Help desk
< September 9	<< Aug \| September \| Oct >>	September 11 >

Welcome to the Wikipedia Help Desk Archives
The page you are currently viewing is an archive page. While you can leave answers for any questions shown below, please ask new questions on one of the current Help Desk pages.

September 10

Breonna Taylor

Your page on breonna Taylor is locked but contains incorrect information. There are search warrants showing the correct information and they are publicly available. This is why I don't donate to you guys, you're liars. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:4940:C0C0:88C6:30D7:EEF1:6C25 (talk) 05:10, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The page has been protected so that only users that are autoconfirmed can edit it. If you have corrections to submit please discuss them on the talk page and leave an edit request with a reliable, independent source there. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:51, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Leon, Oklahoma

Link: Leon, Oklahoma

Leon School was closed in 1984, with the students being consolidated at Turner, OK.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff Hod (talk • contribs) 05:11, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Jeff Hod: Thanks for the picture. To add the closure date to the article, we will need a reference to a reliable source, e.g. a newspaper article in the local paper or a regional paper. Can you find this? Once you have it, come back here if you need help adding the info and the picture to the article. -Arch dude (talk) 05:37, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Review waiting

I have submitted an article draft for review(Draft:Abas basir), but i have not received any reply yet, what can i do that this article be verified as soon as possible? it is urgent to be live in google. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Abas basir (talk • contribs) 06:42, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, have you asked for feedback on your creation at Wikipedia:Peer review? For more information WP:UD WP:MADEDRAFT WP:SYMUD

You should also be familiar with the core issues when creating a draft: Notability, Sources, and Content.

WP:MADEDRAFT "If you are ready to go live, you can move it to mainspace. However, note that your account must be four days old and you must have made a minimum of 10 edits in order to do so (a restriction called autoconfirmation). If you do not meet these restrictions, you can request such a move at this section of Wikipedia:Requested moves.

Above all, don't rush: Rome wasn't built in a day, and there's no reason your article should be. However, if you don't cover at least the core issues below before going "live" with your draft, you may soon be looking at Why was my page deleted? Don't wait to get it perfect, but do write enough content and cite enough sources so that others can develop the article if you move on."

Chinogrids (talk) 07:37, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

May I know what's so urgent? Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 08:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Abas basir. It appears that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the purposes of Wikipedia. It is not for anybody to promote themselves, writing about yourself is strongly discouraged, and if your draft is accepted as an article, it will not belong to you, you will not have control over the content, and Wikipedia does not share your urgency. Looking at your draft, I agree that you probably meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, so we should have an article about you; but it should not be written by you, and it should not be based on material from you, your associates, or any organisation you are affiliated to. It should be based almost 100% on published material by people who have no connection with you, and who have not been provided with information from you in the form of interviews or press releases. A quick look at the sources in draft suggest that few or none of them is independent and has significant coverage of you, so taken together they are probably not adequate to make the article acceptable. --ColinFine (talk)

Mohit Ul Alam

Link: Mohit Ul Alam
Note: Additional discussion at WP:TH#Mohit Ul Alam

To Wikipedia entries authority

This is Professor Mohit Ul Alam, PhD., writing.

Just today, 10 September 2020, I happened to see that on my entry 'Mohit Ul Alam' in Wikipedia a passage under the heading of "corruption" has printed ceratin allegations against me, of which I got absolute clearance after a thorough investigation by DUDOK (the Anti-corruption Commission, the agency responsible for such investigations) and a letter of discharge was officially issued on 16 January 2020, of which I let you know on 21st July 2020 at 9:19 am on my first sighting of the information with the reference number (04.01.6100.616.01.014.17 dated 16/01/2020) carried by the letter. To my great surprise and shock, I see that stuff being repeated and would like to request you to immediately withdraw it from my entry, as it is absolutely detrimental to my professional as well as public image in the society, and all the more reason why I am requesting you is that the charges were completely baseless as ACC's official report attests. Besides, my son was recruited by following all the rules of the university and those of the country, and for your information, following the university rules, I didn't preside over the selection committee meeting, and I withdrew from the committee following the university rules. My son, however, worked there for only six months after which he resigned on his own to join another university on a better offer.

Besides as the present profile does not give a comprehensive picture of who I am I asked one of my junior colleagues Mr. Romel, as he in our department more attuned to handling the technicalities of such websites as the Wikipedia, that he could update my profile as to suitably represent me, and I gave him the draft without ever realizing, out of our ignorance, that it could be considered as compromised by the profile rules of Wikipedia. And he told me regrettably what went on between him and Wikipedia moderators in this regard.

