (talk) 18:53, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
The text appears to be a mix of phonetic spellings and transliterations of Japanese words, along with some invented or distorted phrases. Here’s an attempt to identify and decipher it:
Eseteka danji haranda Fuso Nawajiu Sunaxaranja?
Eseteka danji haranda: This seems to be gibberish.
Fuso Nawajiu: Phonetic distortion of "Fuso Nawajiu" could mean "Fuso" (a term for Japan) and "Nawajiu" which might be "Nintendo" in a distorted form.
Sunaxaranja?: This doesn’t correspond directly to Japanese but might be distorted or creative.
Tanji an Minna no Rasanji dan Tengoku (tusu Minna no Rhythm Tengoku)
Minna no Rhythm Tengoku: This is "Rhythm Heaven" or "Rhythm Paradise" (a Nintendo game series).
Saxarana Xi Qiunji tsunkanaxu Tarananku (Dekahanutsu Karinji hebo turu)
Saxarana Xi: Could be "Sakurai-san" (a common name).
Qiunji: Could be "Kiyuuji" but doesn’t fit well with standard names or terms.
tsunkanaxu Tarananku: Seems nonsensical.
Dekahanutsu Karinji hebo turu: Might be trying to say "Dekahane Tsu Karinji" (possibly referring to something large or grand, with "Karinji" being unclear).
Sana Senjenji janji Karanji? (Sana ken tsuko rexaqinji ba tuso)
Sana Senjenji janji Karanji?: Seems nonsensical.
Sana ken tsuko rexaqinji ba tuso: Also nonsensical.
Overall, the text is a playful or distorted use of Japanese phonetics combined with some recognizably Japanese words, particularly related to "Rhythm Heaven." It seems like the text is not meant to be taken as a standard language but rather a creative or playful usage.
Al Begamut (talk) 17:27, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
In General
I'm curious about how the fact checking gets done on this site and what is the process of making sure you didnt misdirect yourself when researching? Ex) current event or political events were their are equal justification on both sides
Hello. It's up to you to examine the sources provided in an article, both to see if they are summarized accurately with a neutral point of view and for you to judge them for yourself in determining what to believe. Wikipedia does not claim that what is presented is the truth, only that it is verifiable(see WP:TRUTH). Wikipedia makes no guarantees of validity. 331dot (talk) 22:07, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
I would also add the point that it would be reasonable and even best to present both sides of any moderately disputed matter, to avoid neutrality issues in the Wikipedia article. Al Begamut (talk) 17:31, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
I feel for you, but please keep in mind that Wikipedia is neither a social media platform nor an online therapy session. It is a project to build an encyclopedia, nothing more and nothing less. Many editors with a wide variety of mental health issues are able to contribute productively because they do not let their issues derail their positive contributions. I hope that you can follow a similar path. Please do so. Cullen328 (talk) 10:07, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Agreed; especially if you want someone to talk with you about something, an IP-only "account" here is prone to reassignment and would make it difficult for you to ensure you can see any such communication. Al Begamut (talk) 17:33, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
RfA
I had earlier asked how to submit an RfA application, but it was never answered properly.
@Frozen902 as fellow editors mentioned in the previous thread, you don't fulfill the minimum requirement for participation in an RfA, which is to have an extended confirmed account, that means 500 edits and 30 days of activity. If you want to be an admin as you state in your profile, I suggest you start working on Wikipedia as an editor, find areas in which you enjoy contributing, and learn the various policies and mechanisms. Broc (talk) 06:50, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Ss0jse. Well done for starting with finding sources. Unfortunately, none of your sources are of any use for the essential first step of writing an article, which is demonstrating that the subject meets Wikipedia's criterai for notability (this is the first step, because if you cannot find any suitable sources, then you will know that there is no point in spending any more time on and article, as it will never be accepted).
The sources you need to establish notability must all meet all three of the criteria in WP:42: they must be reliably published, independent of the subject, and contain significant coverage of the subject.
The sort of sources you require in the case of a game are usually reviews, but they might also be serious articles about the game or its development. Links to sites that sell or distribute the game have no place in the article under any circumstances.
Remember that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. If you can't find several such sources, then there is no point in trying to continue, as you will be wasting your own and other people's time. ColinFine (talk) 20:58, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello and welcome. The answer depends on the copyright of the photo; Did you personally take the image with a camera(i.e. didn't take it from the internet), or does it explicitly have a copyright that allows for reuse by anyone for any purpose with attribution? 331dot (talk) 21:16, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Encyclomason, and welcome to the Teahouse.
If you're talking about Draft:Accidents and incidents involving the Boeing 777, I suggest you don't worry about pictures at this stage, but concentrate on getting your draft into a state where it can be accepted as an article. At present it has not one single source cited, and therefore cannot possibly be accepted as an article.
But even if you find and sources for each item you list, I'm not convinced that this would be accepted as an article.
First of all, it largely duplicates the existing section Boeing 777#Accidents and incidents - if there are incidents missing from that section, it might be better to add them in, rather than making a new article.
Secondly, normally articles are accepted only when the subject of the article meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and that would require sources which were about "accidents involving the 777" as a topic, not just about individual accidents. Having said that, it is possible that an article like this could be treated as a stand-alone list - I am not very familiar with the requirements for that kind of article.
But before spending time trying to create an article which largely duplicates a section of an existing article, I strongly advise you to open a discussion on Talk:Boeing 777, and get consensus for the idea of creating a separate article. ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Advice for tense for legislation
When describing a bill that was introduced in a prior Congress and not approved, is it better to say the bill "would do" such and such, or the bill "would have done" such and such? Can bills sit for years and get passed without being reintroduced? Seananony (talk) 04:35, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Grammatically, "would have done" is the correct tense for the circumstance you describe, because the bill was rejected and therefore cannot ever "do" what it "would have". As for your second question, while the rules may vary by locale, in the U.S. Congress, bills expire at the end of each annual legislative session and must be reintroduced before they could possibly be passed. Al Begamut (talk) 17:20, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey all! I was wondering if someone could give a quick look over of my draft before I submit it for review. Thank you for your time!Draft:Eiji Yoshikawa (boxer)
Registering for an account is useful but not a requirement. Smart for putting in months improving existing articles before wanting to create a new article. David notMD (talk) 02:27, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I'm currently editing the article Katong and at one point, there was a plot of land between Sandy Point (present day Tanjong Rhu) and Deep Water Point (present day Katong) designated as a shipyard. I want to create a redirect link from Sandy Point to Tanjong Rhu but I can't figure out how to do so and the article redirection help page wasn't that helpful in my opinion. I'm on mobile view, by the way. Imbluey2 (talk) 03:10, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I have requested for article protections before, and sometimes an admin would say "Semi-protected indefinately, or Extended-Confirmed-protected" followed by "Will log as a CTOPS action". what does CTOPS mean? 74.14.6.233 (talk) 17:57, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
When you see an unfamiliar acronym on Wikipedia, you can often find a page about it by searching for the acronym prefixed with "WP:", like this WP:CTOPS. CodeTalker (talk) 18:04, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
@Junurita I have added to your Userpage a few userboxes that I have on my own Userpage. Feel free to remove and change them for ones that you find relevant to yourself. Use the 'Edit Source' button to use our Source Editor, as it's much harder to change templates like these using Visual Editor.
