Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1055

Archive 1050

←

Archive 1053

Archive 1054

Archive 1055

Archive 1056

Archive 1057

→

Archive 1060

Draft:Caleb_Stanton

Hello! I've been trying to create an article for a musician, and I keep getting declined because the sources aren't notable enough. Any suggestions on how to find notable sources? Thanks! Dudup2020 (talk) 16:11, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Caleb Stanton declined three times, and the reviewers provided reasons and some guidance. Minimally, delete all the iTunes refs and seek what people have about him. Also, a lot of what is in the draft seems to be personal knowledge (Example: "Stanton started writing songs at age 14. He wrote them behind his bedroom door, where no one could hear."). Your User page should explain what if any personal connection you have to Stanton. David notMD (talk) 16:39, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Dudup2020: To add to what David notMD said above, the key thing about Wikipedia is that it is reporting the basic facts about someone or something. And all of the facts must be verifiable by some OTHER source. Ideally, every sentence in every article should be supported by some "reliable source". And these sources are not BY the person, but rather ABOUT the person. You need to find articles that talk about Caleb Stanton and support the information you are including. Are there articles in his hometown newspaper? Are there articles about a new release of his that can be found on some music site? Has he given any interviews that are published on media sites somewhere? I see from his website that he was on tour - were there news interviews in any of the locations where he toured? Those are the kind of articles that can help serve as reliable sources. You may find this Referencing for beginners page helpful.

Also, you need to be careful with the text you include. The text in the intro part of your draft article seems to have been copied exactly from Caleb Stanton's 'about' page. Unless it is specifically included in quotation marks, or is truly basic facts (ex. Caleb Stanton was born in Ypsilanti, MI), text cannot be just copied, as that could lead to potentially either plagiarism or copyright violations (or both). Your article needs to summarize the information in your own words (while also avoiding close paraphrasing). I hope that helps. Thank you for wanting to contribute articles to Wikipedia! - Dyork (talk) 17:24, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Quoting different articles from a collection

I'm looking for advice on how to best cite from a collection work where the articles within are by different authors. In particular, this reference has a number of high-quality historical monologs that often overlap. Currently, there is a single bib entry and cites within the body reference the editor name and page number, but this obscures the actual article and author that's being cited, some of which have appeared in other collections. What's the best option here? Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:39, 7 April 2020 (UTC) Maury Markowitz (talk) 11:39, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Maury Markowitz, do you use {{cite book}} template? I would fill the "chapter" parameter, fill "author" parameter with the actual author of the chapter, add editors of the whole work under "editor[n]". If you only want to cite the chapter without the book so that it doesn't matter where the chapter appears, you would need to know more details about the specific chapters, such as where it was published, by whom and when. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:26, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: Normally for collection works I use cite encyclopedia, and put in the editor. But, as far as I'm aware, that would require a separate cite for each article within the collection? I'm quoting one article in that book by Grove, and another by Friedman, so they are two completely separate articles but in the same collection. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:45, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: An example for what you want to do can be found under "Citing a chapter in a book with different authors for different chapters and an editor" at Template:Cite book#Examples. And yes, different chapters by different authors require separate citations. Deor (talk) 17:20, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Cite book, Cite encyclopedia and all the others are kinda like children of {{citation}} and are mostly interchangeable; they produce differences in the commas, italics, etc. that academics and FA writers would notice.

Since two chapters are written by two different sets of authors, we would need to make individual citations for each, that would be a feature rather than a bug. Different works by different writers =Different sources. WP:BUNDLING will give the visual appearance of one citation, but may or may not be desirable. Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:45, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Typo on Steve Mnuchin's page

Hi, there is a typo on Steven Mnuchin's page, but I cannot change it because it is in the introductory section. "in regards to regulatory policy..." Should be in regard to regulatory policy. Is there any way this can be changed, please? 72.12.75.63 (talk) 17:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor, you can change it if you hit the edit button at the very top of the page which will open the whole page for editing. There is also an option in preferences to make available section editing button for the lead as with other sections, but that is likely only for logged in editors. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

NDTV

This is very nice of NDTV that phone numbers of persons in crisis is being displayed. I am sorry to write to you in desperation. I tried to note down numbers to help them but to my utter frustration, couldn't do it because either the numbers are moving very fast, are superimposed by adds or news. Ask your monitors to check what i say. 'My request is to display it properly and give some time so that people can note them down otherwise its no point in showing them' 106.215.124.136 (talk) 17:08, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor, Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. We have articles about notable topics, but we are in no way in contact with them, or represent any of them. You might find their contact address using google. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:58, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Copula article declined

Hello, My article was declined by a senior editor :@Sulfurboy:. The comments provided were "What is going to be most helpful here is providing a lead that introduces the subject to the uninitiated reader. That is, imagine you are trying to explain this concept as simply as possible to someone that doesn't know about this subject, how would you do so? Once that is done we can properly assess the notability of the subject." This comment makes perfect sense, however, the concept is already define in another article on Wikipedia at URL https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_(probability_theory). Does it mean that I am suppose to duplicate the same information in my article? Or it it more appropriate to merge two articles? Also, I would be thankful if a senior editor could help write this up so that it is accepted? Thanks for the feedback. Earthianyogi (talk) 11:00, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Earthianyogi: I'm not entirely sure of surf's objection as it seems to decline based on notability but then talks about a lede. Both do seem to be issues in this case.

The first issue, notability, is easy. Can you reference an example of this topic being used in the real world? For instance, is there a product that was developed using this technique? Is it a topic that appears in lots of standard references? Presto, it's notable. That's the easy one, so start there.

The lead is a bigger issue. To start with, the article does have something like a lead already - simply remove the header "Copula in Signal Processing" and that paragraph becomes a typical lead for a math article. Done! All that's lacking are examples of applications to provide notability, which would make a perfect second paragraph.

But beyond that, the lead should strive to introduce the topic without requiring the user to go to other articles. So no, I don't think that there is an article on copula is enough by itself - and in this particular case that article's lead is also very poor IMHO. Think about it this way: chances are a user will end up on this article via a Google search. They may or may not know anything about math, their search might have even been a typo. So what do you need to say in that very first section so they can immediately tell what this article is about?

I would need to understand what a CDF is, "unit-space", and what "uniform marginal distributions on the interval (0, 1)" are. Those are definitions that a mathematician would know, but not a random reader. That's a lot of definitions, so see if you can simplify each of those down to a core concept. It appears the core concept here is that a copula is a method of linking together a group of independant random variables, yes? Ok, there's your first sentence or two. Now, why is that useful in signal processing and who uses it for that? Now you have a lead.

Writing a lead for a technical article is perhaps the hardest thing to do in the wiki in terms of writing. You have to summarize the entire topic in a couple of paragraphs, not miss out anything important, and explain everything without jargon. A good lead is art, not science. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:18, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: Thank you for your explanation. I think I get it quite clearly now. However, I have defined the uses in the table quite extensively. Is that not good enough? This article is a subset of another article by name COPULA, which already exists, and hence the title 'copula in signal processing'. Thx Earthianyogi (talk) 12:38, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Earthianyogi: Yes those are good use-cases, now just summarize them in the lead as well. "Copulas are widely used by industry in signal processing tasks, including such widely varied applications as the prediction of wind power, ...". Pick three or four examples that are likely to catch someone's eye. Maury Markowitz (talk) 12:47, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

P.S. "Senior editor" is not a category. There are editors, soe of whom are qualified as article reviewers and others as administrators. If any editor wants to contribute to improving your draft, that is up to them. If, by looking at other mathematics articles you can identify editors who have worked on those (via seeing their names and dates of contributions using View history), you could consider leaving a message on their Talk pages inviting help. David notMD (talk) 13:08, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD: Thanks, I actually did invite some editors who helped in creating the copula page. Cheers Earthianyogi (talk) 14:06, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@David notMD:, :@Maury Markowitz: , :@Sulfurboy:: Hello, I have update the draft and resubmitted.

I added: "A copula is a mathematical function that provides a relationship between marginal distributions of random variables and their joint distributions. Copula is important because it represents a dependence structure without using marginal distributions. Copula has been widely used in the field of finance, but its use in signal processing is relatively new. Copula has been employed in the field of wireless communication for classifying radar signals, change detection in remote sensing applications, and EEG signal processing in medicine."

However, I was unable to remove the title 'Copula signal processing'; maybe someone could help. thanks again. Earthianyogi (talk) 15:25, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Assuming you mean Draft:Copula in signal processing, the title can be changed if/when/after the draft is accepted. David notMD (talk) 16:36, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Earthianyogi: That is a superb summary. Maury Markowitz (talk) 16:43, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Maury Markowitz: and  :@David notMD: - Thanks to both of you! :) Earthianyogi (talk) 16:54, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Earthianyogi - You are trying to write about complex mathematical topics. First, I thank you for working on a neutral technical topic that I do not understand well. I would rather see mathematical topics that I do not understand than advertising that I do understand. Second, I suggest that you might get more knowledgable advice at WikiProject Mathematics. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:02, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

+1 I would like to add my appreciation on seeing for a change a draft on a topic that is not the author's secret alter-ego or their own business. Also, second that subject-specific experts available at the relevant wikiprojects would be best-positioned to help going forward. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

User:Usedtobecool and ::User:Robert McClenon, Thank you for all the kind comments and suggestions. I have requested some help on WikiProject Mathematics. Let's see what happens. CheersEarthianyogi (talk) 18:12, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Citing pdf from Wikimedia Commons

Hello to the hosts ! I am currently working on improving inline citations of an article I created (Bhilwara (Rajasthan Assembly constituency)). I want to cite pdf from Election Commission of India website (https://eci.gov.in/files/file/3378-rajasthan-1951/), but their is no option to view the pdf (the button directly downloads the file).I can think of two ways to solve the problem :

• cite the link directly (the pdf file will be lost if the webpage is changed to remove the button).
• upload the file on wikimedia commons and then cite.

with reference to 2, I was not able to found any relevant information about citing from Commons on Wikipedia. Also how can I determine that the files are not already uploaded on Commons. Thank You :) Sanyam.wikime (talk) 05:19, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

I personally would use the Developer tools in Firefox to get the actual url of the PDF and then cite that. Since the browser has to download the pdf anyway to display it, this doesn't make a difference. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 06:18, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Victor Schmidt mobil: Already tried that but the button does not contains the direct url to the file, the url directly downloads it. Also can you clear my doubts in point 2. Sanyam.wikime (talk) 07:05, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Sanyam.wikime, url is not an essential element of a citation. If the website doesn't provide a useful link to add to the citation, just omit it. In this case, you want to cite a document from the Election Commission of India, on 1951 Rajasthan elections. I would cite thusly:{{cite report|title=STATISTICAL REPORT ON GENERAL ELECTION, 1951 TO THE LEGISLATIVE ASSEMBLY OF RAJASTHAN|publisher=Election Commission of India|date=}} It would probably be not so bad an idea to include the url to the page with the download button; it would be useful as long as it exists, and at least provide a record of where the file was available from, in our time. But, as I said, the fact that it's a report, the title of the report and the publisher is probably enough info to help anyone track it down.

The file seems to be copyrighted, so you could not upload it to commons.

Commons is a repository of media files. So, citing from Commons, I reckon you would format the citation as you would any other, and add "via=Wikimedia Commons" parameter to it.

All one can do is search and try to find the file, to see if it is already uploaded. Using categories helps; for images, I use google search with "keyword cite:commons.wikimedia.org" and filter the results by licensing information. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:28, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Please Check my Sandbox and let me know if the article is correct for publishing

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Surelyshubham/sandbox Here is the link of my sandbox. Please go through this article very well & let me know if it is publishable or not. Thank You. Surelyshubham (talk) 20:23, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Surelyshubham. I have moved your draft to draftspace. See here. You can click the Submit draft for review button and someone will review your draft eventually. Please be patient during this process because it can take months before your draft is reviewed. You might get lucky and have it reviewed sooner. Please let me know if you have further questions and I'll be happy to answer them. Interstellarity (talk) 20:40, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

You should at least fix the reference error: 'The named reference "Beatport" was defined multiple times with different content'. Ruslik_Zero 20:55, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

I fixed the ref error. I'm not sure the article will pass AFC, it needs more independent sources in good publications. Detailed coverage is what is needed.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:08, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Please check this link https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Joe_Mesmar I have fixed the issues you have told. I am wondering will this article pass? Please tell me. Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Surelyshubham (talk • contribs) 18:26, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Surelyshubham, it looks pretty WP:GARAGE to be honest. No amounting of editing can compensate for the lack of notability. Also, I could not find any declarations of WP:COI/WP:PAID. Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:38, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

COI

Hi. I made some updates to the page of Michael Stokes (photographer) in November, and it was flagged as a conflict of interest and incorrect citing of sources. I have stated -- though it's very possible I did it in the wrong place -- that I do not know the subject personally, though I did email him to ask if I could upload a photo from his website. He said yes, and I uploaded it, not realizing that this could be considered a copyright issue. The photo was removed (I now understand why) and then the conflict of interest note appeared at the top of the page. I would like to get this resolved but I am clueless. If someone can help guide me, I would appreciate it. Thank you. Apparently I've also cited some sources incorrectly. If someone could guide me on that issue as well, I would be most grateful.