I am personally aggrieved as to what had transpired so far in terms of misunderstanding, and now am writing this letter to clean up all the confusion and allow me to provide updated information about myself by giving a complete list of books and a dossier about my career from verifiable sources.

I am hereby submitting an image of the letter issued by ACC on 16 January 2020, and a copy of my ID as well as a copy of the visiting card.

Please withdraw the 'Corruption' passage completely and let my mind rest in peace.

With this kindly let me know when I can give my fuller description in accordance with the Wikipedia format.

With thanks.

Mohit Ul Alam

(Professor Dr. Mohit Ul Alam) Dean, Faculty of Arts and Social Science Premier University, Chattagram Bangladesh

Formerly Vice-Chancellor of Jatiya Kabi Kazi Nazrul Islam University Trishal, Mymensingh Bangladesh

P.S. I tried to upload the images of the discharge letter by the Anti Corruption Commission of Bangladesh but Wikipedia is not allowing me to do so. The documents are ready to be produced if needed to verify my claim made above in the letter. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mehbad (talk • contribs) 07:02, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Professor Ul Alam: Wikipedia is based on what has been written in reliable published sources, so that its contents can in principle been checked by any reader. This means that court documents (and birth certificates, often mentioned in relation to articles about actresses) cannot be cited. What we need is published sources showing that you have been cleared of the accusations made against you. I would try to find some myself, but I cannot read Bengali. Maproom (talk) 07:43, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Is it ever OK to remove Trade Mark symbols from quotations?

Some time ago, I replaced the (incorrect) text of the lede paragraph of Dublin Core with a correct text, quoting the definition on this page of the DC Web site. The definition is peppered with Trade Mark symbols, which I found odd, but felt that I had no choice but to keep them in, as it is a direct quotation. Now another editor has removed the Trade Mark symbols. The text certainly reads more smoothly without them but I'm concerned that it is no longer a direct quotation, though it looks as if it is by virtue of the inline reference to the page mentioned above. Please advise what is the correct course of action here. Thanks. Misha Wolf (talk) 11:11, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Manual of Style/Trademarks includes "Do not use the ™ and ® symbols, or similar, in either article text or citations, unless unavoidably necessary for context." Johnuniq (talk) 11:21, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. What I was worried about is whether the inline reference implies that the text is a direct (and complete) quotation, which it is not if the TMs are removed. Thinking about it further, I conclude that the inline reference does not imply that, as there are no quote marks around the text in the lede para. That means (I think) that edits to the quoted text are OK so long as the meaning is preserved. Misha Wolf (talk) 12:12, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Advice on editing the following page and adding link to our official website: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.H._Dorman_%26_Co

hello

As a newcomer to editing Wikipedia - I would like some advice please if possible.

Can we add a link to our official company website to a page that has already been created (by other users) about the history of our company? would doing this create a conflict of interests or contravene anything?

We would also like to use our company name as our username and to make some amendments to the existing text. We want to follow best practice so would welcome advice.

See existing page below, many thanks.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/W.H._Dorman_%26_Co — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dorman Diesels (talk • contribs) 11:39, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Dorman Diesels You may not use your company name as your entire username as that violates the username policy. The username must indicate that a specific individual is exclusively operating the account and that only they have access to it(your real name is not required, just something unique) The company name can be a part of your username, such as "JohnDoe of Dorman Diesels". I'll place some information related to this on your user talk page.

Please review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on declarations you may be required to make(compliance with the paid editing policy is a Terms of Use requirement of Wikipedia). You may make a formal edit request on the article talk page(Talk:W.H. Dorman & Co) detailing changes you feel are needed. 331dot (talk) 12:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As regards linking your company website, please see Wikipedia:External Links--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:19, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Murdoch - Wikipedia

edit requests. Shouild be at Talk:Sarah Murdoch

HI. hoping to get a correction made to Sarah Murdoch

She is also ambassador of the Murdoch Children's Research Institute and a member of its development board.”

Sarah Murdoch is on the Murdoch Children’s Research Institute Board of Directors NOT on the development board. Please below boards from the MCRI website… https://www.mcri.edu.au/about/people/board-and-committees

https://www.mcri.edu.au/about/people/board-and-committees

Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JESG66 (talk • contribs) 11:53, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HI. Hoping to get a correction amended to SARAH MURDOCH's Wikipedia page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Murdoch

“Nine News presenter Kellie Sloane replaced Murdoch until May 2007, when Lisa Wilkinson took over as the new co-host on Today.”