Using the Source Editor, copy the complete template text (including the double curly brackets either side). Then paste it in between the {{userboxtop}} and {{userboxbottom}} templates. Preview your edits before properly publishing them to your Userpage. Hope this helps. Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 07:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I have just submitted a new page about the author Evelyn Toynton. One the one hand the notice 'Published' comes up, but I thought it would be subject to some editorial control first.
When do I hear from anyone about this?
Thanks
Michalsuz Michalsuz2 (talk) 03:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Michalsuz2, your draft User:Michalsuz2/sandbox is entirely unreferenced and cannot possibly be accepted without a major rewrite. It looks like you are writing the article backward. By far the best way to write an acceptable Wikipedia is to first identify the reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic, and only then start writing prose that summarizes what those sources say about the topic. Please read Wikipedia:Writing Wikipedia articles backward. Cullen328 (talk) 04:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Yes I just have to go back to the places where I found the info - which are reliable and independent - and list them.
That is how I did it, forgetting that the references are IMPORTANT!
I did standard formatting. Per above, all facts need to be referenced. See WP:42 for description of the types of references needed to establish notability. David notMD (talk) 10:47, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
A 'departments of France' task force?
The articles on the departments of France are still kinda outdated (mostly the 'Politics' section) and many departmental council articles are pending to be made (See Template:Departmental Councils of France). Since there are 101 of these, and the next elections are in 2027, I think there should be a sort of task force on this topic. I've asked this in WP:FR but got no response. Excellenc1 (talk) 11:12, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I'm afraid that I don't understand what you are asking. What activity are you talking about? Editing? Searching? Why do you want to backspace and then insert the same letter? And what has this to do with names of templates? ColinFine (talk) 13:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
How to improve my article?
Hi, I've been writing an article about a speedskater in the late 19th century who has made a historical impact to Dutch speedskating for women. The texts are partly translated based on the Frisian text of Wikipedia page and partly based on established newspaper articles in Dutch from 1974 and 1922 and I have not added any own feelings or comments, just used the newspaper articles text as a basis. It is not accepted and reason was given it looks like an advertisement and that the references are now acceptable. Any tips, how I can improve it?
Draft:Anke Beenen. Mmbeenen (talk) 08:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello IP, this is an encyclopedia. I suggest you contact your bank or card issuer for concerns about online purchases. --ARoseWolf15:45, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Notable sources?
Hello. Can you tell me if these qualify as "notable" sources in a technology solution article? Telecomreseller.com articles, informational tech podcasts, regional newspapers such as Arkansasbusiness.com, or Siliconangle.com.
Hello and welcome. I'm not sure why you need a reply with the Visual Editor; it shouldn't matter. (I find it hard to use) Podcasts aren't normally considered reliable sources as they usually lack editorial control and fact checking, but some podcasts might. 331dot (talk) 16:30, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
To clarify, Stella Worth, there is a very big difference between a source being notable and a source being reliable. Notable means eligible for a Wikipedia article. The Nazi propaganda newspaper Der Stürmer is notable but completely unreliable. A book on a niche topic published by a university press may be completely reliable for use as a reference, but not notable enough to be the the subject of a Wikipedia article about the book. Cullen328 (talk) 17:52, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Submitting edit requests on talk pages
Hello! Earlier submissions of mine on the Talk page of UPtv were made without a template. Helpful editors here in the Teahouse pointed this out. They helped correct the template on two earlier submissions:
- one related to UPtv's 20th anniversary ended up being declined due to promotional language (their explanation made sense and I understand)
- another was a very small non-controversial info-box change that is now in the queue and they suggested it will be approved. I recognize wiki editors are volunteers and what might feel urgent to those submitting a change is certainly not as urgent when considering the fact that wiki editors are moderating an *entire encyclopedia.* - with that said, it would be helpful to know the average length of time it may take for edits in a queue (when non-controversial, correct, etc.) to be reflected on a live page. I'm not sure if a ballpark figure is known, or if there are places on Wikipedia where the average time is listed and can be monitored. It would just be helpful.
Beyond that, I have since made one more submission. I am hopeful that instead of needing an editor to add a template to the submission, that I have used the correct one from the start. Can this be confirmed? The newest submission was titled: Uplifting Entertainment.
my article tagged article of deletion please guide what can i do to prevent it, what changes is required in my article please help. Naqqash6 (talk) 18:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
How do I add a certain certification symbol for Wikipedia?
I'm editing the sales section for the global smash hit "Baby" by Justin Bieber ft. Ludacris and I'm trying to make the US sales figure on the page show this symbol at the end: ‡. In the certifications table, the sales figures for Brazil, the UK, Australia, Denmark, Germany, Italy and Spain have that figure and when I click "edit source" there are different id numbers written in the sections for those figures and I don't know where to get those from. Maybe that could be how to get the symbol. I've successfully edited other pages but I'm stuck on this one. Somebody please respond Blooey (talk) 19:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Blooey, and welcome to the Teahouse. The template in question is documented, and the significance of its parameters are described, at Template:Certification Table Entry. I notice that there is different information for the different countries there, and it is possible that what you are trying to do is not supported (I haven't looked in detail, and I may be wrong). If you can't find what you need, you might try asking at Template talk:Certification Table Entry (certainly if you decide that the template needs something added to it); or alternatively on the talk page of one of the WikiProjects mentioned at the top of [Talk:Baby (Justin Bieber song)]]. ColinFine (talk) 19:57, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Adding Library to Special:BookSources
On the Special:BookSources page individual libraries & library systems are listed to source the books. I'd like the Timberland Regional Library system added under Washington State in the United States under Libraries. The library system covers Grays Harbor, Lewis, Mason, Pacific, and Thurston counties within the state.