Glendon wasey (talk) 19:12, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link:Michael Stokes (photographer) .ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:10, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Glendon wasey, please engage with the editor/s who have posted to your talk page enquiring about the possible COI and reach an understanding. You should also make a post to the talk page of the article, clarifying your position and your relationship (or lack thereof) with the subject of the article. You can post to the article talk page asking that the COI tag be removed from the article, and other editors will in all likelihood respond with what needs to be resolved before that can be done. If no one responds in, say, a week, you can go ahead and remove the tag yourself, wait for it to be reinstated and then start the conversation with whoever happens to reinstate it. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:51, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Question about Portrait Photograph

I am working on a biography of a living person and the subject of that article has sent and given me permission to upload a portrait photo. Having permission to upload the photo, am I also considered to be the "owner". And what, if any, consideration needs to be given to the photographer? Daseinundzeit (talk) 19:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Daseinundzeit, and welcome to the Teahouse. Neither you, nor (probably) the subject owns the copyright. Unless the photo was made under a contract that says otherwise, the copyright belongs to the photographer; if there was a contract, it may have assigned the right to the subject, or to a third party (such as an agency). The only person who can license that picture for use in Wikipedia is the copyright holder; and it is not enough that they give permission to use it in Wikipedia: they must release it under a suitable licence such as CC-BY-SA (which will allow anybody to reuse it for any purpose). They must do this either publicly (eg on a website where it is published) or directly to the OTRS team in Wikipedia: see donating copyright materials. --ColinFine (talk) 19:28, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

DBQuery error

Known Issue: Current discussion of the error over at WP:VPT#Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:04, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Friends, One of my students encountered the following: wikimedia\rdbms\DBQueryError. Does anyone know what to do with this? Sadly, it's miles above my pay grade.Ijmusic (talk) 01:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC) Ijmusic (talk) 01:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Ijmusic, where did your student encounter this error? I'd also recommend you to WP:VPT for errors like this as the regulars over there are more tech-savvy. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 01:39, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu and Ijmusic: relevant section for this particular error is WT:VPT#Error on all non-talk pages at the present time. Stay well, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 01:45, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Rotideypoc41352, the link you provided has been moved to another discussion, but thanks for pointing us in the right direction. @Ijmusic: please check WP:VPT#Wikimedia\Rdbms\DBQueryError. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:01, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

My thanks to you both! Ijmusic (talk) 19:59, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Biographic Articles

I am looking for a specialist in Biographic Articles in order to publish my own professional history. Who do you recommend? NelsonGailH (talk) 20:00, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

NelsonGailH Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you have a common misconception about Wikipedia in that it is not a place for publishing professional histories or otherwise telling the world about ourselves. This is an encyclopedia, where persons must be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves or what they consider to be their own history; Wikipedia only summarizes what independent sources state. Any article about you would not be yours to control; you could not prevent others from editing it or keep it on the text that you might prefer. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media like LinkedIn or Facebook. Please read the autobiography policy for more information. 331dot (talk) 20:05, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

331dot beat me to it before I could save my response and summarized it far better than I could. I would also add that a good rule of thumb, especially when it comes to conflict-of-interest editing, is that if a topic is notable enough to warrant inclusion in the encyclopedia, then more often than not, another editor would take interest in it and have created/edited the article already. OhKayeSierra (talk) 20:09, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Deleting a draft I'm not longer interested in working on

Hello wikipedians please I need an help with deleting a draft I'm not longer interested in working on. Please how do I go about this. Thanks and God bless Samirexz arts (talk) 20:29, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Samirexz arts What is the draft? 331dot (talk) 20:37, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Samirexz arts: If you are the only editor of the draft, you may tag it with {{Db-author}} and an admin will delete it. RudolfRed (talk) 20:39, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

New user

I am a new user that wants to help. How should I get started? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1st Username (talk • contribs) 20:59, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

1st Username, you might want to have a look at Wikipedia:Task Center, which lists useful tasks user can get involved in. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 21:07, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1st Username (talk • contribs) 21:10, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Article Rose Kirumira Namubiru

I have added links to the article Rose Kirumira Namubiru, tried to organise it but found it hard to source more concrete citations. I have resubmitted it. Any additions and corrections will be highly appreciated, thanks Alvinategyeka (talk) 22:32, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Rose Kirumira. David notMD (talk) 22:55, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

You have added hyperlinks in the text to various websites. This is wrong and will lead to your draft being declined again. Remove them. You are also continuing to neglect to capitalize the first letters of organizations and places. I copyedited the Lead, you should do the rest. David notMD (talk) 22:59, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Can you add biographical articles about famous people?

Can you add biographical articles about famous people?I heard that you can't write about yourself but what about famous people? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 1st Username (talk • contribs) 22:59, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

You need to read Wikipedia's definition of notability, then you can read the advice at WP:Your first article. --David Biddulph (talk) 23:03, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

To quote 331dot - one of the volunteers here - "welcome to the Teahouse. I will caution you that creating a new Wikipedia article(not just a "page") is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. New users are much more successful at doing it when they first gain experience editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia works and what is expected of article content. I would recommend that you do this as well." David notMD (talk) 23:07, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

All right, so should I edit articles and fix typos and things like that for now? 1st Username (talk) 23:15, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Indeed! --David Biddulph (talk) 23:33, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@1st Username: Yes, that is a good place to start. See WP:TYPO for hints on tips on how to get started. RudolfRed (talk) 23:38, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Usable images

I welcome knowing what images are able to be used. I've read up on this but I keep feeling dead ended when I read that most images online are copyrighted and anything not allowed will be yanked. I want to follow the rules. :) I'm looking for images to improve a person page, to illustrate various parts of her career. I see images across the web, used on more than one website. Images such as TV show stills and DVD movie covers. If the 'owner' is not able to be tracked down, can I use them in Wikipedia as a fair use; may I do this for any image online I can't trace to a copyright owner? Also, do they have to be downloaded into my own device before being imported to Wikimedia? --PaulThePony (talk) 03:58, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

I deleted your examples (an Admin should remove from Teahouse View history). Even here at Teahouse, Wikipedia cannot have copyright protected content. Not being able to locate the owner is not a valid excuse. David notMD (talk) 08:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, PaulThePony. Not sure what I can say beyond the image use policy. No, you can't use an image unless you can demonstrate that it is either public domain or has been appropriately licensed by the copyright holder. Yes, this puts an unfortunate limitation on the images we can use - which is why, I think, en-wiki has chosen to make limited us of fair use, in the form of the non-free content criteria. But unless you can satisfay all those criteria, you cannot use images that way either (which excludes nearly all images of living people). --ColinFine (talk) 13:48, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

With apologies, David notMD. No disregard for appropriate action was intended and it won't be repeated.

Thank you, ColinFine. Would a publicity photo of a celebrity that has been widely distributed (created for the express purpose of mass public dissemination) be categorized as available to be used here? --PaulThePony (talk) 16:25, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi PaulThePony. Whether files like photos can be upload and used in Wikipedia articles does, for the most part, depend on their copyright status. Wikipedia prefers freely-licensed or public domain images, etc. as explained in Wikipedia:Copyright#Guidelines for images and other media files, but it does allow certain types of copyrighted content to be uploaded and used as non-free content. So, whether that publicity photo can or should be uploaded will depend upon its copyright status. Being widely or publicly available doesn't mean not protected by copyright or within the public domain, and many publicity photos you see of people are in fact protected by copyright even though the copyright holder may be releasing (even selling) physical copies of the photo for others to use. When you purchase a Blu-ray of a movie, you "own" the disc, case, etc. in a sense, but you don't "own" the intellectual property contained therein. So, while you might decide to use the case as a coaster; you can't really start reproducing the contents on the Blu-ray and giving it to others, unless you the copyright holder or said content. The same applies to publicity photos, etc. in that you cannot release them under a free license if they aren't 100% your own work. Try taking a look at c:Commons:Licensing and if after reading through that you think the photo meets that standard, then maybe it's OK. If you read that and it does seem like the photo is likely copyrighted, then your only option may be non-free content, but there's lots of restrictions placed on such files and non-free content is not the same as fair use when it comes to Wikipedia. — Marchjuly (talk) 21:22, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so very much for taking the time to go through that so carefully, Marchjuly. Following up, if a key factor in the usage of an image here is whether or not it is copyrighted, it leaves me with this key question: How do I know if it is copyrighted? I found the double negatives in the non-free content explanation page very confusing. As for my pursuit, I have written to the media department of a network which originally put forth some images--stills from episodes, for example. Back to the general, I don't know how to find out about other images, such as a publicity photo. (One might have hired a photographer to do publicity photos and that photographer's business may be long gone, or they may have died.) If the person her/himself is not reachable or otherwise able to verify ownership, how would one go about finding if there is a copyright? The point is this: Why have as a key criteria something that is not knowable much of the time? --PaulThePony (talk) 22:22, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm not a copyright lawyer, and I'm not sure I can answer your question other than to say that it's probably best to assume that an image is copyrighted by default and then try and work from there; in other words, unless there is something explicitly stating that the image is within the public domain or has been released under a free license (like Creative Commons) that Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons accepts, then it's probably best to assume that the image is copyrighted (even if it doesn't say that it is).

Lots of images you'll find online probably weren't uploaded by their original copyright holders, and whomever uploaded them in many cases probably didn't even think about whether it was OK to so so. Many times, copyrighted images are uploaded and used under the concepts or fair use or fair dealing and technically these probably wouldn't be seen as copyright violations if push came to shove. The content found on most websites is also generally protected by copyright; so, even if the owners of the websites aren't the original copyright holders of the content they're hosting, there's still some degree of (indirect) copyright protection perhaps. This doesn't mean that there aren't people who won't download images they find online and try to reuse them as if they were their own, but it also doesn't mean that they've been given permission to do so.

Wikipedia (and all websites run by the Wikimedia Foundation), on the other hand, is basically giving anyone anywhere in the world the OK to reuse the content it hosts pretty much free of charge for any purpose at any time as long as they do so in accordance with wmf:Terms of Use#7. Licensing of Content, and that's pretty much what you're agreeing to allow every time you click the "Publish changes" button. While it's OK for you to agree to such a thing for content you create, you cannot do so for content created by others without their explicit consent.

It's hard to go into too much detail here at the Teahouse because that's not really what the role of the Teahouse per se. So, if you have specific questions about a specific image, then you might want to try asking at either at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions or c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright because that's where you'll likely find people more familiar with this type of thing. Copyright laws vary (sometimes quite a bit) from country to country and whether something is eligible for copyright can depend on a variety of factors. So, if you're able to provide a link to the website hosting the photo or as much information about its provenance as you can on one of those two pages, someone familiar with image use and image licensing might be able to help you sort things out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:50, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Finding reliable sources for the Canimals Page

I’m wanting to know were to find a reliable source for the page Canimals, It’s been really hard to find info on the show. Were can I find a reliable source on the show? If so, can I add it to the Wikipedia page? RheieWater2005 (talk) 00:08, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

See your talk....will talk more after the sock investigation.--Moxy 🍁 03:08, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Display Category Contents

Hello there! I was wondering if it's possible to display a category's contents on a page without the use of bots and whatnot. Thanks in advance! — Preceding unsigned comment added by ToxiBoi (talk • contribs) 22:50, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

ToxiBoi, not sure what you mean. Do you mean you want to create a list of all articles in a category in a separate page? Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:34, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, yes. –ToxiBoi! ^(contribs) 21:56, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

ToxiBoi, you could open the category and hit Ctrl+A, Ctrl+C. Don't think there's a neater, better, easier way without bots.

Categories populate instantaneously when a page is added to it. So, there is probably an efficient method within the wiki software itself (which is likely, anyway, not accessible to general users), but that's way above my paygrade. Try WP:RD/C or WP:VPT if you want people more familiar with the technical aspects of Wikipedia/Computing to see your question. But, going from previous experience, it's a fair bet that a few of them would have seen this post already, though no one seems to have thought they had a confident answer to give here. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:52, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

ugh... tip of my toung

this is probably not alowed here, but i am trying to recall the name of a wikisoftware - asumming its based on mediawiki. i can only remember 5 things about it 1. it was semi personal. you cold request a wiki 2.had a beehive like logo 3. looked build on metia wiki 4. might have sing in withwikipedia 5. probably open source any ideas? thanks 24.91.137.184 (talk) 02:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC) 24.91.137.184 (talk) 02:53, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Maybe these MediaWiki or WikiApiary. ~~ CAPTAIN MEDUSA^talk 04:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Based on the logo, it sounds like you are after Miraheze ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 08:25, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Web archives - is there a guide  ?

I have seen in many articles that references are linked to web archives. I know nothing about this - ie what circumstances, why, how etc. Is there a guide of some kind that I can read to find out more about when and how to use web archiving ? Marshelec (talk) 08:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Marshelec, generally, any internet reference should have an archive done at the time of citing - see Help:Using the Wayback Machine for the details.

I think there is a bot that automatically archives new links added to Wikipedia additionally. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 08:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Lucien Thévet page

I've now removed the direct external links from the body of the text and consigned them to the footnote section. But I'm not sure why there is the comment [edit source] next to the Discography, Pedagogical Works, and Notes and references section. If there is some problem with the formatting, it would be helpful to know specifically what that is. Thanks! Corniste6367 (talk) 20:35, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Lucien Thévet. David notMD (talk) 22:53, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@Corniste6367: That's not an indication of something wrong – it's just a link to edit that section (as opposed to the entire article). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Indeed. The "edit source" links allow other editors to make improvements to the article. I've just made a couple of minor improvements myself. Maproom (talk) 08:54, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

how to edit and replace the dead links and make the changes

Hello, i am new to the Wikipedia, i want learn about editing and making changes in Wikipedia. Vishal.acquire (talk) 07:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Vishal.acquire, the first tip I'd give you is to read COI and WP:NOTPROMO. Your edits so far suggest that you are here to add links to your website. Please don't do that. GirthSummit _(blether) 07:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

no, i do not want to add my own links, i just want to learn how it works and how i can make the changes if any link shows 404 error or page does not exist — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vishal.acquire (talk • contribs) 08:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I'll try to explain using one of your edits as an example. A reference in a Wikipedia article serves one purpose only: to verify the information in the article. The article Automation and the Future of Jobs describes a documentary film. One of the references is a dead link; the information that is verified by that reference is the time when the film was first broadcast on television. Here you changed that link so that it pointed to a website that has nothing to do with the documentary – the film is not mentioned on the website at all, so it follows that it doesn't verify the information about the broadcast. This is a form of reference spamming – the purpose of the edit was to add that particular link, not to verify the information in the article. Hope that makes sense. --bonadea contributions talk 08:15, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

To follow up on what I said above, Vishal.acquire, in this edit I changed the reference to one that works and verifies the information. If you are able to do that kind of update (and remember that the new link must be a reliable source), feel free to do so, but if you don't know any reliable source that can verify it, please leave it be. That an URL in a reference is dead does not hurt the encyclopedia, but if the URL is changed into one that is inappropriate, it does hurt, and it creates more work for other volunteers who have to fix that later. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

For context see [1]. -KH-1 (talk) 09:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Bonadea, thank you for sharing and letting me clear my doubts. moreover, to make changes how i can suggest and propose edits to the editors ? thank you

Vishal.acquire Please remember to sign your posts, by typing four tildes, like this: ~~~~. You can request an edit using an edit request - follow the links for instructions. GirthSummit _(blether) 10:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Dears...Help Me Enhancing my article so that it can be approved and published....but first stay safe and stay home...Praying for all the world...

Your Feedback is highly appreciated as i am still new on Wiki

Dear Wiki Users, Kindly note that i want to create a page with title "yacht clubs in Lebanon" or "Oldest Yacht Club in Lebanon" and for this reason 2 draft were created one for Beirut yacht club : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Beirut_Yacht_Club and one for Lebanese yacht club: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lebanese_Yacht_Club can you please check them and revert with your feedback in order to submit them for approval. much appreciated your kind feedback. Peace. Princesse Marissa (talk) 08:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

Hello, Princesse Marissa. If your goal is to create an encyclopaedia article about "yacht clubs in Lebanon" or "oldest yacht club in Lebanon", then I'nm afraid you are going about it the wrong way. You need to start by establising that that precise topic that you want to write an article about is notable in Wikipedia's sense. What reliable published sources have you found that talk at length about yacht clubs in Lebanon? If you have found some (several), then you can write an article about yacht clubs in Lebanon, and you do not need to create articles about individual clubs first. If you cannot find any such sources, then the subject is not notable, and you cannot write an acceptable article, irrespective of whether there are articles on individual clubs. And what you absolutely should not do is to create articles about the clubs, and then try to use the information about the individual clubs to create an article about the clubs in general: that would be original research.