This statement is untrue. Please see below article from News.com.au “Sarah signs off for Today" https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/celebrity-life/sarah-signs-off-for-today/news-story/b63cf61adc35b92b418bdbd90dd5d06c

Sarah Murdoch stepped down. She was not replaced.

• “SHE'S improved the ratings, adjusted to a grueling early morning routine and even put up with co-host Karl Stefanovic's jokes, but Sarah Murdoch's successful run on the Today show will finish next week.” • “Much to the Nine network's disappointment, the accomplished model mum has announced that after an extended summer of four months co-hosting the show, her last day in the Today hotseat will be Friday March 30.”

THANK YOU! — Preceding unsigned comment added by JESG66 (talk • contribs) 11:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sarah Murdoch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarah_Murdoch

Hoping to get Sarah Murdoch's page corrected...

Australia's Next Top Model[edit] Murdoch replaced Jodhi Meares as host of Australia's Next Top Model after Meares infamously blundered her way through the third season's live finale in 2007 and flat-out refused to appear in 2008's finale.

This statement is untrue. Please see below article from Sydney Morning Herald “Murdoch Leave Model” https://www.smh.com.au/entertainment/tv-and-radio/murdoch-leaves-model-20111212-1or4n.html

Sarah produced Australia’s Next Top Model as well as hosted. • “FOXTEL announced today that Murdoch has decided to step aside from her role as host and co-executive producer of the FOX8 series.” • “As well as hosting the show, Murdoch also held the role of Executive Producer via her Room 329 production company." • “Brian Walsh, FOXTEL’s Executive Director of Television, said in a statement today “Sarah has made a remarkable contribution to Australia's Next Top Model and was instrumental in propelling the programme to its most successful season ever, in 2011."

https://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/lifestyle/sarah-murdoch-im-no-superwoman/news-story/99a806c45a4404d2aa7f323a06ac9f68

• “Photographer Jez Smith rejoined the series…’She’s not only put her kudos as a model on the line in calling on her contacts to become involved but, as executive producer, she’s taken on a lot more responsibility and is really putting in the hours to make the show as good as it could possibly be. She’s amazing.’” — Preceding unsigned comment added by JESG66 (talk • contribs) 11:57, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JESG66 To request an edit to an article, you should ask on the article talk page, in this case, Talk:Sarah Murdoch. Note, when linking to another Wikipedia article, simply place the title in double brackets, as with Sarah Murdoch; the entire web address is not necessary. 331dot (talk) 12:00, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

JESG66 You asked for similar updates in August (see Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2020 August 4#Wikipedia page for Sarah Murdoch) and received similar advice. TSventon (talk) 13:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Doubts regarding quality of my initial draft article

Hello

I am interested in creating a Wikipedia page for the Callan Method, which is a system for teaching English as a foreign language, and I am reaching out to you for a little guidance if possible.

I should point out from the outset that I work for Callan Method Organisation; we publish materials, train teachers, and accredit schools that use the Callan Method.

The Callan Method tends to divide opinion, and consequently there is a lot of content online about the method, uploaded by students, teachers, commentators etc. Opinions differ widely, which is fine, but our concern is that ‘factual’ information is often inaccurate. We think that a neutral Wikipedia entry could go a long way to resolving this matter.

I have read the various pages on Wikipedia that mention the need for notability, and for reliable, verifiable and independent sources. I have to admit, though, that I am still unsure how to address these properly.

I have drafted a first article, which is in my sandbox (username: SquirrelArdilla). I would be very grateful for any feedback, no matter how brief, that you can give me at this early stage, as I do not yet feel confident to submit the article for review.

Kind regards

Duncan McLeaySquirrelArdilla (talk) 12:27, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SquirrelArdilla As an employee, you need to make the Terms of Use-required paid editing declaration on your user page.

This subject would merit an article if it receives significant coverage in independent reliable sources, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Wikipedia has no interest in helping your organization correct what it sees as misinformation- we're only here to summarize independent reliable sources. Note that any article would likely contain any and all information about the topic, be it good or bad. You couldn't limit an article to materials that only you or your organization would like to see there.