(i haven't edited before and don't know how to work with protected pages so i'm chucking the request here!) EndDragon438 (talk) 02:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I just recently found out that anyone who wants to can follow my Talk page and User page. Is there a way for me to find out which editors are doing that? Can you also explain why someone would want to follow my User and Talk pages. To me it feels like stalking, although when I used that language to the person 'watching' my pages, he/she was insulted. I need this explained to me, and I want to know who is watching me. Thanks DaringDonna (talk) 17:11, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
@DaringDonna Wikipedia is an open project that relies on collaboration. that's why we have Userpages and associated talk pages. You can (as with any page) click on the tools menu for "Page information" when looking at your own userpage to discover it has "less than 30 page watchers". That's the only information you can get: to respect the privacy of those watching. Your privacy is respected in that you should only post on your Userpage things you are happy to share (see WP:UPYES). There are templates such as {{talk page stalker}} and (talk page watcher) that some editors use to admit they are looking at other editor's pages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:31, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, DaringDonna. Adding editors to one's watchlist is commonplace. For example, 641 editors have my userpage and user talk page on their watchlists. I have 15 years of experience and am an administrator. This is a collaborative project and productive editors look out for each other. At least a hundred times over the years, I have woken up to discover that someone has vandalized my pages while I was asleep, and that some administrator watching my pages has reverted the vandalism and blocked the vandal. If the person who noticed is not an administrator, they will revert the vandalism and report to a noticeboard. I check my watchlist frequently, and if I see something out of the ordinary happening on another editor's pages, I go there and bring things under control. I would not worry at all about your pages being watched. If a malicious stalker starts bothering you, present the evidence and they will be blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 17:37, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I choose to watch articles, but not individuals. However, Wikipedia has a Mentor program, in which some new article registrants are randomly assigned to an editor. If an editor is commenting on your User or Talk pages, you can ask on their Talk page if that person is an assigned Mentor. You can ask to be delisted from their Mentees. Last, if an editor has chosen to watch an article and sees that you made an edit that either was already reverted, or in their opinion needs to be reverted (for example, vandalism), that editor may choose to look at your other recent edits, including your User and Talk. David notMD (talk) 21:26, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
How to move my article from the "Sandbox" to the mainspace in Wikipedia
My article is now finished and I would like to make it live in Wikipedia. How do I name the page and move it to the mainspace? Inigo.novales (talk) 22:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello. I've added the appropriate information to allow you to submit the draft for review. New accounts cannot directly create articles. I would suggest using the Article Wizard to create drafts; doing so automatically provides the means to submit them. 331dot (talk) 22:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I am trying to post a new article (Draft:Mark Liu - Wikipedia) on Wikipedia which was rejected due to insufficient notability. I have added several sources and details to demonstrate more notability but want to check with more experienced editors to see if this would now meet the notability criteria before re-submitting for review, and any advice you might give to improve it further. Thank you in advance for any assistance! Thecatch33 (talk) 19:25, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Thecatch33, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you are having the usual experience of editors who try to create an article before spending time learning how Wikipedia works. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft.
I haven't looked in details at the sources you cite, but on a quick look it seems to me that hardly any of them are relevant to establishing notability. Nothing published by Liu or TSMC will help, nothing that is based on an interview or press release will help, nothing that is about TSMC with no more than a sentence or two about Liu will help.
You need to evaluate each source against the triple criteria in WP:42, and if it does not meet all three of them, it will do nothing to establish that Liu meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. Unless you can find several sources that do meet the criteria, then you should give up, and not spend any more time on this draft.
One more point: when somebody creates an account on Wikipedia and immediately starts writing an article about somebody in business, it is often the case that the editor has a connection with that business. What is your connection, if any, with Liu and TSMC? ColinFine (talk) 19:49, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you @ColinFine, I appreciate your insights. I understand your point that anything regarding TSMC is not necessarily a reflection on Mark Liu as a notable person and that any articles/sources need to be specifically about him. I did include a few such things, but your response leads me to believe I still need more.
As far as my connection to Mark Liu and TSMC, I have none beyond the fact that, like him, I am ethnically Taiwanese. I do understand the suspicion regarding a new account and such, and sadly, I also understand there's not much I can do to ameliorate that. The truth is, though, I did some research on him some years back and at that time he had a Wiki page. When I searched him again recently and found it was gone, I decided on a whim to try to recreate it and build experience editing Wikipedia.
If it gets too difficult, then I will indeed give up as you say. We all have to start somewhere, though, and your recommendation to start with making improvements notwithstanding, I'm now invested in this so will try to see if I can finish it! Thecatch33 (talk) 20:20, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
According to the little I can tell, his page was written by someone who was engaging in undisclosed paid editing and had done so on many occasions, leading to many if not all of their written articles being deleted. Don't let that dissuade you at all of course if this is a subject you have an interest on writing about and if you can find works that others have written on him. I found a couple articles on the Wikipedia Library that mention him in some capacity, so they may be useful to you or someone who has access: [11][12][13]Reconrabbit20:38, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the encouragement and direction @Reconrabbit! Glad to know a bit more about why it was deleted in the first place. Frankly, it doesn't surprise me that Mark Liu and/or TSMC may have paid someone to publish the initial article. Thanks also for pointing me to the Wikipedia Library, although it looks like I still don't yet qualify for access. I will endeavor to get access soon in the future, though! Thecatch33 (talk) 22:29, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Thecatch33, this is written in a strangely opaque style. Sample: Liu was also the architect behind the global expansion of TSMC's manufacturing footprint beyond Taiwan, initiating landmark fab buildouts in the United States, Japan, and Germany. I think that this just means Liu also planned the expansion of TSMC's manufacturing beyond Taiwan to the United States, Japan, and Germany; however, I'm not sure and of course am open to being proven wrong. Feel free to rephrase differently -- but in a way designed not to impress the reader but instead to inform the reader. -- Hoary (talk) 21:43, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for the feedback @Hoary. I'll be honest, I made it a bit more "impressive" sounding in the most recent revision of the draft because I thought that would improve the "notability" aspect. Now that I understand better what determines notability, I will move back to the more neutral tone I had in the initial draft I submitted. Thecatch33 (talk) 22:34, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Need help moving sandbox page
Hello Wikipedia community,
I am seeking help with moving my sandbox page to a new title. I've tried to find the "Move" option as instructed, but I couldn't locate it. I'm logged in with my account and have edited on Wikipedia before.
Could someone please guide me through the process or check if there are any restrictions preventing me from moving the page? The current title of my sandbox is User:2toastygram/Sandbox, and I would like to rename it to User:2toastygram/Toasty chat: Report a topic.
Any assistance or advice would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!
You have a page for people to communicate with you, your user talk page, Why do you want to create another? 331dot (talk) 18:48, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
To report innapropriate topics such as profanity and discrimination. 2toasty (Chat!)
I'm curious as to why you want those issues reported to you personally, when we already have WP:ANI to report behavior issues. Profanity is not censored on Wikipedia, but if it is used as personal attacks it may be reported to WP:AIV. 331dot (talk) 18:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi, I want to understand what is the correct order of a generic sections on any page. There are some standard sections that we have on almost all the pages, such as References, See also, External links, and other things such as Categories the articles belongs to, stub info, etc. What is the correct order of those?