My guess is that "yacht clubs in Lebanon" may well be a notable topic - there may be books, or significant articles about the subject. I would be very surprised if there were a book, or more than maybe one article in a magazine, on the topic of "the oldest yacht clubs in Lebanon", so I doubt if that topic is notable.

Looking at one of your individual articles, it does not appear to me that Draft:Beirut Yacht Club has any references that are both independent of the club, and substantial, so they do not establish notability. Please see WP:CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 10:33, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear ColinFine (talk), Thank you very much for your reply and have checked WP:CSMN.

regarding Draft:Beirut Yacht Club it still lack references and i am working in that issue and i think it will take sometimes before finding the approved references.

for the other Draft Draft:Lebanese Yacht Clubcan you please just give your feedback in it?

my idea is to create category with the name: Yacht Club in Lebanon

and once articles are approved i.e. Draft:Lebanese Yacht Club i will list is in the Category.. am i on the right track? Peace. Princesse Marissa (talk) 10:52, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

Hello, Princesse Marissa. I don't understand your fixation with the category. Categories are a way to help people navigate Wikipedia, nothing more. It is high-quality articles which make the encyclopaedia. I am not going to look at the BYC draft right now - maybe later today. --ColinFine (talk) 11:24, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear ColinFine ColinFine (talk),

you are right, i am trying to provide strong sources for both articles to be high-quality and approved. may i kindly ask you to take a look when you have time to (Lebanese Yacht club) Draft, i need an expert opinion as i am still very new here and i am trying to learn and understand things ... the (Beirut Yacht Club) BYC article still needs some resources... wish you a very pleasant afternoon or maybe eve at yours. Princesse Marissa (talk) 11:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

Creating a biography

I need a help to create biography page. Lakshika rodrigo (talk) 11:48, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Lakshika rodrigo. Writing a WP-article that is accepted is difficult, especially if you don't now much about the "rules" involved, but if your topic is WP:NOTABLE as WP defines it, it can be done. Start with reading Help:Your first article carefully. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

How to insert draft articles for the main article when they're complete

I created an article about Merle Norman Cosmetics after I saw strangely there wasn't one [link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:CTR117/Merle_Norman_Cosmetics ], and I can't figure out how to insert it to be the main article. CTR117 (talk) 09:47, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello CTR117! In WP-language, that's not an article, that's a draft.

However, in it's current form, it will not be accepted, you can't source it mainly to their own website. See WP:GNG, HELP:YFA and WP:NORG. Good luck! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Hello, CTR117, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added a header to your draft which includes a "submit" button, to submit the draft for review. But as Theroadislong says in a comment, the draft has no chance of being accepted at present because it is based on what the company says, not what independent commentators say. Please see WP:CSMN. --ColinFine (talk) 10:42, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I cleaned up the draft Draft:Merle Norman Cosmetics, but did not look to see if the remaining refs (the ones not to the company's own website) establish notability. Goal is quality (at least a few refs that are at-length content about the company) over quantity. David notMD (talk) 12:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Staffs in house for guiding newbies?

I met a newbie at User_talk:2001:8003:9008:1301:780A:CF5:F4B:EC87. Can someone who find it convenient to guide this new editor walkthrough Wikipedia on behalf of me? I may not have too much time to do so, that's why I come here to seek assistance. Thanks. Reciprocater (Talk) 05:05, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@Reciprocater: If that user wants to create an account, they can ask to be adopted at WP:ADOPT, and they are always welcome to ask questions here or at the Help Desk. RudolfRed (talk) 15:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Understanding if these are acceptable sources.

Hello there,

I recently had an article declined about a woman, who I think is phenomenal. Quick context, I learned about her work in class, heard her speak at an event, and after seeing so many articles on Google & wikipedia about her, thought she should have her own wikipedia page. I am excited to learn how to make this article better.

So, these are just a few of the sources I found about her that aren't directly from her company's website. I'm hoping you can help me understand which of these types of citations meet the secondary source criteria? Thank you for your help ^_^

Ripple, Inc

WilmerHale Wins Case Against Abortion

Stanford University Center for International Security and Cooperation

Interviews with Fox News, MSNBC, Bloomberg, etc

Aspen Institute appoints Anja Manuel as Director 2019crisissimus2 (talk) 14:52, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

2019crisissimus2, hi. All of these sources seem to be affiliated with the subject, and as such they are not ideal, and would not contribute towards Wikipedia's concept of notability. What you are looking for are sources which are reliable, which are independent of the subject, and which are secondary rather than primary. If you can find a few such sources that cover the subject in significant depth (not just a passing mention), then an article could be written. Good luck GirthSummit _(blether) 15:01, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Just to expand on that - she is a director of Ripple; she was on the WilmerHale litigation team that article is about; she is an 'affiliate' at Standford (which is why they have a biog about her); that's her own YouTube channel; she's a director at Aspen. They're all directly affiliated sources. What you need are entirely independent sources. GirthSummit _(blether) 15:04, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, 2019crisissimus2. You might find common sourcing mistakes helpful. --ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

rejected article

Hi, my article on Rena Dumas has been rejected for not having verifiable sources. These are the same sources that are fine in French ... what can I do? Thanks Pollymagoo (talk) 18:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

It was declined rather than rejected. What you need to do is to find and add reliable sources to demonstrate the notability of the subject. The French Wikipedia has its own standards, which are not relevant here on the English Wikipedia. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:01, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

subject of a page is not supposed to be the author?

From what I understand, the subject of a page is not supposed to be the author. Is this correct? Tunesmth (talk) 20:51, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Tunesmth, that is correct, see WP:AUTO and WP:COI. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:11, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Previous page names

Where can I find the previous page names for any page? For example, I know the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic article wasn't called that in the beginning, it had a couple of names like 2019-20 Wuhan pneumonia outbreak, but I only know that from studying the topic from the beginning. How can someone look at the previous names of any article or page?

47.152.145.95 (talk) 20:42, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Put the current page name into Special:Log/move. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 21:33, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

Alex Noble, that's what I was going to say, but I tried that and it doesn't work. It looks as if special:log/move only accepts the original name of a move, and tell you about only moves from that exact name. So I can put "2019-2020 China pneumonia outbreak" in and it tells me it was moved to "2019–20 China pneumonia outbreak", but putting "2019–20 coronavirus pandemic" in gives nothing, because that page hasn't been moved to anything else. --ColinFine (talk) 21:39, 7 April 2020 (UTC)

@ColinFine: There are entries made in the page history, e.g., Special:Diff/934292955 edit summary says "UnitedStatesian moved page 2019-2020 China pneumonia outbreak to 2019–20 China pneumonia outbreak: move to consistent title". Most of it (except for the ": move to consistent title") is, I think, generated automatically by the move page, so you can search page history for "moved page". Of course, with pages like that with many thousands of edits, that can be slow. There's probably a more technical solution (like an API/database query). Somewhere, there's a somewhat user-friendly way of running those, with a library of common useful queries available. Maybe try asking at WP:VPT. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:36, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Question

FYI

 – This header was created by Tenryuu. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

how can i put an on wikipedia 41.210.145.65 (talk) 21:16, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

What is your question? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

How to get a page published

I've finished editing my page and everything appears to be in good order. I clicked the publish button on the bottom of the edit page but am uncertain as to the current status. Can you help me to understand what is the next step. Bobw7165 (talk) 21:29, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Bobw7165 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please be aware that "Publish changes" should be interpreted to mean "Save changes". It does not mean "publish what you wrote to the encyclopedia". You have only saved what you wrote, you have not submitted it for a review yet. I will shortly add the appropriate information for you to do so, but if you were to submit it now, it would most likely be declined, as you offer no independent reliable sources with significant coverage to support its content. Wikipedia articles only summarize what independent reliable sources say about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability(in this case, the definition of a notable academic, please review). Please read Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 21:45, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Help with getting published

Hello! I had recently tried to get an article published because it is part of a graded assignment for my english class. However, my request was rejected because it was marked "contrary to the use of Wikipedia" (or something along those lines, sorry) and was considered "an uncensored advertisment". The assignment is due today so I really need to get it published; I am willing to make the corrections needed in order to do so! Agwarnock (talk) 20:08, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Your tutor has given you an unreasonable task. Tell him/her to read Wikipedia:Student assignments. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:12, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

The same question was also answered at this page.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 21:26, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

and also here too. Theroadislong (talk) 21:31, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

That the company exists does not make it notable. David notMD (talk) 22:32, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

assistance requested

I submitted my first entry and it was rejected with the notation (ADV/BIO) which I understand to mean advertising and not notable biography. Please let me know if I am incorrect. If that is the case, and I understand notability is somewhat driven by independent news coverage of a subject, is it a lack of diverse citations that leads to this or is a wider search done by the reviewer? Any tips for improving the evidence of notability or do I simply make peace with the fact that this is more of a regional author/expert and give it up? Thanks for any thoughts. Whirly12 (talk) 21:37, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Whirly12, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that this is a common experience of new editors who plunge straight into the extremely difficult task of creating a new article before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works by making small improvements to existing articles for a few months. Put simply: Wikipedia has little interest in what a subject says about themselves, or what their associates or institutions say about them; and absolutely no interest in how they would wish to be presented. A Wikipedia article should be a neutral (neither for nor against the subject, or any source) summary of what several people who have no connection whatever with the subject have chosen to publish about them (and been published by reputable publishers). If you can find at least three such sources, you can write an article based almost 100% on what those sources say. If you cannot, then the subject fails to meet Wikipedia's criteria of notability, and no article on them will be accepted, however it it written. I haven't looked at your sources, but from their titles and origins it does not look as if a single one of them is independent of Mona. Since you have no independent sources, it is unsurprising that the text of the draft is not neutral, but struck the reviewer as advertising. Please read your first article, and WP:CSMN.

One more point: when a new editor goes straight into creating an article about a person or an organisation, it is very often the case that they have some connection to that subject. If you are connected with Mona, please familiarise yourself with the advice on editing with a conflict of interest. Further, if you are in any way employed or paid by him, please also read about paid editing, and make the mandatory declarations. --ColinFine (talk) 22:17, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft is Draft:David L. Mona. David notMD (talk) 22:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Whirly12, As a note: you should have gotten a longer explanatory message than that, but your reviewer accidentally typed their feedback in the wrong box, so it didn't create the right templates. Hope that explains the short review. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

got it, thanks. Understandable. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Whirly12 (talk • contribs) 22:41, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Whirly12 - I made some edits to merge the refs and correct the syntax, but the article is going to need to be rewritten to be less promotional, including removing way too specific biographical items. In addition, there will need to be better sourcing. Please read the basic notability criteria for biographies of living people at Wikipedia:Notability (people)#Basic criteria. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:46, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing clarification

FYI

 – Section header created by Tenryuu. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I need clarification with editing; i'm not sure if i understand what is expected of me.

Thank you, Peggy APSME.OKU (talk) 04:57, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@APSME.OKU: Please create a new section when asking a new question. If you're looking for an interactive tutorial to using Wikipedia, why not try out WP:TWA? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello APSME.OKU, welcome to Wikipedia! In a sentence, an editor is expected to improve the encyclopedia with each of their edits. The edit does not have to be perfect, it does not need to fix everything that might need fixing; the article should be better off with your edit than without, is all. This can mean something as simple as fixing a typo, or it could involve completely rewriting the whole article, or creating one anew, depending on the editor and their interests/mood (For you, it probably means whatever the professor has assigned you to do). Most of what's required of an editor is covered by common sense, that which isn't, you'll learn of one at a time, as someone else undoes one of your edits and leaves you a note explaining why it was not an improvement. There's tons of stuff (WP:PAG), which you can only be expected to learn as you go. The first mantras may well be, "be nice to others" and "be communicative"; the rest should follow naturally. That said, if you are feeling particularly diligent, it couldn't hurt to quickly skim through WP:V, WP:NOR and WP:NPOV before you start. Oh, and, extra care should be taken when writing about living people (WP:BLP), and, also, to not violate copyright laws (WP:COPYVIO). Think that covers the basics, Best wishes, Usedtobecool ☎️ 22:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Why did my page get rejected?

Why did my page get rejected? I wrote a biography about myself under Bennettheyn/sandbox. Here is what I wrote. (redacted) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bennettheyn (talk • contribs) 22:49, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Bennettheyn Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was deleted as a blatant advertisement for both you and your company. Please understand that Wikipedia is not a place for people to tell about themselves. Wikipedia only summarizes what independent reliable sources state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. Please read the autobiography policy to learn more about why writing about yourself on Wikipedia is not advisable, and you should also review conflict of interest.

I removed your draft from here as this is not the place for it. I can see it as an administrator even though it was deleted. 331dot (talk) 22:52, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Vampire Balls?

I am interested in writing an article on the Vampire Ball of Los Angeles. There appear to be adequate sources which discuss the subject in depth, but it turns out there are actually several events around the country themed "vampire ball", and I don't want the LA event to be confused with them. Neither, however, do I want to write 10 articles on vampire balls! Since there are currently no articles called "Vampire Ball", should I just create the LA one under that title and wait for others to disambiguate it from that one if/ when articles on the other balls are written? Or should I call it Vampire Ball (Los Angeles)" even though there are no other articles called "Vampire Ball" yet? A loose necktie (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC) A loose necktie (talk) 22:02, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@A loose necktie: - you can call it Vampire Ball since you are the first, but I think you're going to have a hard time demonstrating notability with media coverage. It's not even the first Vampire Ball that shows up on Wikipedia. I could only find this from the defunct LA Weekly. [2]. I was going to suggest dding it to the LA Globe article, but that was just a draft that was abandoned. You could request a WP:REFUND of the draft content and go from there, with this info to be added [3] [4] [5]. Good luck. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 22:20, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

When did the LA Weekly become defunct?? They were still publishing articles as of this morning! A loose necktie (talk) 23:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

You're right - I knew the OC Weekly was shut down and thought it was the same company. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Visual Editor

May I know why was the Visual Editing option removed from Wikipedia please? AlAzhar 21:09, 8 April 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alazhars (talk • contribs)

Alazhars, afaict VE is still with us. Did you perhaps disable it in your own "Preferences" somehow? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:14, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@Alazhars: We still have the Visual Editor; just uncheck the "Temporarily disable the visual editor while it is in beta" in Preferences → Editing → Editor. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:39, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I believe it is only available to editing articles, not for talk pages or anything else. What page are you trying to use it on? RudolfRed (talk) 01:27, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Why did I get reverted?