Your draft has no independent sources(other than your organization's website, no sources at all) and wouldn't be accepted at this time. Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 12:33, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Template Category Trouble

Sorry to bother you again but I ran into trouble again with my template (Template:Brass instruments). For whatever reason, every page that uses template was somehow added to Category:Musical instrument templates, including my own user page. If it helps, I added the template to the pages using the Visual Editor and typing "{{" to pull up the "Add a template" box" and went from there. I can't find the way to fix this and I would love some instruction from some more experienced editors. Why? I Ask (talk) 13:18, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Why? I Ask: Edits to templates don't always take immediate effect in the articles using them; instead, the system puts the work in a queue to be done later. You correctly moved the category to within the <noinclude>...</noinclude> tags. The system will get round to fixing up the category listing eventually. -- John of Reading (talk) 14:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@John of Reading: Alrighty, thank you for your help! Why? I Ask (talk) 21:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

This isn't the right place but I want to say something. Today, you asked me to donate, which I already do, every month. I cannot tell you how much I LOVE Wikipedia. Having the whole of human knowledge, including Wikipedia, in the palm of my hand is mind boggling. Wikipedia is perfect for trivia, serious info and also I love it as backup for quick reference when I've been reading up on a subject seriously. Love, Mary L — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.151.42.70 (talk) 16:41, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Mary. I can only speak as one volunteer, but I guess that I'm not the only one who feels pleased and proud when reading your acknowledgment. --ColinFine (talk) 17:33, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

User page marked as deleted

When I go to wikipedia and click on my user name GioCM I get a note that it has been deleted, without stating when and by whom. My Contribution list still exists, and I am still alive, although older than statistically expected. My wikipedia page, for Gio Widerhold, created by one of my students is still there as well.

The reason I looked is that received on my iPhone an urgent call to contribute to wikipedia. I do that annually. But when I clicked on payment it disappeared, and there is no evidence left on my email. Was that Spam of Phishing? I don't find such a request when I go to wikipedia (US) now. It requetsed payment by Paypal - surprising, since I was informed by Wikipedia in 2019 that they don't use paypal directly for some privacy reason. I don't care about my privacy, can't recall anything in my life that I should be seriously embarrassed about.

Thanks for follow up <email address redacted> Gio — Preceding unsigned comment added by GioCM (talk • contribs) 16:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, look again. Clicking on User:GioCM does NOT say that it has been deleted. The page has never been generated. If you wish to create a user page, you will find advice at WP:User pages. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:08, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hatnote arrangement policy?

Is there a policy for how hatnotes should be ordered? CampWood (talk) 17:36, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This gives you the order. HeartGlow ^(talk) 17:42, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CampWood, MOS:HATNOTE should answer your question, but basically using only one hatnote is strongly recommended per article. There's a 2016 discussion which goes into the scenario where hatnotes that focus on different principles (e.g., "not to be confused by" vs. general disambiguation) should have their own lines. There doesn't seem to be anything in the discussion that mentions forming a consensus on any particular order they should be in.

Do you have a particular article in mind in regards to why you're asking this? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:48, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Tenryuu: Yes. I added a Template:Distinguish to History of linguistics, and am wondering if I positioned it correctly. CampWood (talk) 18:19, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I believe so. HeartGlow ^(talk) 18:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CampWood, going off of the aforementioned prior discussion and my personal tastes, it looks fine to me. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:28, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. CampWood (talk) 22:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

HeartGlow30797 & Tenryuu: Hmm, I can't seem to find what I'm looking for on either of these pages. Forgive me if it's there. To clarify, I'm looking for a hard-and-fast order within multiple hatnotes (even if this is discouraged). Something like English adjective order, but for hatnotes:

Opinion – limiter adjectives (e.g. a real hero, a perfect idiot) and adjectives of subjective measure (e.g. beautiful, interesting) or value (e.g. good, bad, costly)
Numbered list item
Size – adjectives denoting physical size (e.g. tiny, big, extensive)
Age – adjectives denoting age (e.g. young, old, new, ancient, six-year-old)
Shape – adjectives describing more detailed physical attributes than overall size (e.g. round, sharp, swollen)
Colour – adjectives denoting colour (e.g. white, black, pale)
Origin – denominal adjectives denoting source (e.g. French, volcanic, extraterrestrial)
Material – denominal adjectives denoting what something is made of (e.g., woollen, metallic, wooden)
Qualifier/purpose – final limiter, which sometimes forms part of the (compound) noun (e.g., rocking chair, hunting cabin, passenger car, book cover)

CampWood (talk) 22:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

CampWood, it doesn't appear that a precedent has been set, so unless someone else has a problem with the hatnotes and reverts them/starts a discussion about them, you're in the clear. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:41, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback

Hello. I know this is probably a matter of fact, but I am very confused. So I use rollback all the time because it's a very handy tool, of course. However, I looked at my rights and I do not have the rollback right, nor am I listed among the users with it. Am I allowed to use it without the right? How did I even get it if I don't have the right? Thanks, EDG 543 (talk) 19:25, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hello EDG 543. You appear to be using WP:TWINKLE for rolling back edits, and of course you are allowed to do that (as long as it's not misused). Twinkle is usually enabled through the Gadgets in your Preferences. There is a more integrated tool for rolling back edits, confusingly officially called 'Rollback', which involves adding the extra 'rollbacker' permission. The differences are subtle, but it can sometimes provide a slightly better experience. In fact many experienced users use both Twinkle and Rollback. You can find a detailed description at Wikipedia:Rollback. Once you've read the page, you'll know how to apply for it if you wish. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 19:52, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I personally find Twinkle rollback a better tool than "actual" rollback. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:41, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Using state abbreviations in text of article

Could anyone please tell me if it's all right to use ~~something~~ (in the instance I'm talking about) a phrase like "Kansas City, MO" in the text of an article, outside of a quote? It seems a bit awkward to me, but maybe that's just my own stylistic biases at play.--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:03, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No, it is proper to use Kansas City, Missouri instead, complete with wikilink to the appropriate article. We are an encyclopedia, not a newspaper or a directory service, and have no need for confusing abbreviations. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:26, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Orangemike: Gotcha, thanks.--Thylacine24 (talk) 21:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And one good reason for that is that this is an international encyclopaedia. I'd be willing to be that most people in the UK don't know either what MO stands for, or that Kansas City isn't necessarily in Kansas. --ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In this specific case, the fact that Kansas City, Kansas also exists means it is important to include the state. That is not true in the case of a city like Chicago which is known worldwide. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:20, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Chicago, Texas is somewhat lesser-known, it seems. 107.15.157.44 (talk) 23:46, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't use it. It's one of the telltale signs that the editor prefers to use a style copied directly from their advertising literature WP:IBA. AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 00:43, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first bulleted item at MOS:POSTABBR has the Wikipedia Manual of Style's advice on this matter, which matches that of Orangemike above. Deor (talk) 14:49, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Barry Scott

The Barry Scott who passed away today was a voiceover artist for Impact/NBA/TNA and not The Lost 45s radio DJ.

https://heavy.com/sports/2020/09/barry-scott-dead/

https://411mania.com/wrestling/longtime-tna-impact-wrestling-voice-barry-scott-passes-away/

https://nashvillearts.com/2009/10/barry-scott-a-man-for-all-seasons/

MikaelaArsenault (talk) 22:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like you posted this same information at the appropriate pages to get it dealt with. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:39, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry.

MikaelaArsenault (talk) 13:25, 12 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Locking of persons Bio Page from the person who it is about

Does wikipedia allow creation of a biography page about a individual to be created and edited and locked and controlled by someone other than the person it is about?

Why would wikipedia allow their website to be used to slander a persons reputation with false information by others who are not authorized or given consent to write a Bio page by the person whom the Bio page is regarding?

I'm disgusted by this abuse of wikipedia and being presented as factual but in reality is used to harm a person.

This is a false political tool. Wikipedia is corrupt and a shame if this is true.

Randometleto33 (talk) 23:30, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nobody owns a Wikipedia article, certainly not the article subject. Ask yourself: does a newspaper require permission from it's article subjects? Does it only write what the subject wants? Of course not. An encyclopedia should, however, always retain a neutral point of view on all subjects. Without any further details it's hard to know what exactly you are referring to. Beeblebrox (talk) 23:34, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No one may control an article, and no one should be editing an article about themselves (see WP:COI). If the page is experiencing vandalism you can make a request at WP:RFPP for temporary protection. Anything else, please discuss on the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 23:38, 10 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Randometleto33: Basically, yes, the person a biography is about is "locked" by the WP:COI policy from editing that article. Anyone can create the article in the first place, but the article creator has no more control of the article that does any other editor. We do not want or need the permission of the subject. All information in the article must be backed up by references to published reliable sources WP:RS. HOWEVER: we are supposed to be even insistent about references in articles about living people: see WP:BLP. Any unreferenced assertion about a living person must be removed immediately. Any editor who sees such a statement is supposed to remove it. If you see such a statement, you should post this on the articles talk page. -Arch dude (talk) 02:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]