For instance, should the "stub" info. be after "Categories" or before? Will "External links" go after the "See also" or vice versa? Is there any standard page design for the order of such things? Please guide me to the resources where I can get more idea about this. TIA. Waonderer (talk) 01:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey there @Roastedbeanz1! Did you use the "{{subst:proposed deletion|concern=put concern here}}" template? You should be able to paste that at the top of an article in the source code editor (obviously changing the "put concern here" part though) and it should automatically set up the template. Hope this helps! :) Sir MemeGod ._. (talk - contribs - created articles) 04:59, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi, Roasted! That means to put "subst:" at the beginning of the template when you put it at the top of the article, like this: {{subst:Proposed deletion|concern=reason for proposed deletion}}
I just used the template for new wikiprojects. Thank you, I'll make a requested edit at {WikiProject Anthropology}, have a good day Kowal2701 (talk) 20:35, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter sorry, I'm struggling with this, how do I access the template code? Help:Template says you can edit templates in the template space, but I can only find documentations rather than the original thing Kowal2701 (talk) 16:02, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
@Kowal2701:Template:WikiProject Anthropology is only semi-protected. You should be able to edit it like any other page by clicking an Edit tab at top of the page. Did you instead click edit next to the "Template documentation" heading lower down? That only edits the documentation page. I haven't examined which code is needed to make a task force parameter. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:56, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
Have used Template {{collapse top|}} {{collapse bottom}} in nested fashion (two collapse templates in one collapse template -purpose keeping content well organized and presentable) at a user sandbox talk page. (sandbox talk page history). User:Louis P. Boog communicated me, "attempted to add a cite to Proposed additions of text 1 and now it won't open.", "Correction. checking the history I found earlier Proposed additions of text 1 do not open either! Can you fix this??"
1) Can some one well versed with 'Collapse Templates' help test and confirm if 'Collapse Templates' are functioning properly to you.
2) From the talk page history I did not get what difficulty User:Louis P. Boog may be facing, may be some one can help. Bookku (talk) 08:01, 26 July 2024 (UTC)
Let's see what happens if I nest collapse templates.
Marking as resolved as of now since Louis P. Boog communicated at their user talk that they are not facing issue at their sandbox talk as of now. Many thanks.
Thanks at Maproom, editing the thread to keep it live till Louis P. Boog visits here or problem gets sorted out. Bookku (talk) 13:11, 28 July 2024 (UTC)
Copying between Fencing at the 2024 Olympics and Fencing at the 2024 Olympics - Qualification
Currently, the "Qualification" subsection in Fencing at the 2024 Summer Olympics and the lead description of Fencing at the 2024 Summer Olympics – Qualification are nearly identical. This is my first time coming across something like this and even after reading through WP guidelines, I am not sure exactly how to proceed. My best guess is remove the text in the "Qualification" subsection from the main article and just leave the link to the Qualification page, but I would love some input! RilVi (talk) 00:41, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, RilVi. Without looking at the articles, I'd suggest cutting the text in the Qualification section to a short summary and using the {{main}} template. ColinFine (talk) 09:57, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Help creating a draft article on Wikipedia
Hi everyone,
I'm Feli, a member of the Frente de Estudiantes en Lucha and I'm currently studying the Bachelor's and Professor's degrees in Philosophy. I also have a YouTube channel called 'kratofas' where I share content related to philosophy and student politics. Recently, I've been working on a project about the history and impact of the Frente de Estudiantes en Lucha, and I'd like to create a Wikipedia article on this topic.
I'm looking for guidance and help in putting together a solid draft for this article. Here are some key points I want to include:
History of the Frente de Estudiantes en Lucha: From its formation to the present day.
Aims and Principles: What it seeks to achieve and what its core values are.
Activities and Achievements: Demonstrations, projects, and any notable impact it has had.
Relationships and Collaborations: With other student groups and organizations (national and international).
Current Context: The relevance and necessity of the Front in the context of the current government of Javier Milei.
Any advice on how to structure the article, reliable sources I can use, and examples of other articles from similar organizations would be very helpful. I am also open to suggestions on what else I could include to make the article more complete and balanced.
Thank you in advance for your time and assistance!
Hello, Rennis970, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.
Please note that creating a new article is much more challenging than most people realise, and people who try it before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works often have a frustrating experience. My earnest advice to new editors is to not even think about trying to create an article until you have spent several weeks - at least - learning about how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles. Once you have understood core policies such as verifiability, neutral point of view, reliable, independent sources, and notability, and experienced how we handle disagreements with other editors (the Bold, Revert, Discuss cycle), then you might be ready to read your first article carefully, and try creating a draft. (You have had an account for several months, but you have made only 12 edits, all to new drafts). ColinFine (talk) 10:09, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Addition of "Collected in" field to Template:Infobox_short_story
I am looking to add the field "Collected in" to Template:Infobox short story. This would allow the template to display when a short story by an author was later collected in a book by that author. I have raised this on the talk page with no objections. I am however not sure how to actually implement this change. Any advice would be much appreciated. McPhail (talk) 11:47, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Indexing
It has been 100 days since I created the article Elmich. It is in the main space for consecutive 100 days, but it does not show up on google. I thought if it persisted for 90 days it would be indexed automatically. Any changes to this rule? or what ... Thanks for your helpful comments in advance. HungGreat (talk) 11:34, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
After 90 days, the page will automatically be allowed to be indexed by search engines. However we can't control what Google indexes, so it can take longer than that to show up. Reconrabbit12:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@HungGreat Following the above, Reconrabbit made a small edit to the article today. I suspect that Google is alert to new edits on Wikipedia and may now index it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:53, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hi Junurita. Interesting structure! I fixed the Wikidata link: WD lists links to each Wikipedia article, and then all of them automatically display the links to each other. But what the article really needs is reliable sources about the chemical. Not database entries that merely list the formula and structure and link back and forth among other such databases, and not patents, but journal articles, textbooks, or similar that discuss it. DMacks (talk) 04:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Junurita, please familiarize yourself with Template:Chem and Template:Chem2, and use one or other where appropriate. When you provide a source that's a web page, be sure to specify its author(s) (if specified), its title, the website's title, its date (if specified), etc. (Use of Template:Cite web is a good idea. If the source is reproduced from a journal, then Template:Cite journal instead; for other alternatives, see Template:Citation Style 1.) Incidentally, does ethyl copper have any known applications? -- Hoary (talk) 05:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@Junurita If the compound has no uses, then it almost certainly doesn't merit a Wikipedia article! (There are only a few exceptions.) The good news is that the Chemspider link you provided leads to the RSC's website there I can see six references under the "Articles" tab. If you take a look at these, you may find something more worth mentioning about the compound. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:20, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Please help with new article - Andrzej (Andrew) Pohorille
Hello,
I am reaching out with a great request for help in posting a new article on Wikipedia. Currently, it has been rejected, but I do not see a list of things to correct as is usually done. The assistance of an experienced Wikipedia editor would be invaluable. I am sending a link to my sandbox: User:Joanna.sokolowska/sandbox
Hello, Joanna, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft has been declined, not rejected, which means that the reviewer thinks there is a possibility that it can be improved.
The problem is that there are no inline citations: see WP:REFB. There are however inline external links, which are not permitted: see WP:EL.