I was asked by Yebba's management to make updates to her Wikipedia page because there were clear errors and inconsistencies. I spent hours making changes only to then have the whole thing reverted to its original state. The only message I received was that the edits were not constructive. How can I ensure that my changes will be saved since they were approved by the actual artist management? Davidjr25 (talk) 01:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm adding this Yebba (edit | talk | history | links | watch | logs) for those looking into this. MarnetteD|Talk 01:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Davidjr25: Information needs to come from published, reliable sources. Management approval does not play into it. Please read and follow the required disclosures at WP:COI and WP:PAID. After that, you can post suggestions on how to improve the article at the article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 01:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Davidjr25. I've added a welcome message to your user talk page that contains (blue) links to various pages that you might find helpful. Please take the time to look at them and familiarize yourself with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines because it will help you avoid running into problems when you edit. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

need 2nd perspective isnt this a run-on sentence

am i wrong that this is a run-on sentence? maybe im wrong about the term, but this sentence seems convoluted.

It is based on the DC Comics character Batwoman, a costumed crime-fighter created by Geoff Johns, Grant Morrison, Greg Rucka, Mark Waid, and Keith Giffen, and is set in the Arrowverse, sharing continuity with the other television series of the universe.

Any suggestions on how to improve? ToeFungii (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: It's a bit long. You could just change it to:

It is based on the DC Comics character Batwoman, a costumed crime-fighter created by Geoff Johns, Grant Morrison, Greg Rucka, Mark Waid, and Keith Giffen. It is set in the Arrowverse, sharing continuity with the other television series of the universe.

TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:37, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Now if i can ask a follow-up.ive noticed a lot of wiki has long sentences which i understand because people add info but sometimes dont think about readability. problem is i tried to change the sentence and another user reversed me saying its not a runon sentence (ive looked up runon sent and id say this is just an overly long sent as Tim said.been long time since english class). ive seen a lot of contentiousness on pages with some users acting as stone. i dont want to just make another change because im certain this user will likely simply undo it again, so what is one to do with an obvious problem but faces a user that feels status quo is right? as am fyi the page is Batwoman TV series.ToeFungii (talk) 00:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: I'd say if you think it sounds better and change it, and someone reverts it, don't sweat it and move on - there's plenty more that needs to be fixed. This type of runon is borderline acceptable. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 02:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Should "Plantscape" be an AfD?

Hi, I'm pretty new and was looking to de-orphan articles and came across Plantscape which, upon further inspection, might be a valid candidate for deletion. All of its seven citations are dead, and I could find few mentions of it of much substance outside its own website. I think it might have been made as a way to add prestige to a brand, though it is a neutral article now. A second opinion and some advice would be appreciated. Trevey-On-Sea (talk) 23:58, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I entirely agree.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 00:24, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Trevey-On-Sea: Plantscape is another term for interior landscape, which is notable per [[6]] and [[7]]. I'd just rewrite this article to be about interior landscaping, keep the title as plantscape, and not even bother with the AfD. Stub it if you don't want to put too much time into it. If anyone protests who doesn't have a COI, then you can AfD it. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:35, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: I'm start a draft of "Interior Landscaping" but Plantscape just seems like such a specific word, more used in company names than in general parlance. I suppose General parLance must be a cavalry officer. Trevey-On-Sea (talk) 00:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Trevey-On-Sea: You could then turn plantscaping into a redirect to an interior landscaping article. I thought about adding interior landscaping as part of landscaping, but the landscaping article says it's outside only and that seemed to be a hill not worth dying on, whether we controlled General Parlance's or General Parking's armies. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 02:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: I wasn't sure if Interior Landscaping was actually important enough for a page so I left a question about adding a section on interior landscaping to interior design's talk page, I'll add it there if no one pops up with a better idea, here or there. Let us hope for a peaceful end to the Grammar-Municipal government conflict. Trevey-On-Sea (talk) 02:56, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Page for an Actor Declined

Notabilty, Actors

I wrote an article for a Thai actor named Mew Suppasit. It was just declined for failing the guidelines of "actor notability" according to wiki staff reviewers. I am confused as to why tho? The actor is quite famous in Thailand and throughout Asia. His drama has garnered an international fanbase, he recently reached 1M IG followers, acted in 4 dramas, several commercials, in-demand. So can someone please explain to me how that isn't significant? Is there something I am doing wrong? Thebriandez (talk) 01:34, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Thebriandez, did you read WP:NACTOR? Did you provide reliable sources that demonstrate that your subject pass those criteria? GirthSummit _(blether) 06:44, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

I just took a look at the draft. I think the problem is the sourcing - lots of TV schedules, no actual coverage of the subject himself. Can you find any reliable, independent sources that discuss him? GirthSummit _(blether) 06:50, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, there are 2 articles (both in Thai and from the same source) talking about him. When I looked at a similar actor in his field on Wikipedia, they referenced similar articles. So is that not enough? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebriandez (talk • contribs) 05:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I have revised my draft, added more and in my opinion, better sources. I am hoping this will help get my article approved. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thebriandez (talk • contribs) 07:35, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Dates in references when you use a web archive

I have begun using a web archive to ensure that references I quote remain accessible. However, I am unsure about whether it is important to retain the accessdate parameter, as well as the archive-date parameter. Once you archive a web reference and give the archive-date, is the accessdate now irrelevant ? Here is an example I am working on: "National performance review - Residential water efficiency". Water New Zealand. Archived from the original on 9 Apr 2020. Retrieved 9 Apr 2020. Marshelec (talk) 03:24, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Marshelec, I would personally opt to retain the access date, as a page may be archived multiple times, so its good to note when you accessed the version so that someone searching the Wayback machine can find that exact version. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 09:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Police Constable John Woodcock, Northumberland County Constabulary. Interred Ponteland Cemetary. 1868.

92.23.114.59 (talk) 09:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Howdy hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have a specific question regarding this feller? If you want to make an article on them, you can use the WP:Article Wizard to draft one. You'll need to find some reliable sources that discuss their life. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 10:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

references are linked to Sources on Johanna Alida Coetzee, is this method should be untouched ?

its kind of confusing to me to find links on same page. however, we have multiple ways to provide references. here author using {{sfn|Scott|2007|p=2}}.

my query : is this method correct ? or it can be improved ? Leela52452 (talk) 07:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC) suggestion or critique is preferred here

Short citations are perfectly acceptable under Wikipedia's citation guidelines. Generally speaking, you need a very good reason for changing a valid style of referencing if it has already been introduced by the article's creator; here, my advice would be to leave well alone. Yunshui ^雲_水 10:21, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

The use of shortened footnotes is one of the permitted citation styles. WP:CITEVAR says not to change an article from one style to another if the style is consistent in the article. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

New Desginer PAge

"I want to create a designer brand page. How can I do it without it sounding like a promotional page? Lavanya Venky (talk) 09:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Lavanya Venky, For starters, are you in any way associated with the subject? If so, you ought declare a conflict of interest. If you are being paid by the subject, are an employee of them, or have been compensated in any way for your edits, you must disclose that by following the steps at WP:PAID. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 09:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I just want to write pages on Fashion Designers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lavanya Venky (talk • contribs) 09:24, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Lavanya Venky, Everything on Wikipedia must be written from a neutral point of view. I only briefly glanced at the page before it got deleted, but it was not written with formal encyclopedic tone and language. Avoid buzzwords, and language that puffs up the subject. Remember that we are an encyclopedia: we must present our subjects neutrally, and from an...almost uninterested position. We transfer knowledge about a subject, such as when it was created, not where you can buy their stuff and how much it costs. Additionally, your article was not appropriately sourced. Our articles need to be supported by reliable sources, cited inline. Again, since I can't see the deleted article, I can't give much more specific guidance at this time, unless you have particular questions. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 10:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Lavanya Venky. I think you can get a big start to getting the tone right by not framing it as "a designer brand page" but as "an encyclopaedia article about this brand". --ColinFine (talk) 10:33, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Help

23.176.32.1 (talk) 12:37, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

My name is Shelby Kloberdanz and somebody is hacking my account please call the MCPD at 641-424-3636

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We can't help with these kind of questions. This forum is for questions regarding using and editing Wikipedia. Interstellarity (talk) 12:49, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Connie Glynn

Someone changed her birthplace to "Hatfield" - Herfortshire stood there first. I cannot confirm this change - and i don't know what to do... leave it like this or undo or??? Maybe you find better sources than me to confirm this? I'm excusing myself already if this is a very stupid question! Kind regards, Gyanda (talk) 12:07, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Gyanda! I took that out, since it was unsourced and in a WP:BLP. If someone want to add it again, they should find a WP-acceptable ref first. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I translated the page for the german wikipedia and therefore i wasn't sure whether to also update the german site or not. Am happy with you! Thank you and stay safe! --Gyanda (talk) 12:59, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Is it possible to hire someone to edit my page so that it conforms to requirements and can be published?

Is it possible to hire someone to edit my page so that it conforms to requirements and can be published? Alt4960 (talk) 15:30, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Alt4960, by doing so, you'd be forcing that person to follow Wikipedia's WP:PAID guidelines, which means they'd be discouraged from editing the article themselves. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:44, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Alt4960 Note that it is not "your page", but an article about you . We cannot stop you from hiring someone, but they would be required to declare that you are paying them. Please understand that Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves (either directly or through a representative). Wikipedia only summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. If you just want to tell the world about yourself, you should use social media or other forum where that is permitted.

I will add that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 15:57, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing feedback

Hi, I am new to Wikipedia. I have copyedited a few articles from the backlog page, some in parts and others in full. Do I need to inform a senior editor so that they can double-check and removed the 'Need copyediting' tag from some of these pages? How does it work? The articles are as follows: 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zero_downtime_manufacturing 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Health_information_on_the_Internet 3. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ISO%2FIEC_27005 4. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gurdwara_Gobind_Ghat 5. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cameraman_Gangatho_Rambabu 6. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copula_%28probability_theory%29 Thank you Earthianyogi (talk) 13:38, 9 April 2020 (UTC) 6.

Hello Earthianyogi! If you feel that you have dealt with the problem so the template is no longer necessary, you can remove it. If someone disagrees, they can reinsert it/talk to you about it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thank you Earthianyogi (talk) 14:18, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

(Adding this anyway because I'd typed it in already, working off an older revision) Earthianyogi, if the tag accompanied a talk page note elaborating on why it was tagged, you'd best discuss it with the tagging editor first, to make sure that they too are satisfied that issues are now resolved. If not, it's like any other editing. If you think the tag doesn't apply (or doesn't apply anymore), you can remove it. There are some tags you should not remove simply because you disagree with the tagging, such as a "connected contributor" tag on an article you have considerably edited, speedy deletion tag on a page you created, etc. Copyediting tag is not one of those. On an unrelated note, Wikipedia articles can and should be linked within site as wikilinks by putting the title between a pair of large brackets, like so: [[Zero downtime manufacturing]]. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool Thank you Earthianyogi (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

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

Swaraj Abhiyan is not a political party and is not synonymous with Swaraj India, which is a registered political party in India. Swaraj Abhiyan is a socio political forum for social work (like an NGO) and a sister organisation of Swaraj India. Now Swaraj India redirects to Swaraj Abhiyan. I thought Swaraj India has grown significantly in the past few years and deserves its own page. Can a draft for Swaraj India be created? Davidindia (talk) 18:23, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Davidindia: welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to make it better. For suggestions on existing articles, start a discussion on that article's talk page. To start a draft of a new article, follow the guidance at WP:YFA and there is a wizard there to help you create your draft for review. RudolfRed (talk) 18:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Article for filmmaker declined

Hi there,

I submitted a draft today for an article and filmmaker which was declined. I was wondering if you could give me some specific tips to make this article wiki-worthy?

This is the feedback I received: This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people). Before any resubmission, additional references meeting these criteria should be added (see technical help and learn about mistakes to avoid when addressing this issue). If no additional references exist, the subject is not suitable for Wikipedia. USHistorian1867 (talk) 18:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@USHistorian1867: Hello and welcome. I would say the advice in the feedback above is correct: include more reliable sources. For example, the early life section on Draft:Jordan Shanks has no references. What we look for is in-depth coverage of the subject in independent publications. More of those is what is needed. Trivial coverage (event announcements, name checks etc) do not help with determining if a subject is notable enough to have an article.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Submit a draft article

I realized that a product that can be found across the globe and that a few of us have dedicated our lives has no entry in the encyclopedia. So since we are confined to our homes, I thought to spend time to author one. How do I get my Draft:JNIOR article considered for release? What is my next step?

Bruce Bscloutier (talk) 16:05, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bscloutier: welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. add {{subst:submit}} at the top when you are ready, and the draft will be added to the drafts awaiting review. Note that there is quite some backlog so after submitting, you will need to be patient. RudolfRed (talk) 16:15, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

But, Bscloutier, and welcome to the Teahouse. I second RudolfRed's acknowlegment to you, but I'm afraid that the answer might be "start again" (though it might not). Unfortunately, you have done what most new editors do when they have the idea of creating an article: write from what they know. Creating a new article is very difficult, and I always advise new editors to get some experience of how Wikipedia works before they try it. Wikipedia articles are not based on what you know (or I know, or any random person on the internet knows); and they aren't based on what the subject or people closely associated with the subject say about it: they are based, almost 100%, on what people who have no connection with the subject have chosen to publish about the subject. So writing an article starts with identifying reliably published sources wholly unconnected with the subject. Please have a look at your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:26, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier I looked at the draft for Jnior, and while it is well written it is 95% original research. As ColinFine mentions above, we do not publish what we know. Rather, we publish a kind of summary of what we have found in reliable sources. I looked for reliable sources for Jnior, but could not find enough to establish notability. My opinion is that it is not notable enough to be included on Wikipedia. If you can find five or six newspaper or magazine article that talk abotu it in depth, then it might be a different story.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: There are no articles as there is no press. We don't even employ a salesman or someone for marketing. Yet, there are 15+ years of this item in over 55 countries in use in 1/3rd of all movie screens for example. That is not to mention all of the other places it shows up. All of this from a company of 4 or 5 people. It is both insignificant and critical at the same time. No one writes about it. They just use it and rely upon it. So the topic has to start someplace. There is some evidence of it but presenting those references would more appropriate in a sales piece. I hope that with this Draft:JNIOR article just to document that it exists and what it is. Especially since I am uncertain whether or not we will survive this pandemic. Bscloutier (talk) 18:48, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bscloutier: in that case, since we rely on articles published in the news, magazines or books, the subject would not be notable. Sorry, but that is the way we have built this encyclopedia. Arduino is a good comparator here: since there are hundreds of published articles about it, we have an article for it. Finally, you also appear to have a strong conflict of interest. Anyone involved with the subject should not be writing articles about it. That is how we maintain the neutrality of the encyclopedia. Thanks.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Deletion proposal

An IP user with zero other contributions deleted my Proposed For Deletion tag on the “Little Dogs on the Prairie” article without providing a reason why it should be kept. Could I undo their edit or do I have to go through the formal deletion process? Dronebogus (talk)

Dronebogus: although users are strongly recommended to provide a reason when removing a prod tag, this is not a requirement. Unless the tag was removed by a banned or block evading user, the page is considered deproded, however poor (or non existent) the reasoning.

Hence, to progress with deletion, it should go to AFD.

~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:05, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Question

Hi, this is Shadowblade08 again. I had a quick question. (at least I hope its quick)

Is it possible for me to close a topic on my discussion page? I've seen this on article talk pages. I currently don't have anything that I want to close, but is it possible for me to do it? Thanks. Shadowblade08 (talk) 13:57, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Shadowblade08, yes, you can. Usually, only editors whose talk page it is, close discussions on them; usually because the conversation is not going anywhere productive. The how of it is explained at WP:Closing. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

A more simple process for your own Talk page is to either delete content or archive it. You have already been deleting. David notMD (talk) 16:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Having looked at your >100 edits to date since registering an account on 29 March, so far you have done nothing to contribute to the encyclopedia process, i.e, you have edited no articles. You have repeatedly asked questions at Teahouse and you have started discussions on editors' Talk pages. If you continue this pattern you may be blocked for not being here to help with the encyclopedia. David notMD (talk) 16:53, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I apologize for that all being harsh. I can understand wanting Wikipedia to be like friendly chat. But its not. David notMD (talk) 21:33, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Question about referencing

I am writing an article about a scientist who has published many highly cited papers. He is among the pioneers in several disciplines, which is reflected in many citations to those papers. The reviewers are asking to prove his notability by references. My problem is that I do not know which references would prove it. What sort of references or links are appropriate to show that a subject has highly cited papers? From the other articles on Wikipedia I can see that links to Web of Science or Scopus are not provided. I inserted some references in which Matej Pavsic is cited, but the reviewers say that causal mentions are not sufficient. This is not the case with mentioning of Pavsic. Especially in a paper published last year by a famous physicist in Physical Review D extensively describes two papers by Pavsic, which are important and gaining more and more citations. In addition, his book The Landscape of Theoretical Physics has many citations, as well as the paper External Inversion, Internal Inversion and Reflection Invariance that has more than hundred pure citations. He is among the members of the International Advisory Board for the series of conferences on Clifford algebras, and is in the Standing Committee of IARD conference series. So again my question. I need a concrete example of referencing that show many citations. Terazij (talk) 17:30, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Terazij, although producing highly cited papers is a good guideline for the kind of people that would be considered notable, what we need in the article is coverage about the person; our article is about the person, not about the subject of the person's research, so the sources should be about the person.

Someone could have done lots of influential work, but if there isn't any information about them out there, there aren't any sources for us to base an article of, so we can't have an article. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:09, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm not very familiar with this area, Terazij, but it seems to me that your subject may satisfy section 1 of WP:NACADEMICS. It is up to you to demonstrate that he does, though. --ColinFine (talk) 19:16, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

At a simple level, it's not what he has written, but what people have written about him that conveys notability. David notMD (talk) 21:46, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Newbie - How best to respond to comments?

I have responses to my first question. What is the accepted procedure for replying to those? The same for a comment appearing on my article? Clicking on the (talk) link associated with the comment's author does not take me to a consistent form or entry point for a response. If it does where does that response show up? I can edit to add a response but then am I responsible for my own date and time? Is there a wizard or something? Searching the help... seems just to get me further and further away from an answer. Bscloutier (talk) 17:27, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bscloutier: the standard way to reply on a talk page is to make a post as you did above, but you would add an indenting colon ":". Click edit and you can see the wikicode for my reply. For the date and signature, you just need four tildes like this: ~~~~. A reply is the same as what you wrote above, but it is usually indented. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 17:43, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: Thank you! This is helpful. Is there a shortcut for this {{reply-to:someone}} block? This is not as simple as an email reply. Another issue that I have is that my email comes in on a different system. My attempt at a reply there using the link in the email shows only that IP address. I need to login there but where do I go to change my password as I used the cryptic thing first offered to me? I don't let Chrome shuffle around my credentials. If I click on my username I just get an opportunity to create my page. Bscloutier (talk) 18:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier, you can use {{Re}} as a shortcut. The software will still recognise it as {{reply-to}}. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 19:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier, you might be intrested in the reply link script. The details are at User:Enterprisey/reply-link.

It can be installed by placing importScript( 'User:Enterprisey/reply-link.js' ); // Backlink: User:Enterprisey/reply-link.js on Special:MyPage/common.js.

It places a link to reply after every comment, and then handles indentation and formatting for you, so you just write in the content. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 19:12, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I second this as I also use it for replying to a lot of talk page discussions. Just be aware there are times where this script fails to submit your reply and that you may need to go into the actual editing window to post a reply. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 22:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Bscloutier, you can change your password without leaving Wikipedia. Pick "Preferences" at the top of any page when you are logged in and you'll see the option there. --ColinFine (talk) 19:13, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Gadget/tool for developing talk pages of newly created pages?

Curious if there's some kind of gadget or tool for easily developing talk pages of new pages. I've created a couple dozen pages so such a tool, if there is one, could definitely help me out. Thanks. Loksmythe (talk) 22:35, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Loksmythe, The tool I recommend is WP:RATER, which allows you to easily create talk pages and sort a page into WikiProjects and rate them. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 22:51, 9 April 2020 (U

Ditto on that advice. In my browser I have to reload the page after rater is run in order to see the work it has done.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 22:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

This is great! Thank you for the recommendation CaptainEek and the affirmation ThatMontrealIP! Loksmythe (talk) 23:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Pro tip: you can also revisit a page a few months or years later, and it will update the ORES rating (stub, start etc) when you run it.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 23:13, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Ooooooo, very cool! Good to know, thanks! Loksmythe (talk) 23:14, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Can i ping a non user?

can i ping a non user? --Disoff (talk) 01:13, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Disoff, If you mean can you ping anonymous IP users? No you cannot, but you can still leave them talk page notices and they do get notified about those. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 01:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

CaptainEek yea thats what i mean, thxs!--Disoff (talk) 01:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

what is the right way to fix "Warning: Page using Template:Authority control with "XXXXX", please move this to Wikidata if possible (this message is shown only in preview)."

issue is on Julie Cairney. it contains code {{Authority control|ORCID=0000-0003-4564-2675}} . i have added url on https://m.wikidata.org/wiki/Q49882552, however the issue still persists. Leela52452 (talk) 01:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC) suggestion or critique is preferred here

Comic Book Lists

I recently posted a question in the teahouse about comic books which is archived on my talk page - Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1054#Comic Books Someone responded that you could not make a list of a publishers publications regarding comic books.

but here: List of Timely and Atlas Comics publications I found a list of these publications.

My original goal was to make a list of all the comic books published by several different publishers and add them to wikipedia, because organized lists can often be helpful to those who read and collect comics.

Is that answer still valid or is there something different about this list that makes it different than what I am trying to achieve?

A response would be helpful. Thanks. Svrangerchrista (talk) 03:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC) Svrangerchrista (talk) 03:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Svrangerchrista. That list article you linked to above is a really poor quality article because it is referenced to websites that sell old comic books to collectors. Such sales sites are not considered reliable independent sources for Wikipedia since they profit from those sales, and Wikipedia should not be driving traffic to sales sites. List articles should be based on the same quality of reliable sourcing as any other article and Wikipedia is not a collector's sales catalog. We now have well over six million articles and at least a million or more of them have serious problems like this one does. We do not need to create more poor quality articles like that one. Instead, new articles should comply with our policies and guidelines. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:56, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

How do you make a wikipedia template?

Aaron Justin Giebel (talk) 06:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Aaron Justin Giebel: Welcome to the Teahouse. The help page is over at Help:Template. Generally templates are created in the Template space, but if it's for personal use, you can do so in your own userspace. Consider my template {{User:Tenryuu/GOCE talk}} as an example. If you're looking for ideas as to how to use templates, search for templates that fit what you want, take a look at the code, copy it over, and experiment with it. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

My article it has been declined

my article it has been declined, i don't know why and am just new in here, i need your help. Moses rukanima (talk) 08:46, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Moses rukanima, I think the advice of the reviewer was quite clear: Websites that are associated with Mohameds' company (that is, websites written by people working for/paid by Silent Ocean) and social media websites aren't reliable information because they're primary sources. Instagram and YouTube are user-generated websites, so they aren't reliable, either. What part of that is not clear to you? Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:27, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

i real appreciate for your help. sorry can you help me to edit it if possible. thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Moses rukanima (talk • contribs) 09:43, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Volunteer editors here at Teahouse provide advice. If they so choose, they may provide help, but that is outside the function of Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 10:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Editing the text published on List of countries by food energy intake - Wikipedia

Dominique.Habimana (talk) 09:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am Dominique Habimana, a statistician at FAO based in Rome.

We appreciate the publication of information and data on food energy intake that we produce. Thank you for that. However, we would like to request you if there is a possibility for us to support the editing and revising the numbers and text related to this page so that we provide the more updated information as a team in charge of producing such data.

In summary we need to know how we can edit the text and figures published on this page. Thank you. Dominique

Briefly, individuals (not teams) may edit existing Wikipedia articles as long as quality references are added. The information in the list List of countries by food energy intake is from a 2009 FAO document that tabulated data from 2003-2005, so newer information would be welcomed as long as it is referenced. As to how-to, clicking on Edit on the top menu opens the document for editing. A new number would need to replace the old number for each country. Once done, click on the blue-boxed Publish changes at the bottom. A replacement reference is required. This can be a published FAO report. It cannot be unpublished information known to FAO. OK to leave a question on my Talk page if this is unclear. David notMD (talk) 10:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

How do I create a new article page on Wikipedia?

I am a new contributor to Wikipedia and I would like to create a new article. How do I do this? MrJCasey (talk) 11:19, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

MrJCasey Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Be advised that successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. New users are much more successful when they first learn how Wikipedia works by editing existing articles in areas that interest them, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. You should also read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial to learn more about Wikipedia.

I see that you have attempted to declare a conflict of interest on your user page- it's even harder for users with a COI to edit or create articles. If you have a conflict of interest with what you wish to write about, you definitely should use Articles for Creation to create a draft. You also should not directly edit any existing article related to your COI, instead you may make formal edit requests on the article talk page. 331dot (talk) 11:28, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Links!

I have edited a page with a new link. My link is black, not blue like the other links. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Odonis_Odonis Reference #8 Can someone please tell me what I've done wrong? This is my 1st Wiki edit ever. Thank you OGSepterhed (talk) 17:20, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, OGSepterhed. As far as I can see, you have done nothing wrong, and the link is working, but you may be confusing two different kinds of link.

Where you see one or more words in blue, they are "Wikilinks" – that is, they are links to an article elsewhere in Wikipedia: this may be an article with the exact same title as the blue word(s), or the title may be something different (because of grammar or synonyms), but relevant.

What you have created, correctly, is a citation of a numbered reference linked to a site external to Wikipedia. The citation (in blue) appears as a superscript 8 in square brackets immediately after the full stop following the album name you wanted to link. If you click that blue "[8]", it will take you down to #8 in the References list at the bottom of the article. The text of that reference comprises an URL which you have linked, so that clicking on it takes you to the actual site you have used as the reference source.

Please note that I am not making a judgement as to whether or not that site – the page for the album on Bandcamp – is acceptable as a Wikipedia reference. I will leave that to editors more experienced in this field. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.197.27.39 (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by OGSepterhed (talk • contribs)

@OGSepterhed: Your browser displays a link in a different color when you have already visited the target page (whether you did it by clicking the link or in another way). The color for an external link should normally change from blue to purple. Maybe it looks black to you. Internal wikilinks change from blue to dark blue. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

How to cite/include tribal knowledge

How do you cite something that is more less tribal knowledge, such a common nickname or do you just not include it? I wanted to include the nickname of the airplane the RQ-170 Sentinel which I know from working in the defense and aeorspace industry. But this isn't something I feel like I can give a reliable online source because what comes up is www.militaryfactory.com and medium.com

I've found before that the best parts of wikipedia are when they mention connections to other ideas that may not be "offcial" but to a layperson or someone not familiar in the area, it makes the mental connection. Therefore I'd like to properly include some of this type of information. Estatic707 (talk) 01:49, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Estatic707. Acceptable Wikipedia articles summarize what published reliable sources have to say about the topic. So, the only way to include "lore" in the encyclopedia is if a reliable source describes that lore. Please read Wikipedia's core content policy Verifiability which is very relevant to your question. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

If you means "Wraith" then that name appears in the website you mentioned above (militaryfactory), so that can be the reference. David notMD (talk) 12:53, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Quick question

Hi all dos anyone know of somewhere or someone who I could go to to request the creation of football kit patterns? on the subject is there a way for me to create some patterns myself that is simple and easy and dos not cost the earth like photoshop thanks! REDMAN 2019 (talk) 12:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019: I don't think any of that is really what the encyclopedia is for. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:08, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson: What about season articles? example. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@REDMAN 2019: Ah, if you mean for adding them to articles, those aren't actually picture files but text inputs. If you edit the source, you'll see code in the infobox like pattern_b1 = _chelsea9394h | pattern_la1 = _drkredhoop | pattern_ra1 = _drkredhoop | pattern_so1 = _chelsea9394h and so on. The best thing to do with that would be to experiment at the sandbox. Ian.thomson (talk) 13:16, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Section edit links disabled

Edit links are disabled in all articles I have tried to edit. Only the edit link on top of the page is active but with it, I can only edit first section Ugbedeg (talk) 12:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ugbedeg, welcome to the Teahouse. The pencil icon for mobile section edits is currently invisible for some mobile users (reported at phab:T249864). It still works if you can hit the right spot. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

It works, though difficult and time wasting to locate. Thanks. Ugbedeg (talk) 14:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Wanted to know the status article.

I created an article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mohan_Shakti_National_Heritage_Park but unable to know, what's the status with few queries like : Do I need to verify it from someone for getting Grading scheme ? Thankyou Pankajkukreti03 (talk) 11:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Pankajkukreti03, welcome to the Teahouse. I have rated it as one of our shortest/most incomplete article types (a Stub) and have added it to WikiProject India. There might be other relevant Projects it could be added to, but it's not a field I am familiar with. I would make the following suggestions for you to improve the article, please:

• Consider adding approrpiate categories to the article.
• Add an infobox with cooordinates so it can be located on a map
• Remove the excess number of images and add a template to Wikimedia Commons to show that further images can be found there.
• Add wikilinks to other articles (like Solan and Atal Bihari Vajpayee), ensuring you clarify where in the world this site is. I assume it's India, but you didn't explicitly state that! Remember that we have readers from all round the world who will not be intimately familiar with such places.
• Please don't use Wikipedia as a source - wikilink to a topic instead, please.
• Consider what the top notices states and try to address those issues.

Hoping this feedback is of help. regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Nick Moyes I made changes as you suggested, Please let me know if there are improvements left & do I still need to verify it from someone ?