Please be aware that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
Per above, do not resubmit until you have removed all of the hyperlinks and added properly formatted references. (Some of the URLs may be useful as references). Second, as his wife, you are required to state this on your User page as a conflict of interest (see WP:COI). You are allowed to create and submit a draft while having a declared COI. Third, articles about academics often list selected works, but this contributes nothing toward establishing notability. What is required as references are what people have written/published about him. David notMD (talk) 22:00, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
I made correction and updation on the nawazuddin page as per his latest findings and research, and corrected the info putted by random users that change the narratives of famous personnels. But wikipedia is not letting me to do it making it all reset. Pratham1998 (talk) 10:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Pratham1998 is not a serious editor. They have consistently deleted sound, referenced content and replaced it with personal opinions and poorly rewritten content, as well as making various unexplained changes. This can be seen here, here, etc. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:08, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
In fact, they are being disingenuous in the way they've approached the Teahouse. The matter of inappropriate edits on the Nawazuddin Siddiqui page has been brought to their attention more than once on their talk page, so they have been acquainted with the issues connected to their editing activity, and they are certainly not in the dark about the nature of the opposition they've faced. Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 14:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Every edit you have made to Nawazuddin Siddiqui has been reverted - actions by several editors - reasons given and warnings left on your Talk page. You were advised to start a discussion on the article's Talk page, but have not. David notMD (talk) 15:27, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Help with declined submission
Hi,
I am new to wikipedia and would appreciated any advice. I have been trying to amend the wikipedia draft page: Draft:Dan Keeling, but this has been declined twice now. I have added in many additional references that are from reliable sources and directly discuss the key points I have used in the wikipedia page, and have tried to make the text more neutral in tone. Would any be able to look over this and assist any further please?
@LunaPudding23 If you feel the draft is now in an acceptable state, you should hit the big blue "Resubmit" button. That places it back in the bundle of unreviewed articles to be checked again by those who specialise in that task. The text still reads like a cv to me and notability would be greatly improved if you could show that any of the awards he received were themselves notable: which often means they also have articles in Wikipedia you could WP:Wikilink. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:02, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
The Fetisov Journalism awards is the largest (in terms of prize money) journalism award in the world. I want to set up a wikipedia page. How do I go about this? Aidanpwhite (talk) 12:22, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
You're going to have to address the conflict of interest mentioned on your talk page first. Removing a line from the draft won't make it go away. -- D'n'B-t -- 13:53, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Aidanpwhite. Once you have made the formal declaration of your status as a paid editor, you will need to address the fact that the draft Draft:Fetisov Journalism Awards does not have a single citation, and the only thing it links to is the awards' website.
Your use of the phrase "set up a page" suggests that, like many people, you have a completely wrong understanding of what Wikipedia is, and think it is like social media, where you can "set up a page for" somebody or something.
Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and the activity is writing a neutral, well-referenced, encyclopaedia article. Note that an article about the Fetisov awards (whoever writes it) will not belong to, or be controlled by, you or anybody associated with the awards: almost anybody in the world will be entitled to edit it except you and anybody else associated with the awards (you will be allowed to suggest changes, but not to make them).
Note also that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. Writing a draft begins with finding reliable independent sources that contain significant coverage of the subject: at this stage you should evaluate every proposed source carefully againt the triple criteria of WP:42. If you can find several which meet the criteria, that will establish notability as Wikipedia uses the term, and you should then forget absolutely everything that you personally know about the awards, and write a neutral summary of what these sources say. ColinFine (talk) 16:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
publishing translations
Hello, my account is roughly 20something days old, and i wonder when will i be able to publish my translations? i'm doing translations here from czech to english as a part of my university practice (am in the final semester). Here's an example link of a translation i made, and i don't know if its publicly available or if only i can look it up https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Praxe1/Saskia_Bure%C5%A1ov%C3%A1. in case that it is publicly visible, i'd want to ask how big of a deal is the header template missing, how do i add it in case it's a big deal, and how do i edit references, because every time i try to manually edit it and click the line in the references box, it opens a general references menu. thanks in advance. Praxe1 (talk) 12:35, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, Praxe1. The draft Draft:Saskia Burešová is in draft space, which means that it is publicly visible to anybody that finds it, but it is not yet part of the encyclopaedia, and will not be indexed by external search enginges such as Google.
What you need to do is to submit it for review, by picking the blue "Submit" button. However, I do not believe that it is adequately sourced for a article about a living person in English Wikipedia. Each language Wikipedia is a separate project, with its own rules and practices; and English Wikipedia is one of the strictest on sourcing: merely translating the content of an article from another Wikipedia is often not enough (see translation).
If you submit it, you will eventually get a review, which will say whether or not it is adequately sourced; but I encourage you to read WP:BLP (already linked above), notability, WP:RS, and WP:REFB and to continue to work on it. ColinFine (talk) 17:03, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Searching for an article I created on Google
Hi everyone, I have a bit of a unique request. I wrote an article Sheri Yan, which was accepted through AfC. After that was accepted, I created a follow up article on Roger Uren, who is her husband. The two have been investigated by Australian intelligence services for their roles in espionage & bribery. I'm proud of having written those articles and wanted to show them to a friend: they tried to Google their names + Wikipedia. Sheri Yan popped up but Roger Uren did not, only articles where he is mentioned. Is there any reason for this? 30Four (talk) 04:24, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hey there @30Four! When I created my first article, this was actually one of the first things I did, only to find out that it never popped up when I did a quick Google search. Since pages can take a hot second to be stored in databases after being created, it can take a while for them to appear on a search engine.
Sidenote: I did a quick Google search on "Roger Uren", and would you look at that - he popped up. It may just be an issue with your friend's devices or error with Google itself. If you want to show a friend, just send them the article links :)
Thanks for the quick reply! It's interesting that he appears in your searches, his page still isn't appearing in mine. I should check back in with my friend to see what they say as well, but searching on Wikipedia was obviously more direct when he didn't pop up the first time. I read a similar post from July 27th not too far above this one where someone asked a similar question (I guess my request isn't so unique) and wanted to note that I created Uren's page back in early April, so it's over that 90 day threshold. If you're seeing it, maybe it's a problem on my end? Who knows. 30Four (talk) 04:41, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Yea, in that case I'm not sure. Also to clarify, I just searched up "Roger Uren" and the page showed up (it was the 5th or 6th result though, which is weird)
@30Four: FWIW, I've just searched for 'Roger Uren' (I'm based in the UK, in case that matters), and nothing came up on Google, at least not in the first ten pages of results.
New Wikipedia articles become available for search engine indexing when they have been reviewed by New Pages Patrol, created or accepted for publication at AfC by a user who is autopatrolled, or when 90 days have passed from publication, whichever comes first. I say this just to explain that new articles don't in most cases automatically become visible to search engines.
That said, you moved the Roger Uren draft to the main article space on 5 April, therefore although it hasn't been patrolled yet, it is well past the 90 days, and should therefore be visible, as far as I can tell. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:18, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@30Four As I mentioned below, in my experience Google may index articles once they are >90 days old and often does so when there is a subsequent edit. Roger Uren has been edited again today, so I'd expect that to happen soon. There may be some difference according to whether you search on google.com, google.co.us, google.co.uk or other version. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:12, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
hey wiki, we are officially from Dr Meena Sharma's team. We have full details about her life, Journalism, awards education Qualifications and More. We want updated her profile. JournoRohit (talk) 17:41, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, JournoRohit, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Absolutely the first thing you must do is to read paid editing. Understand what the restrictions are on you editing that article, and put the mandatory declaration on your user page.
Note also that accounts may not be shared: if there is more than one of you working on this, you must each have a personal account, and put the declaration on each user page. (If new people join your team, they may not take over this account, but must create new personal accounts).
Next, note that Meena Sharma is not a "profile", but an encyclopaedia article about Sharma. It does not belong to Sharma, it is not controlled by her or her team, and it will not necessarily say what she, or you, want it to say. You are welcome to make edit requests on the article's talk page: be as specific as possible, and always cite reliable (and preferably independent) sources for any information you want to add. An uninvolved editor will in time come and decide whether and how to implement your request.
Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.
At present, it has, as far as I can see, not one single source that meets the triple requirement of being reliably published, independent of Sharma, and containing significant coverage of her (see WP:42). I have therefore tagged it as problematic in that way, and also Sharma as possibly not notable (in Wikipedia's special sense). So the best thing you can do is to find some sources which do meet that requirement, and request that they be added. Adding such independent sources, and information from those sources, is likely to be welcomed. Adding information which she or you want in the article, without independent sources, is not likely to happen. ColinFine (talk) 18:56, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Pictures
How do you edit a page so that you can have two pictures of different versions of something (eg: original version and remake)?
I'm a little nervous to start editing, I see in a lot of the "suggested edits" articles that need to be edited to not sound like thinly veiled advertisements. If someone could give me a few articles to read that they think really follow the format a good article has so I can get the feel of the writing I'd really appreciate that. Whosiewhatsie (talk) 05:50, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@Whosiewhatsie This is one of the best ways of learning Wikipedia guidelines and norms! To answer your question, it sort of depends on the topic. If the article you're looking at is connected to a WP:Wikiproject (you can check by looking at the talk page), then you can use that to find similar, high-quality articles. Most Wikiprojects (even the defunct ones) have lists of all their articles, rating by quality. For example, Wikipedia:WikiProject Aviation/Aerospace biography task force#Tagging and assessment, Wikipedia:WikiProject Socialism#Statistics, , Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Green#Assessment statistics for articles about women. If you look at those tables and click the number under "FA"-"Total" or "GA"-"Total", you'll see a list of their articles which have passed some form of peer review. If you look at B or C class articles, you get a good feeling for what the "Average" Wikipedia article should look like. I hope that helps? Sometimes Wikiprojects like to hide their assesment tables.
@Whosiewhatsie it's no problem; I'm glad you're finding it useful! And I hope you don't mind, I looked at your contributions- don't worry, you're not breaking anything by doing text edits in your sandbox. Personal sandboxes can contain pretty much anything within reason (no copyright violations or personal attacks against other editors, obviously) but other than that they're pretty much fair game! Some people use them for playing around with templates and Wiki-code, some people use them for drafting articles, and some people use them for making to-do lists and gathering notes for articles they wish to rewrite or expand. They don't have to be pretty at all- mine certainly isn't!
And I don't know how much of a chance you've had to explore the back-end of Wikipedia, but there's a lot of low-stakes, beginner friendly projects out there! There's a project for finding and correcting typos, a project for copy editing articles, and so many more! You can look at the Wikipedia:Task Center for more jobs like this, all sorted by difficulty. (Though, if you're confident in a certain subject matter, you can ignore the difficulty ranking and go straight into what you're best suited towards). GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 22:04, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Copyright issues with diagnostic criteria
I'm currently trying to improve the page Mixed connective tissue disease and I've ran into a bit of an issue. For context Mixed connective tissue disease (MCTD) has 4 different sets of diagnostic/classification criteria. Usually when I add in classification or diagnostic criteria for a disorder I'll just re word it a bit. The issue is that the diagnostic criteria for MCTD is so specefic that it's hard to reword it without losing meaning. I'm not super familiar with the details of copyright rules but I believe some of this falls under WP:LIMITED. If someone could check out the classification section of my draft for the artcle (User:CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath/sandbox3) and let me know if what I have is appropriate, that would be much appreciated. I also used an open access article for the diagnostic criteria (link) so I think it would also be okay to leave the text the same and put in an attribution template but I'm not fully sure if that's needed or what the logistics of that are. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Good news! While the article being open access is pretty irrelavent- it doesn't have a strict definition, even on PubMed, as you've pointed out, the article is listed as being under a Creative Commons Attribution Liscence. Looking at the International Journal of Rheumatology's Permission page, [15], it's apparently licensed under [16]. Which, as detailed in WP:COMPLIC, is compatible. GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 23:11, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
I have noticed that Wikipedia content is made by volunteers, and some of them have their own agendas that can ruin people's reputations. In my case, there is an article made by one of your volunteers that contains my family name. The problem is that when people search for my family name on Google, this article appears as the first result. Therefore, I am asking you as admins to please help me fix this article, at least by removing my family name from it. Thank you. A1324a (talk) 23:16, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@A1324a Yes, please be more specific about the issue, though I really don't think there is anything we can do if Google searches return your family name. Whenever I search on my own surname I get a load of annoying footballer-related results! Nick Moyes (talk) 23:37, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@A1324a Ah, I can see that an article about a Jihadist on Arabic Wikipedia might cause you some concern if they have the same name as you. Sadly, I see two problems. Firstly, there must be thousands of people in the world with the same name as infamous people or murderers, but who are not connected in any way with them. I can see this could be awkward, but I fear this is the reality of internet browsers and search results.
Secondly, this is English Wikipedia (en.wikipedia.org), and we have no control or say in what happens on Arabic Wikipedia - it's an entirely different project. I do not know any Arabic myself, but I do know there is a Teahouse equivalent at Arabic Wikipedia (ar.wikipedia.org). You can find it here, and I suggest you raise your concerns in your own language over there. I'm afraid I think this is about as far as we can assist you on English Wikipedia. Kind regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:53, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
In Draft:Spotlight (television program) - currently working on it ,all of the episode summaries to date are coming directly from RaiPlay.it How do I provide proper citation that it coming from this website and that it is not me producing the summaries? Episode summaries from RaiPlay are translated into English.