Pranjal Bhatt

Disregard

 – OP blocked for legal threats. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

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

---

dear sir, these are all valid , i am doing on pranjal bhat behalf and please dont interfere and remove all your work done on her, it is serious issue . you have no right of her profile and photos and wikipedia. you cannot change our profile , if you do it again we will take police action regards sumeet Suprach (talk) 07:29, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Suprach: A Wikipedia article is not a profile, and it does not belong to the subject of the article. However, much more serious than that is the fact that you seem to be making a legal threat here. You must retract that before you make any other edits to any Wikipedia page (I will post about this to your user talk page as well). --bonadea contributions talk 07:37, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

give me your mobile no - need to know more about editing Suprach (talk) 07:49, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Of course not. You could have asked any questions you had about editing here, but since you ignored the note above and on your user talk page, your legal threat has been reported. --bonadea contributions talk 08:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

User Suprach has now been blocked for legal threats. This thread should be closed.Cedix (talk) 08:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

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

Need help on the page - Gary Vaynerchuk

Hi,

I am a paid editor and had suggested clean-up edits on the talk page (along with paid disclosure) of Gary Vaynerchuk to deal with the COI tag on the page. Since the page is too long, I had broken down the requested edits section-wise. I had also shared the explanation of each change along with the requested edits, but I was asked to 'Please work in smaller requests, and explain why you want the changes.' I had already done that.

There is no addition of information, just toning down the current text working inline with WP:CLEANUP but my requested edits were misjudged as an attempt to whitewash the article. I request help or cooperation of the editors to understand the underlying issue and deal with the COI tag on the page. Thanks a lot! FamJoshua1 (talk) 17:00, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't see a COI tag on the page? REDMAN 2019 (talk) 17:23, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I copied the PAID tag to your User page and removed the COI tag from the Vaynerchuk article. Given your paid status, you properly proposed specific from-to changes on the Talk page. The reply was that you had put everything into one large, multi-part request. I suggest you create a series of requests, each limited to one section of the article. This may induce an editor(s) to review each request. David notMD (talk) 17:25, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal, Anthropologist

Draft:Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal, Anthropologist. I want to publish this information related to Dr. Ajeet Jaiswal, but i am not getting approval from your side. Please let me know the reseaon. I have checked all info there is no copy write issue is detected. 2007.sapna (talk) 10:24, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@2007.sapna: Don't paste his CV here. Even if you have permission, that's just not how we create articles here.

Articles are a summary of independent professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources that are specifically about the subject but not dependent upon, affiliated with, nor connected to it.

Here is a guide on how to write articles that will not be rejected or deleted. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:28, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@David.moreno72: pinging the user who had reviewed your Articles for Creation submission. — MarkH₂₁^talk 10:30, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Kindly go thru it again, I have not pasted his CV here. I typed all important information related to his career and his teaching specialization. Please check it again. Thanking you — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2007.sapna (talk • contribs) 10:33, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@2007.sapna: Kindly read my last response again (and actually look at the guide I gave you) and you'll see why the review is going to fail -- you don't have any source. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:43, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@2007.sapna: See Franz Boas and Jane Goodall for examples of fully-developed articles on anthropologists. You should consider developing your article at Draft:Ajeet Jaiswal (no "Dr." prefix or suffix per MOS:TITLE), not your talk page, which is like an "inbox", designed primarily for other editors to communicate with you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I copied what was on your Talk page to the draft space Draft:Ajeet Jaiswal created by AlanM1. Continue editing there. Per what Ian.thomson wrote: references are required. After the draft is improved, ask here how to submit it for review. David notMD (talk) 17:47, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to COI

Hi. Regarding Michael Stokes (photographer), I would really like to resolve the issues of conflict of interest and incorrect citing of sources. I have stated -- though it's likely I did it in the wrong place -- that I do not know the subject personally. I did email him to ask if I could upload a photo from his website. He said yes, and I uploaded it, not realizing that this would create a copyright issue. The photo was removed (I understand why) but then the conflict of interest note appeared at the top of the page. I guess it was assumed that if I asked his permission to use the photo that I must know him. I do not. I have never met him. As for the incorrect citing of sources, I have tried a few times to fix this but I clearly don't know what I'm doing.

If someone can please tell me what I need to do to resolve these issues, I would appreciate it. I find this all a bit confusing, and I feel bad for messing up this person's page. Glendon wasey (talk) 19:09, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

It's not "this person's page," it's an article you created in 2015 and have edited on and off since then. If there are better sources, assume that in time someone else will add them and someone else will decide to remove the tags. David notMD (talk) 19:32, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia writer

I’m trying to write Wikipedia of a supermodel actress . How can I get her more information?? I have draft ready , anyone can see and tell me what correction needed ?? -- 202.134.174.127 (talk) 19:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Do you mean you are trying to write a Wikipedia article? There are no other edits from your IP other than your comment here, what is your draft? If you created it under an account, remember to log in. 331dot (talk) 19:58, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Rejected drafts

Are rejected drafts allowed to be resubmitted? Is there a difference between rejected and declined? What is the procedure to applying suggested edits to a rejected draft? Pilot333 (talk) 22:24, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Pilot333 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I believe that "rejected" means that the reviewer feels that there is little chance the draft can be improved to meet the standards of an acceptable Wikipedia article. "Declined" means that while the draft is not currently acceptable, there is at least a chance that it could be made so. To resubmit a rejected draft, you would need to radically change it from its current state. If this is with regards to Draft:Renowned LA, you would need to summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to write about the brand. Interviews, press releases, and routine announcements are not acceptable for establishing notability as defined by Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 22:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Linking to Commons photo without displaying photo

I'm working on some improvements to our article on Pillar Point Harbor. I uploaded a photo on Commons of a plaque in the harbor commemorating a local shipwreck. The photo itself is not great, with the text impossible to read in a thumbnail and difficult to puzzle out even at full size. So I don't really want to put the photo in the article, but the text itself (which is transcribed in the description of the Commons file) is of some interest. Would it be appropriate to put a link to the Commons file in the External Links section of the article? Or is there a better way to handle this? CodeTalker (talk) 21:36, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, CodeTalker, and welcome to the Teahouse. I think that adding the image as a thumbnail would still be the way to go, in this instance. When you add it as a thumbnail, interested readers that click on the image to try to get a better view of the text would see your description from Commons and would be able to read the text on the plaque from that. OhKayeSierra (talk) 22:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

“ ANCHOR OF THE RYDAL HALL
On the night of October 17, 1876, the square-rigger Rydal Hall ... ”

@CodeTalker: I would use {{Rquote |1=right |2=ANCHOR OF THE RYDAL HALL<br /> On the night of ...<ref>(cite for the source of the text)</ref>}}, producing the quote box at the right. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

References

Thanks AlanM1, I think that works well for this case. It displays the text readably in a sidebar and has a link to the photo for those who want to see it. CodeTalker (talk) 22:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Using research in Wikipedia

I have been making Wikipedia submissions for over 10 years. In the past I was able to create articles for my small community. They are hard to support because we are very small but live in an area where there is deep history of the native Americans and along the main access to the west in Canada. Some of my submissions I have researched for hours upon hours and used the words from local people and natives. They are now being rejected because I cannot find enough online sources to support them. This is such a shame. A Killer can kill 2 people and will get a Wikipedia page, but real history is rejected and deleted because there is no online information about it. This was where I was coming to make the online information about it. I am very disappointed in the direction that Wikipedia has gone. I believe that research should be accepted before cites from news papers etc. How can I cite a historical place if there is no place to get cites from? Singlepole (talk) 05:23, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

@Singlepole: if you have carried out detailed research, then the answer is to get it published elsewhere, when it can be cited here. The principle that an encyclopedia is not a place to publish original research is a sound one, and won't be changed. (By the way, you wrote "online" several times above as though only online sources count. This is far from being true.) Peter coxhead (talk) 05:55, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Singlepole, welcome to the Teahouse. If you can provide reputable independent sources (online or offline) it will help get your draft approved. I'm not sure when Wikipedia's notability standards became stricter: any other hosts able to chime in? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:59, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

Singlepole, welcome. The way Wikipedia works is that we rely entirely on assessments done by others of a subject, in the form of reliable sources. This is how the wiki was built: anyone can edit it because you just need to be able to assess reliable sources. You do not need to be a subject matter expert. This is why we rely only on good published sources, and do not allow original research. ThatMontrealIP (talk) 06:15, 8 April 2020 (UTC)

In addition to what others have pointed out, part of the reason why Wikipedia only accepts third party sources is to avoid bias. An author might have devoted years researching his work but he needs another set of eyes to ensure not just accuracy but also the objectivity of the information presented. Published reliable information are imperative because these have passed through the scrutiny of professional editors. Darwin Naz (talk) 23:40, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

A vandal undid my editing twice and pretend to forbid me to correct his errors - French schooner Belle Poule

Moved to Talk:French schooner Belle Poule

User "Llammakey" stated in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_schooner_Belle_Poule that "The vessel was constructed in 1932 as a replica of a cod fishing vessel used off Iceland for the French merchant marine school". It is obviously wrong. This boat was ordered for the french naval school ("Ecole Navale") and not for the merchant marine school.I corrected this twice and this guy nndid my edition twice. This kind of vandalizing is unacceptable. I asked him to restore my text.

cf https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Llammakey

There is an official description of this boat on french navy official website at:

they clearly state (in french) that "L'Étoile à été mise en service le 20 novembre 1932 et la Belle-Poule le 20 juillet 1932". Which means in english that Belle-Poule was commissioned into the French Navy (Ecole Navale) the day it was delivered that is the 20th of July 1932. No way it could have been ever commissioned by french merchant navy.

Plus, this boat is somewhat different from french fishing schooners, its hull lines are much narrower and designed for higher speed. It could be qualified as a sail training vessel inspired by XIXth century Dunkerque's sailing schooner which mostly operated off Newfoudland and not off Island.

I know this boat for ages having first visited it #45 years ago. My grand-grand-father also knew this boat quite well in the 30' 78.194.143.124 (talk) 18:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! I am pretty sure that Llammakey, with over 80,000 edits to their credit, is not a vandal. If you are having a dispute about content (which needs to be verifiable through published sources, by the way), post a message about it on the talk page of the article.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 18:47, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Ah, the English language, ever a fickle creature. 78.194.143.124, the prepositional phrase for the merchant marine school modifies the noun phrase a cod fishing vessel, not The vessel [Belle Poule]. The article text does not contradict the official information from the French Navy. Stay well, Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 21:17, 9 April 2020 (UTC) and reworded 21:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree with Rotideypoc41352. However, the sentence could be more clear that the Belle was not constructed for the merchant marine school if the words "that was" are added after the word "vessel." David notMD (talk) 21:55, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

No, Rotideypoc41352 is wrong, whatever the prepositional phrase for the merchant marine school modifies, he is plain wrong, this schooner was not built for the french merchant navy school and is obviously not "a replica of a cod fishing vessel used off Iceland by the French merchant marine school". Because 1) no cod fishing vessel where ever built for the French merchant marine school, and, 2) The Belle-Poule is not a replica of of a cod fishing vessel used off Iceland. It is a very much altered and reinterpreted adaptation of fishing schooners used off Newfoudland, with much sleeker water-lines. So this text is rubbish and "Llammakey" and "Rotideypoc41352" don't know what they are talking about.

Plus "Llammakey" undid my editing twice without asking anything, insulted me, treating me of "vandal", and menaced me of forbidding me access to Wikipedia editing if I persisted to correct his errors, and nobody seems to have read my comments on the talk page of the article. I am shocked by his incorrect behavior and by his refusal to let people who know something about boat correct his mistakes.

Hello IP editor. The proper place to discuss this routine content dispute is Talk:French schooner Belle Poule, where no one has commented since 2011. You have not posted there. Calling a good faith editor a "vandal" is unacceptable behavior on your part, and calling their efforts "rubbish" is not a very good first step in reaching consensus for whatever changes that the article needs. Please try a more collaborative attitude. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:01, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I first commented my addition to this article with this text : " l'Etoile and la Belle Poule were built in 1932 for the French Navy (Ecole Navale..) at the request off Admiral Durand-Viel then chief of staff, who attended Ecole Navale in 1892 and had been part of the last round-the-world cruise of sail-frigate "Iphigénie" (in "View History"), then "Llammakey" undid all my work saying I had "Vandalized his article", after that, I corrected once more his error about who had this boat built in 1932, with following comments ("View History") " are just plainly wrong l'Etoile and la Belle Poule were built in 1932 for the French Navy and not for the merchant marine. Please stop vandalizing my text because of german errors or propaganda. Plus they are not copy of fishing shooners, hull line are much finer. They ware inspired by Dunkerque's fishing schooner of 1850'. Naval architect was probably the same as for french battleship Dunkerque (1935)" and "Llammakey" answered ''"Please stop your disruptive editing. If you continue to vandalize Wikipedia, as you did at French schooner Belle Poule, you may be blocked from editing. Llammakey (talk) 13:00, 8 April 2020 (UTC). I have every reason to consider that I am a the good faith editor who has been treated of "vandal" by "Llammakey, and that, for reason I can not understand he just refuses to have his error corrected whatever my arguments which he refused to discuss before undoing my work twice and forbidding me to persist in correcting this.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.194.143.124 (talk) 23:19, 09 April 2020 (UTC)

Again, IP editor, please discuss the content dispute at Talk:French schooner Belle Poule, rather than trying to debate the details in edit summaries or here at the Teahouse. Thank you. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:28, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I responded to the IP's comments on the Belle Poule page. Just to summarize, most of what they claim as fact is not backed up by the sources. Llammakey (talk) 00:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

1) the main reason why Llammakey treated me of "vandal", the fact that the "Belle Poule" was built in 1932 for Ecole Navale and in no way for a supposed French "merchant marine school" is clearly documented in :

2)The Belle-Poule was built in Fecamp by the Chantier Naval de Normandie which was then a semi-closed shipyard, not very active since 1914. French scholar agree that hull shape is similar to Dunkerque or Graveline-type fishing Dundees or schooners from #1900 or before, but with finer "yacht-like" water-lines. and They have found drawing dated April 7, 1931 in Brittany (St Malo), but according to them "presque à chaque fois qu’une commande de la Marine arrivait, elle était accompagnée de plans déjà réalisés et imposés, notamment pour la forme de la coque. Il est donc probable que ces plans soient ceux que les chantiers Gautier ont reçus, comme les chantiers de Fécamp, dans le cadre de l’appel d’offre. M. Clément précise que, en général, le chantier retenu ne pouvait guère apporter sa «touche locale» que sur les superstructures", which means that the hull-shape was most probably drawed by a naval architect belonging to the French Navy. A clear suspect is adm. Durand-Viel, then chief of staff, whose family had a long maritime tradition in Dunkerque and who is the conceptor of french balleships Dunkerque and Richelieu.

References

Is this a reliable source?