In addition, is there anything else that should be included in the episode infobox/table such as translating the episode title to English or is that not needed? Soafy234 (talk) 20:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Soafy234, I'll address your first paragraph. See the content guideline "Do not include the full text of lengthy primary sources". Each is not the full text, you say? No matter: the guideline says in part "we can quote a sentence or two from a movie review in an article on the movie"; an implicature is that multiple sentences cannot be quoted. If summaries are appropriate, they should be written by Wikipedia editors, not by RaiPlay. -- Hoary (talk) 22:00, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for answering my question. I have a follow up question: Is it ok to paraphrase the summaries written by whoever wrote the episode summary/description on raiplay,it or would this violate copyright and/or plagiarism policy on Wikipedia? Soafy234 (talk) 22:33, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Would it be possible to do attribution of the entire translated quote from RaiPlay of their episode summary/description in the event that after I summarize and/or paraphrase that it is closely similar? Soafy234 (talk) 23:55, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Kazikhun, Fazzyk and Qibtimagy have been confirmed to be sockpuppets. I now request someone to revert their edits. It will be a challenge for me as it involves multiple edits, some of which are as old as two months ago. For example, this, this, this and this edit are 4 consecutive edits done 2 months ago and all of those (apart from many other edits) need to be reverted.18:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC) Sockbuster1 (talk) 18:51, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
@Sockbuster1, it is not necessary for sockpuppet edits to be reverted. Like all other edits on Wikipedia, you should revert them only if they are making the encyclopedia worse - for example introducing unsourced information, removing sourced information, using multiple accounts to sway a discussion, or vandalizing. Sockpuppet edits aren't automatically bad just because they've been made by a sockpuppet. You can read WP:SOCKSTRIKE for more information, but please exercise caution so that you do not cause a disruption. StartGrammarTime (talk) 00:31, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
By offering money? This would attract the attention of any of a number of shady outfits, so in effect you'd probably just be throwing the money away. Would this be Kyle D Knoth (subject of your abortive Draft:Kyle D Knoth)? If so, then right here, in this thread, please present links to three substantive descriptions of Knoth or his work. These descriptions should be independent of Knoth and of each other. -- Hoary (talk) 21:13, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
@Annebellah Nobody "needs" a Wikipedia page! And nobody gets one even if they think they do need one. They get one if, and only if, they meet our notability criteria. See both THIS ONE and THIS ONE for more details.
If you can demonstrate (using links to independent sources not in any way connected with your brother) that he meets either of these sets of notability criteria, then we might we might be able to point you in the right direction at Wikipedia:Requested articles. If they're genuinely notable, someone will undoubtedly love to create an article about him. If he's not deemed 'notable' by our standards then I'm afraid no amount of wanting or needing is going to deliver the desired page. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:21, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
If you mean other than Kyle D Knoth, then you are allowed to create a referenced draft following the guides at WP:YFA after you state your conflict of interest (he is my brother) on your USer page. What are his accomplishments that you (and he) believe he is article-worthy? David notMD (talk) 03:08, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Meat puppet investigation
Hi I am having a problem with some editors that seem to be working together and dominating edits on multiple pages in reference to one subject. One account is new and making advanced edits and the other has admitted to knowing personally said account. Is this meat puppetry and what do I do next. Thanks to anyone that can help. Foristslow (talk) 22:54, 29 July 2024 (UTC)
WP:MEATPUPPETtry could be what's happening here. That link has some details of what it is and how to recognize it. If you think they might be responsive to your talking to them directly, you can obviously try that. If you aren't comfortable doing so (or have tried it and they did not improve their behavior), a "sockpuppet investigation" page is a good place to post a list of the relevant accounts and links to on-wiki evidence you have found. See WP:SPI. DMacks (talk) 04:07, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your input. I have gone to one of them, they seem to have a agenda, also copy and paste a lot of material on page, duplication of material over a number of pages. The Editor Interaction the editor overlap is almost complete. --
I was in the middle of a converation on the talkpage with an editor that was guiding me through COI and they restored the page before even checking that all my contributions to the page were very well cited. Wikipedia's inappropraite usage pocity states:
Editors involved in content disputes or edit wars should focus on resolving the dispute, rather than preserving the stable version, and the decision to temporarily preserve the stable version for the purposes of deescalating a dispute may only be made by an uninvolved administrator.
Editors who attempt to enforce a stable version may be blocked from editing without warning.
@Cinematracker, you've inadvertently discovered WP:BRD - one of our most common methods for improving an article! You boldly added information to a page; another editor reverted it; now it's your turn, and you should go to the talk page to discuss. There you can explain what you want to add and why, and other editors will probably show up to explain why they reverted you. Assume good faith, discuss calmly and be prepared to make compromises and understand everyone else's point of view, and try to find consensus. Everyone else should be doing the same in an effort to improve the article.
That being said, as Rotidey has mentioned, if you do work with Bellomo (or have worked for him, or know him personally) then you have a conflict of interest and need to mention that on your userpage. You also should not edit the article directly, and should make edit requests instead. This is because, knowing him as you do, it will be much harder for you to keep the text completely neutral - it's the same for any editor who knows a person or company personally, not a reflection on you at all. We also would not want there to be any repercussions for you if Bellomo did not like something you'd written. Let the rest of us deal with that! When you make edit requests, make sure to include sources - this will make it much more likely that someone will be able to perform the requested edit. They may have questions for you, and you can discuss and find consensus then as well. You can also ask for policies guiding their arguments, if need be, and if you see an all-caps acronym then try searching Wikipedia for it with WP: in front. For example, if someone said 'per BLP...', you could search for WP:BLP to find out what they were talking about. Happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 01:30, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your kind explanation. I am new to this and still learning and you taking the time to explain is so helpful. To be really honest the editor that reverted the page, username Jeraxmoira, feels very hostile and rude which felt very bad to me because I was simply attempting to explain myself. I am not comfortable speaking with him/her on the talk page. I was open about knowing Bellomo, but explained that I was not being paid nor did Bellomo ask me to update anything, and the editor Jeraxmoira that I was speaking with kept accusing me if being a paid actor and having Bellomo solicit me to edit his page. It's just simply not true and was not handled in good faith at all.
I now understand the COI due to the fact that I know Bellomo and will learn how to disclose that appropriately on my profile page.
Also, after my very unpleasant exchange with Jeraxmoira on the talk page I had a strange feeling and looked the username up on Google. Their name came up here:
I feel very nervous now talking to Jeraxmoira in the talk page. Is there someone else I can speak with who can help guide me in the talk page? I meant to harm at all and just would appreciate someone being nice and also who I know is a real person that isn't a bad actor. Cinematracker (talk) 04:12, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
@Cinematracker, one thing to keep in mind is that if you edit an article without providing sources - especially a biography of a living person, which has very strict rules - other editors are almost certain to come along and revert it. This is going to happen even faster if you also remove sourced statements, and although I am sure you were only trying to update the page, from the outside it does look very much like paid and biased editing. We have a big problem with this on Wikipedia, and things get even more chaotic during the US summer holidays with bored teenagers deciding to have fun by messing up the encyclopedia. Jeraxmoira may have sounded snappy to you, but their actions and the information and questions they presented to you were what pretty much any editor would have done. Most of the wording they used was standard templated notices, which we use to make sure the right information is given without anything forgotten (since there's a lot to know and we are all mere humans!). You can certainly ask them politely not to interact with you, if you feel uncomfortable, but they are still entirely in the right if they revert any other unsourced additions or removals of valid sources and information that you have made. I would urge you to do your best to assume good faith and that they were only trying to help you understand Wikipedia's policies and keep the encyclopedia safe. It would probably also be wise to remove your Googling - Reddit isn't the most reliable source, and the accusations made there against a large number of experienced editors are heading towards personal attack territory.