Would East-West Digital News be considered a reliable source to use on articles?  ArchonBoi—(Talk) 17:36, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. The place to ask about reliability of sources is WP:RSN. Searching the archives, that source doesn't seem to have been discussed before, so I suggest you post a query there. --ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, should have pinged ArchonBoi. --ColinFine (talk) 19:01, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Colin, I wanted to say thanks as this is a question i also had. appreciate you sharing your brain.ToeFungii (talk) 04:14, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Adding information for the USAF 2075th Comm Sq that was located in Korea

I have additional information that I would like to add to the USAF communications squadron listing of all the various squadrons. I notice that the 2075th comm sq is missing the emblem and other details that I can provide. I'm not familiar with Wikipedia updates and just wondering if I could provide the information for someone to actually do the inputs? Thank you. Danof 2075 (talk) 05:47, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Danof 2075: Most articles are unlocked, so you could try to make the edit yourself (maybe test it out at the sandbox first or even try the tutorial to get an idea of how to edit). Whether or not the article is locked, you could make an edit request on the article's talk page.

Whichever route you take, do note that new information must cite a reliable (published) source where possible. If you the squadron has an official website, or an entry on an official USAF website, those should be sufficient. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How to report spam on a page

Have you see the Daisuke Kambe page and the Haru Kato page? People are spamming and deleting info and putting inappropriate things all over the page. How do you stop that? 2601:681:5300:AE80:D13A:5008:4D9E:1E95 (talk) 06:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for letting us know that The Millionaire Detective Balance: Unlimited was being vandalized. I went ahead and reverted an edit that seems to have added factually incorrect information. The page seems to have stabilized now, but I'm going to take a second look at the page history to make sure I didn't miss anything. OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:35, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I'm assuming you are referring to The Millionaire Detective Balance: Unlimited. The page could be semi-protected to prevent IPs from editing, but I don't think it's reached that level yet. It seems an issue being edit-warred over is how to anglicise Daisuke's family name; I have addressed that issue in the article's talk page. Anyone else able to weigh in on if the page warrants protection? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

what if 9 out of 10 reference url are permanent dead ?

usually we mark a link as permanent dead. what should i do if almost of them are permanent dead ? Leela52452 (talk) 06:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC) suggestion or critique is preferred here

Hello, Leela52452, and welcome to the Teahouse. In this instance, I would recommend using User:InternetArchiveBot, which has the ability to automatically rescue dead links and replace them with links to their pages on the Wayback Machine. Simply go to this page and login with your Wikipedia login to get started. OhKayeSierra (talk) 06:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Sita Jayawardana-Parakrama

Hi I am trying to upload two articles- one of which I have already placed for some months now on my Wikie sand box for vetting/ approval for upload on Wikie . It is about Sita Parakrama(nee Jayawardana) Actress, Journalist and founder Editor of the first Women"s Magazine In Ceylon(now Sri Lanka),possibly one of the first In Asia .She was one of the leading personalities in the arts in post-independence Sri Lanka. It is as far I know well cross referenced and I have a huge amount of other content and links if needed.. but I I'd like to first get approval that as is,. it is fit for uploading Pls tell me how.. I have been through Help and am still unsure of the process. I could give you a sandbox link if neededor copy it out here..pls advise.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:SchezID/sandbox SchezID (talk) 02:55, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello SchezID, and welcome to Wikipedia! I made some changes to your draft, and moved it to Draft:Sita Jayawardana. If you hit the "Submit your draft for review" button, it will be added to the queue for review by an independent editor. Currently, there are a few issues I think need fixing. First of all, cross-referencing with other Wikipedia articles is not enough, and we can not use Wikipedia as footnotes/references, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Second, the draft is not written in neutral encyclopedic language; it's too promotional for a start. There are many extraordinary claims (such as:"Jayawardana’s modelling and fashion sense was far ahead of her time"), and quotes which require inline citations. I think the content needs some reorganising but that's not a dealbreaker. I suspect the subject is notable and deserves an article on Wikipedia, but I do not have access to the sources to be able to contribute efffectively. If you are OK with what I have tried to do so far, please say so, and I would be happy to copyedit the draft for neutrality and add more tags where your attention is required. You might also seek help from WP:WikiProject Sri Lanka if there are active editors working in the area. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 06:57, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

A question

why my page has not published yet -- Skylark Sportz (talk) 11:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

• 1. your content at User:Skylark Sportz/sandbox has been Rejected (more severe than Declined) and nominated for Speedy deletion, meaning that very soon an Administrator will delete it.
• 2. your User name is the company name. This will result in you being blocked from any editing until you change your User name. David notMD (talk) 11:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Create a page for me

I'm hoping someone can help me. Looking for someone to create an author page for me (who knew you could do that? I only just discovered it). The learning curve is a bit steep for me at the moment as I'm on chemotherapy which causes brain-fuzzies, plus lack of sleep and I still have to work full time. If anyone knows a reliable and experienced editor, I'd be happy to give over reasonable payment (if I can afford it) if they could create a page for me. Please contact me through FB (Aiki Flinthart) AikiFlinthart (talk) 10:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi @AikiFlinthart: and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately you seem to have been misinformed. Wikipedia does not have "author pages", but articles about topics (including people) who are notable according to Wikipedia's definition of notability. An article about a person does not belong to that person, and if there was an article about you, you would not have any particular influence about its contents. Wikipedia editors are volunteers, and anyone editing for pay has to follow the policy for paid editors, which among other things means that they should not edit articles directly but just make suggestions for edits. This text explains why an article about yourself is not necessarily a positive thing. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 10:28, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

(By the way, the above is not to be interpreted as a reflection on your authorship. I don't know whether you do meet Wikipedia's notability criteria, and if you don't, well, many of the authors I read and enjoy don't, while quite a lot of authors I wouldn't touch with a ten-foot pole do. Wikipedia notability is not connected to that, nor to literary quality, at all.) --bonadea contributions talk 10:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello AikiFlinthart. You can see WP:s "rule" for "Should WP have an article about you" at WP:GNG, WP:BASIC and WP:NAUTHOR. Per this googlesearch [8] I don't think an article about you can be written at this time, but of course google does not know everything. Also, Wikipedians generally prefer to discuss WP-stuff on WP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:39, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

WP:NOTBIBLIOGRAPHY

Some time ago, I noticed articles like Bibliography of Bhutan and Bibliography of Canada and was interested in updating them. But then I remembered the guideline WP:NOTCAT, and that seemingly includes bibliographies. I don't want to waste my time on articles that might someday be deleted so my question is, is there any chance that articles like Bibliography of Canada will be deleted under WP:NOTCAT? TryKid (talk) 09:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse User:TryKid. They will not be deleted..(some real old). as compiling bibliographies for research is a major activity of historians and scholars here on Wikipedia Wikipedia:List of bibliographies. Join us at Wikipedia:WikiProject Bibliographies.--Moxy 🍁 14:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

MORE (application)

Cleaning house in the Time of Coronavirus. Getting ready to discard original disks containing the program in question MORE (application). Took photo of each (2). Thought they's be a positive addition to the above-referenced entry. Have never edited Wikipedia. Will forward photos to anyone who can/will insert them (if that is possible). Regards. Stay healthy, y'all. WasTherein'84 (talk) 01:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@WasTherein'84: This link will take you to a guide to uploading images. This link will take you to a guide on adding images to articles. Ian.thomson (talk) 01:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@WasTherein'84: You also need to be autoconfirmed as it is copyrighted. Wynn Liaw (talk) 15:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Rishabh Jain

Header inserted by ColinFine (talk) 18:58, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

I am Rishabh jain I am a Indian actor I want to edit my own page so what is the best way to do it? 122.161.66.229 (talk) 18:15, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

As an addendum to ColinFine, you may edit an article about yourself if there is obvious vandalism on it or make edit requests with reliable sources on your article's talk page. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 21:05, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi

Hello, Rishabh. I guess you are not the same person as Rishab Jain the inventor. I'm afraid that the answer to your question "What is the best way to do it", is to go to some site that allows self-promotion. (see WP:OUT): Wikipedia doesn't allow promotion of any kind.

If at some point Wikipedia has an article about you, it will not be your page, it will not have your text on it, but will be based on what people unconnected with you have published about you; and you will not be allowed to edit it directly. See autobiography for more information about why you shouldn't do this. --ColinFine (talk) 19:06, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

What do you mean by your own page? Do you mean your userpage (if you have an account) or a real Wikipedia article or the page you had created (with your account)? Wynn Liaw (talk) 15:25, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to 1968 Democratic National Convention

Bob, thank you for accepting my change to the 1968 Democratic National Convention! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 100.36.105.237 (talk) 18:52, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

(Pinging Bob305) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You're welcome 100.36.105.237, and thanks for the ping AlanM1! Bob305 (talk) 16:33, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How to upload files

How to upload image file like this? => ( File:Twitter icon.svg ). Where i can upload my images? Zebuready (talk) 13:36, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You need to be autoconfirmed (your account must be four days old and you must make 10 edits) in order to upload image files like the one above. You also can upload images on Wikimedia Commons if the image you want to upload is not copyrighted. Wynn Liaw (talk) 14:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Wynn Liaw: thanks for the valuable information, Can you tell me what is the requirement for extended confirmed user? Zebuready (talk) 16:02, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Zebuready, extended confirmed isn't needed for images, but is 500 edits over 30 days. There are very few uses for extended confirmed though, mainly very controversial articles where editors can't behave. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 16:45, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Table aligned right

Hello, I am trying to my align my summary table to the right hand side of the page as seen in most articles.

(The table shows the name of the musical act, years active, label genre etc.)

Can anybody help?

Thanks 185.176.90.147 (talk) 16:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Do you mean an infobox? By default they are on the right. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:52, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Edits

Hello, I make some edits but I can't see the updates live. Is that normal?. Thanks 154.189.18.1 (talk) 17:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Does this still occur if you follow the instructions at Wikipedia:Bypass your cache. This sounds like a caching issue. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 18:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Discouraging Behaviour

Hello,

I am after some advice as I feel quite discouraged today but hope it doesn't come across as whinging!

I have been on wiki for some time, but as my contribution pages show, I'm a creator and tend to avoid doing anything other than that task! As I am constructing an article I'm happy for experienced editors to contribute, and particularly correct my typos, MOS etc as I know that is my weakness. Most editors come along, make quite a few soft edits, and off they go. I am not too bothered what happens with the articles, because as soon as I've finished the research, and written them to the best of my ability, I move on to the next one, as I've done my bit. Today, I've started an article, put up my usual under construction or in use template on, and within minutes a patroller is sticking notability and major error templates on it. It is very discouraging. I look at the person's talk page and they seem to be good at putting tags on articles and falling-out with everyone. It does make you think why do I bother creating articles, and feel it would be very off-putting for newcomers. Am I being oversensitive? Is this typical behaviour? After somebody has been given additional tools is there ever a review to consider if they are still suitable?

And mine is with milk and two sugars please! --WPCW (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC) WPCW (talk) 15:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

WPCW, you don't say which article this is about, so I can't give a direct answer. But I suggest that, instead of using "under construction" notices, you create your articles as drafts, and only move them to article space once you're confident that they meet Wikipedia's standards (or submit them for review, if you're not sure). That way, you'll avoid the attention of patrollers until your work has reached an acceptable state. Maproom (talk) 16:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I think you've found the article Chester and Wrexham Turnpike. Yes, I agree with the page name change, it is much better. However, I still think the patroller is likely to discourage people, and really should not be doing that role!--WPCW (talk) 16:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree that this can be avoided in the future by developing the article in draft space rather than main space. For a newcomer, being confronted (affronted?) by a patroller's comments may feel equivalent to being wacked by a trout, but the intentions are good - to improve the quality of Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 18:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Question on merging articles

I want to perform a merger of certain articles. Unfortunately, I am topic banned from creating redirects. Does it mean that I am not allowed to perform any merger? --Soumyabrata ^{stay at home} _{wash your hands} ^{to protect from coronavirus} 17:57, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Soumya-8974: I think you would be better off raising this at AN/I where your TBAN was issued , as anything said here would be anecdotal and not binding, imho. Or ask on your own talk page, linking to the original report and ping the original admin(s) involved. [updated] Mathglot (talk) 19:14, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How to create a family tree page

Hi how do you create a family tree page on here. I want it to talk about the notable couch family from England. Nbarratt31 (talk) 19:30, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Nbarratt31 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia that summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about topics that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. It isn't a place to just tell about a subject or post genealogical information. If the family that you wish to write about gets significant coverage in independent sources, it would merit an article(including a family tree as part of it). 331dot (talk) 19:37, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Nbarratt31, if you're asking about how to create a family tree chart, you may want to take a look at {{Tree chart}}. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:10, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Date parameters

Resolved

 – Extra digit removed fixed editor issue. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 20:13, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, I just started working on my wikipedia page, and for some reason, I can´t get the editor to accept my date paremeters within the web cite template on my page.

I´ve pasted the actual text below, along with the source in my sandbox. I´m sure it´s a quick fix, but I just can´t figure out why my dates would be wrong.

Worley, Will (07 January 2016). "Kids photograph the slum they call home". CNN.com. CNN. Retrieved 06 April 2020. Check date values in: Chrisc5234 (talk) 15:36, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Chrisc5234: I think it might be becaose of the zero in "06". Try without it and see if it works? (More info on accepted date formats at MOS:DATE. --bonadea contributions talk 15:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

That did it, thanks.

Irritability

Hi! I'm funded by the NIH to study Irritability and a physician. I edited the Irritability page yesterday and then realized that I probably needed to disclose that I'm funded and my views do not represent those of the National Institutes of Health. I tried to do that on my personal page.

I did cite myself, but removed those citations on realizing that's understandably not welcome. I am not particularly keen on self aggrandizing. The most important thing (to me) was to update the content and make sure it was accurate, reflecting the cool stuff going on, and that it was clinically accurate and safer. What else can I or should I do to disclose my relationship to the topic? Thank you!

The Irritability page sorely needs a disambiguation. DMDD/ODD need updates too. I'm not sure if I'm welcome to do that given my funded clinical scientist status.

Thank you! JoelStod (talk) 16:40, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Joelstod, Well for starters you should read the guide to conflict of interest editing. The most important thing is making disclosures, but you do need to be careful with what you add and how. You can read WP:SELFCITE which discusses citing your own work. If its been published in a peer reviewed journal, and you don't use it to cite more than a few sentences, then it should be a perfectly fine addition. You might also wish to try to cite the literature you cited in the paper, as that allows you to add relevant material without needing to cite yourself. Make sure to keep the content neutral and formal, but understandable. Wikipedia is not a scientific journal, its content needs to be accessible. The most important point: don't promote your views unduly. The latest scientific research is very cool, but if your study is just a single paper and not a meta-review or large analysis of the field, limit the scale of conclusions you draw into an article. Give any research its WP:DUE weight.