When it comes to requested edits, they may be answered by any editor - we all have different things we like doing, and some people enjoy helping out editors with a conflict of interest. I'd be happy to help you craft a request, and give you some pointers on suitable references if you have trouble with those; you are most welcome to leave a message on my talk page whenever you have the time! Start by checking out the plain and simple COI guide, the simple COI request guide, and WP:42 for information on what to look for in a good source. If anything in them confuses you, please feel free to ask on my talk page and I'll do my best to explain or point you towards another source of help if I don't know. StartGrammarTime (talk) 06:33, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Thanks so much for your explanation and help. I will ask Jeraxmoira politely not to interact with me again if they try to in the future. I understand your point about them trying to use standard language but some of it veered into accusations that were not in good faith or were baseless which makes me really uncomfortable. The experience of being on Wikipedia has to (or should) feel good to everyone. I will reach out to you on your talk page for any guidance and questions. I super appreciate your help and kindness! Cinematracker (talk) 06:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
What should we do if a person tampers entire page, which was entirely designed by Me
No one has exclusive rights to any article, even the initial editor. Please discuss your concerns with the other editor involved, either on the article talk page, or the user's user talk page. 331dot (talk) 16:48, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, VidshiBhakiNRI. I would advise you to assume good faith, and not use judgmental terms like "tamper". Wikipedia is a collaborative project, and editors often disagree about what should be in an article. I recommend starting from the position of "how can we reach a consensus about this?" rather than from "I am right and they are wrong and somebody should make them stop". Please read WP:BRD carefully.
"What should we do if a person tampers entire page, which was entirely designed by Me" Well you could say "Thank You for improving upon what I started on this here collaborative project". -- D'n'B-t -- 17:36, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
I've done maintenance on that article (check the history) and there have been a lot of IPs. It's highly likely that one of them has decided to make an account.GreenLipstickLesbian (talk) 09:29, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
i reverted some of his edits to categorise items(mega projects) in a manner as per heads(like space and technologies) project. And secondly there were errors in his edits I just removed some of his sources. Then he reverted back my edits. And I intension was not to do edit warring. I'm sincerely apologise for that. WikiEdits2003 (talk) 10:09, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Request for Guidance on Final Year Project Topic in Hydraulics
Dear Wikipedia Team,
I am a Civil Engineering student currently planning my final year project. I aim to choose a live project in the field of Hydraulics that not only addresses a real-world problem but also enhances my job prospects in the future. Could you please guide me on potential topics or areas of focus that would be impactful and beneficial for my career?
Welcome to the Teahouse, Swaraj Bankar. Unfortunately, Teahouse hosts are not qualified to answer questions such as this. As it states at the top of the page, the Teahouse is a place to ask for help with using and editing Wikipedia. We can't answer more general questions unrelated to Wikipedia. Cordless Larry (talk) 12:58, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Why does the appearance or tool bar clip through statistics?
An article in Wikipedia is runned by a group. Unfortunately, its not letting anyone do any edits.
Explanation: I found one article completely ran by a museum. They have their own Wikipedia page which is cool for them, however they are not letting anyone do any edits on their wiki. They are reverting edits done and are mentioning to those that edited it that they "Are not authorized representatives" of said museum. What should I do in this situation since I had done an edit after I applied for volunteering at that museum where they showed me their aircraft and noticed the wiki page they have is outdated. ThatOneFilipinoExtremeist (talk) 14:37, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
@ThatOneFilipinoExtremeist: Welcome to the Teahouse! The last time that museum account edited the article was 8 years ago, and they have just been blocked from editing due to our username policy which prohibits usernames that imply shared use. I see no reason why you can't technically edit now—the issue seems to be long-resolved. However, I will guide you in the direction of our rules on conflicts of interest, which I advise you to read through as a volunteer of the JAM. Please carefully consider based on those rules whether you think you should edit the article directly; it might be best to propose changes via edit requests. Feel free to reach out with any other questions or concerns, and happy editing! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 14:47, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello, ThatOneFilipinoExtremeist, and welcome to the Teahouse. I want to add to what Bsoyka said, and advise you to drop the idea that "They have their own Wikipedia page which is cool for them". Wikipedia articles are notowned by anybody, and certainly not by their subject. In fact, almost anybody in the world may edit most articles, except the people who are connected with the subject. "Authorized representative" are of no relevance at all.
Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely 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. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 15:25, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
linking to an article with a different name
This is incredibly obscure, but maybe someone has the answer. I noticed in a list of Reader's Digest Condensed Books there's book that has a Wikipedia article that I recently edited, Hide My Eyes. However, the book was published under different titles in the UK and the US. The article is under the original UK title, but the list of books has the US title (Tether's End). I was thinking of trying to link it, but I'm not sure how to do that given the words and the link are not the same (and there's no redirect). It's not that big a deal, but since things are often published under different titles, it would be useful to know how to handle it. Itsagazornum (talk) 17:15, 30 July 2024 (UTC)
The piece of vandalism was in the mini-description. Specifically, the vandalism was for the mini-description of the surname Ponomaryov, where it says (transliterated) suka, a Russian profanity corresponding to whore/bitch. MetricPin (talk) 15:36, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
To clarify, by mini-description, I mean the piece of text below an article name/image, if there, that expands on an article if you type it. MetricPin (talk) 15:43, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
@MetricPin: Welcome to the Teahouse! By mini-description, you're actually referring to what we call a short description. I've removed the offending text from the article by removing the {{Short description}} template at the top, since a correct description is automatically generated for surname lists. Good catch! Let us know if there's anything else we can help with, and happy editing! Bsoyka (t • c • g) 16:04, 31 July 2024 (UTC)
Courtesy link: Timothy McKernan
Courtesy link: User:KEmel49/sandbox 3
Courtesy ping: SafariScribe ? Haha ! please forgive me i am spending a lot of time learning the terms but at least i get better and fall in love with writing more everyday as i learn. Yinka Williams (talk) 11:34, 19 July 2024 (UTC)
Done. Fixed the duplicate reference. Not sure why the sections weren't showing before, but I didn't do anything to fix it. Probably just a glitch. Let us know if you need any more help. Happy editing! C F A 💬 04:01, 20 July 2024 (UTC)
Fixed! 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 04:19, 24 July 2024 (UTC)
Done. Andy Mabbett (Pigsonthewing); Talk to Andy; Andy's edits 12:11, 27 July 2024 (UTC)
Resolved
.png){kind=link}
.jpg#globalusage){kind=link}