All in, we're glad to have ya editing. We need more experts editing Wikipedia, as they know way more about their fields than we do. As long as you keep your editing professional, and make the relevant disclosures, you shouldn't run into any trouble. Smooth sailing, CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You may wish to read our guide for expert editors. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Joelstod. Welcome to the Teahouse, and thank you for wanting to improve Wikipedia. Contributions from expert editors are welcome, but the way we work is often different from what academics are used to: have a look at the essay expert editors. As you surmise, citing your own works is regarded as a form of conflict of interest. If you think such a citation would be an improvement to the article, you are welcome to make an edit request, and then an uninvolved editor will look at your suggestion and decided what to do. --ColinFine (talk) 20:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Black Widow (2020 film)

I made a change to the Black Widow (2020 film) article. It incorrectly says "Robert Downey Jr. reprises his role as Iron Man..." As the movie is not out yet, and will not be out until November, that line should not appear anywhere on the page until it is confirmed. 173.86.51.152 (talk) 17:03, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. I see that you removed that information from Black Widow (2020 film) on the 6th, and that Locke Cole reverted your edit a few minutes later: neither of you left an edit summary explaining why. Looking at it, the claim that Downey is cast is cited to Deadline Hollywood: unless you think that is not a reliable source (I have no idea, but WP:Reliable sources/Perennial sources seems to say it is) it would seem appropriate for the information to be in the article.

But if you think it should go, then the thing to do is to start a discussion on the article's talk page, explaining why you think it is not appropriate: preferably pinging Locke Cole to join in the discussion (but I have pinged them here, so they should see this discussion). Please see BRD for this way of working. --ColinFine (talk) 20:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How can I add another template to the page

I want to add a new category in a page as a sub-template (new page), how can I do it? Thanks Sw135792003 (talk) 19:07, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Sorry, [{U|Sw135792003}}, I don't understand what you are asking. Adding a category is not normally anything to do with templates, and I don't know what you mean by a "sub-template". Please explain. --ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Repinging Sw135792003 --ColinFine (talk) 22:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Semi-protected edittion request

Please tell me if there is any invalid link(404) exit in any Semi-protected article so can I ask to replace that link my potential blog's link of the same topic? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khalidlatif12 (talk • contribs) 21:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Khalidlatif12. Wikipedia is a neutral encyclopedia. It is not a platform for self-promotion. You cannot add your blog to Wikipedia. Please do not try. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:23, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Mistake

NEW - Talk on Emma Robert’s Wikipedia page is locked to protect it against vandalism.

I can’t find any other way to tell someone about this mistake - that the filmography in Emma Robert’s Wikipedia entry is missing the film Nerve (2012) which she was a star in. 2600:8800:7D80:707:F57B:2270:5D38:169F (talk) 21:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The best place to bring up an error you may notice in an article is on the associated article talk page(if using the desktop version, click "Talk" at the top of the article). I'll put a direct link: Talk:Emma Roberts. 331dot (talk) 21:21, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Talk on Emma Robert’s Wikipedia page is locked to protect it against vandalism. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:8800:7D80:707:F57B:2270:5D38:169F (talk) 21:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The article itself, Emma Roberts, is locked, but not the talk page, Talk:Emma Roberts. It would be very unusual to protect("lock") a talk page. Are you using the desktop version? 331dot (talk) 21:31, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Discussion created; Talkback link added. Mathglot (talk) 22:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Nominating articles for deletion that were previously nominated

I want to renominate Animated Hero Classics et al. for deletion, as they were nominated for deletion back when Wikipedia had looser standards and kept on flimsy grounds (basically a pity keep). Notability was never actually established, and the closest things to references on any of the current articles are links to primary/unreliable/non-notable sources, which do not count towards notability. However, when I tried doing it with Twinkle it just redirected to the archived deletion discussion. How do I properly nominate it again? Dronebogus (talk) 22:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Dronebogus. The first thing you should do before nominating an article for deletion is to follow the recommendations in WP:BEFORE, which says:

"Search for additional sources, if the main concern is notability. The minimum search expected is a normal Google search, a Google Books search, a Google News search, and a Google News archive search; Google Scholar is suggested for academic subjects."

In less than a minute, I was able to find significant coverage in a book called Abraham Lincoln on Screen: Fictional and Documentary Portrayals on Film and Television. Deletion should be the last resort after all other reasonable alternatives have been exhausted. If you are having trouble with Twinkle (which I don't use), you can always nominate articles for deletion manually. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 22:42, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

New article

I would like to create a new article, but I can not find the place of writing. Where can I feed the information? Please let me know the menu of entry. Attoexa (talk) 23:06, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Attoexa. You cannot create a new article until your account is autoconfirmed, which means that the account is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits. Please read and study Your first article. I see that you have been adding unreferenced content, which I have reverted. Please provide a reference to a published reliable source when adding new content, and familiarize yourself with our core content policy Verifiability. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Augustus Vignos

@Jmcgnh: Thanks for your input about Augustus Vignos. I have made some edits on it, but don't understand everything you said. Is there a "Wikipedia for Dummies" book yet? Nimishillen (talk) 00:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Apparently in response to this discussion. Rewrote section title for comprehensibility; technical TPO vio. Mathglot (talk) 00:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Question

Please advise.

Updating and expanding a stub, human gene cloned in 1999. I worked in the field 20-30 years ago.

In the 10 years a subfield of clinical neurogenetics has grown around this gene.

Is it considered reasonable as per TOS for me to be doing these edits - no commercial or professional activity in this field. Basically, to help out students.

Thank you for your kind attention! DL7700 (talk) 16:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

DL7700, I don't think that there is any conflict of interest there. In fact, we love having experts help out because they bring knowledge with them and can better read and apply sources. Now if you worked for a specific company/organization in the industry, I would recommend you not edit their page, but otherwise you're golden. CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 20:06, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, DL7700. We welcome expert editors, but if you haven't edited in Wikipedia much, it is worth looking at Expert editors first. --ColinFine (talk) 20:15, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Will do. Thank you both. DL7700 (talk) 00:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Table of Contents -Bryan Morel Muhumuza

I would like guidance on how to create "table of contents" for the page to list the different sub headings/categories Icecommtech (talk) 14:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You don't need to create it — it would automatically appear like what I did in my sandbox from this to this. You can view the source if you don't believe me. Wynn Liaw (talk) 15:04, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

TOC is created automatically if the page has at least four headings. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:07, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The content you had created in your Sandbox has been deleted. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

How is this even relevant? Wynn Liaw (talk) 01:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Because the article where he wants to create a table of contents has been deleted. David notMD (talk) 02:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Confusion about how to cite references?! George William Eve (1855-1914)

Dear Tea House, Being brand new to adding material and editing on Wikipedia, I need some advice about how to and and cite references on my 1st piece of work, which is a genealogical addition to an existing article about George William Eve (1855-1914) who was an Heraldic Artist. He was an ancestor of mine. Thanks, Christopher Eve 95.150.221.41 (talk) 17:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

You'll find advice at Help:Referencing for beginners. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:53, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: The article in question is George Eve. David notMD (talk) 19:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

On April 10th an editor added a large amount of content to the article without any references. I deleted all of that, not because I believe it untrue, but because verification from published sources is required. For you, I caution "genealogical addition" may not be appropriate. The article is about George Eve, not his ancestors (or descendants). David notMD (talk) 19:13, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

An alternative guide to referencing is at WP:EASYREFBEGIN. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 04:09, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

“Case overview”

“Case overview”

Greetings,

When I typed in “the latest on covid-19” on google, one of the first things is see is the “case overview”. If I’m correct, this is a page by Wikipedia. I was also typed in “the latest on influenza” but I do not get a “case overview” from wiki. Does you have one? If so where could I find that info? I ask cuz after looking at the CDC website. They say that in the US there have been approximately up to 62,000 deaths from influenza and up to 56 million cases, although the CDC disclaims that they don’t monitor the flu as closely. Anyhoo, if this info is correct, then mathematically, the flu seems to be just as potentially fatal and possible to contract as covid-19. Yet, c-19 is portrayed as something much worse. Anyway I was just hoping to get a case overview for influenza from wiki so I can gather data for both illnesses from the same sources. I am gather data from multiple sources but seeing as how infamous wiki is, I was hoping to include your data in my research. Thanks for your time. 2600:1010:B10D:6B79:C980:F6E9:B5FE:5583 (talk) 05:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Typing that exact string in Google search does not pull up any Wikipedia hits. Can you link to the page in question? If you are looking for influenza I suggest looking up Influenza and its relevant pages. Seeing as you're looking for a case overview you should look up particular instances like pandemics or go through a specific season like the 2017-2018 United States flu season. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Test question

Resolved

 – I clicked the "new section" link and not the button. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Tenryuu — the preload seems to be working here. I clicked on the main button to create a new section. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 06:17, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Sdkb, I am being a dumb. I clicked on the "new section" link instead of the big button. Never mind! :P Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 06:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

How to undo more than one edit?

The last two revisions of Noakhali riots (by the same IP address) look like they might be vandalism. How do I undo these two edits and bring the page back to the previous version?

Thanks for any help, Coldspur (talk) 14:08, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Coldspur, In the history page, when you click the radio button on the revision you want to restore the page to, all subsequent revisions will appear with two radio buttons. Hitting the right one in any of the latter revisions, and clicking "Compare selected revisions", you can open a diff. You should find a "Restore to this version" option at the top of the left column. I am not sure it's certainly a vandalism; please leave an edit summary explaining the revert when you do. More, including alternative ways, at H:RV. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 14:40, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, [restore this version] is visible only to users who have installed Twinkle after qualifying for it. Can you please ascertain this. I verified this on sandbox. Undo appears to be the only possible way to do that in 2 separate edits. --Cedix (talk) 15:04, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

There is a way to do it with a single Undo, though – after clicking the round button by the revision you want to return to, hit "Compare selected revisions", and then just click "Undo". I sometimes do that if I want to leave a longer edit summary than the one automatically provided by Twinkle. --bonadea contributions talk 15:22, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Cedix, yes, seems that's true. So, Coldspur, you'd need to use "Undo" as Bonadea suggests below, until you can get Twinkle. The undo procedure is also explained at WP:UNDO, part of the help page I linked earlier. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 15:58, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

I've always 1) gone to the revision history, 2) clicked on the date/time stamp of the last good version, 3) clicked "edit source", 4) clicked "publish changes". --Khajidha (talk) 13:10, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Usedtobecool, Cedix, Bonadea, and Khajidha: The edits have already been reverted by someone else, but thank you for all the help! Coldspur (talk) 07:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

How do you get published on wiki... a story about yourself..

How do you get published on wiki... a story about yourself.. Domtaino (talk) 04:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Domtaino, Wikipedia is a place for articles, and is not for stories, resumes, or social networking. Provided you are notable enough to meet Wikipedia's general notability guidelines, an editor with no connection to you may decide to write about you. If you're looking for social networking, consider this directory of altenatives. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 04:30, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Domtaino: Please see the User talk:Domtaino#Welcome! section on your user talk page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Who does not have COI?

Hi folks, I've read the COI pages, but need more guidance. I publish software packages. One of my packages is the subject of 3 books (2 published by Springer) and is often mentioned in papers published in professional Journals in the Medical and Educational fields. It has thousands of licensees and the freeware version has hundreds of thousands of downloads. I am often asked about it, so a Wikipedia page would be helpful. But who can write it? Me? One of the book authors? One of the paper authors? A licensed user? A freeware user? A knowledgeable competitor? I welcome your guidance. Thank you. User:MikeLinacre 02:02, 9 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse User:MikeLinacre! I am assuming this is medical in nature because of what's said above. Best review Wikipedia:Conflicts of interest (medicine) and then bring a more detailed explanation on the content and your involvement at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine. WikiProject Medicine can't help determine is notability status and help find secondary sources and give guidance.--Moxy 🍁 02:37, 9 April 2020 (UTC) Shouldn't that be WikiProject Medicine can help determine notability?— Vchimpanzee • talk • contributions • 16:07, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you Moxy. It's a software product, so let's discuss software in the same marketplace. There are pages for software packages SPSS and SAS (Software). It seems that the authors of these pages cannot be owners or employees of SPSS and SAS, but must be very knowledgeable about them. This suggest that the lead authors could be (1) ex-employees, (2) long-time users who have collected corporate news releases etc., (3) investigative reporters, (4) .... Am I on the right track? -- MikeLinacre (talk) 00:49, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@MikeLinacre: Articles are supposed to be written by independent volunteers who just happen to have an interest in the topic. For example, I started the Debtera article even though I'm not Orthodox, Ethiopian, a musician, a deacon, a folk magician, etc; nor an anthropologist, historian, (professional) theologian... The only things I might in common with (most, not even all) Debteras would the Apostles' Creed and maybe spice tolerance. I've had a perpetual to-do to write an article on a type of gas can even though I'm not an engineer, mechanic, or a car owner. Elsewhere in the Teahouse, we have someone who wants to add a photo to an article on some old software because he found a copy when cleaning his house.

Of the categories you suggest, 2 is the most feasible: former users. However, there are some folks who are just interested in the history of computer software even for machines they otherwise would never both owning (or else the 8-Bit Guy's YouTube channel would consist of maybe five videos with altogether less than a hundred views). The books that are about your software would probably be valid sources (especially if your company did not contribute to those books and they are not "how-to" works but independent scholarly or journalistic analysis). Ian.thomson (talk) 05:36, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Ian.thomson. Very clear :-) -- MikeLinacre —Preceding undated comment added 08:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Signature

I want to change my signature style permanently. How can I add image, color and different language text to my signature. --Raaj Tilak (talk) 09:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Raaj Tilak! See WP:CUSTOMSIG. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Re-Creating previously deleted page

Hello, I was recreating a previously deleted page. The draft is available at Draft:Dax Dasilva and now I want anyone to let me know if I should proceed with moving it to the article space. It was deleted by Seraphimblade and I was hoping that he might help me with it. It was deleted for being promotional. After my research I believe that Dax Dasilva is fairly notable and meeter WP:GNG. But having a few other opinions is the right to go about it, I guess. Thanks ElricFullMetal (talk) 11:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC) ElricFullMetal (talk) 11:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

ElricFullMetal Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Unless you are extremely experienced in article creation, you should send the draft through Articles for Creation. Briefly looking at it and the sources, I am less certain that the article meets GNG. Most of the sources seem to be routine business announcements or interviews with Mr. Dasilva, both of which do not establish notability. Wikipedia should summarize what independent reliable sources have chosen on their own to write about Mr. Dasilva with significant coverage. This does not include interviews with him, because that is a primary source. 331dot (talk) 11:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

331dot Hi, thanks for explaining it so comprehensively. I guess I should use the AfC and see what the experienced people in the community think about it after a detailed analysis. Thanks again, much appreciated! ElricFullMetal (talk) 12:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Can a stub-article contain only the lyrics of a song?

I just found this article and I think it doesn't meet the wikipedia notability. sorry if I should have found this myself but I was overwhelmed by all of the pages and couldn't find what i was looking for so even a link to the description would be greate. Erfan Talk☻ 18:44, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

In general no, but this is something of a special case. This song is written by Stephen Foster, who pretty much invented what we now consider traditional American music (think of anything you consider a traditional American song and chances are it was written by him), and as such the exact nature of his lyrics is of more interest than would usually be the case. We generally delete stubs that don't actually say anything about their article subject, but in this case we can say with certainty that there's going to be more to say about this song (Foster is one of the most written-about musicians on the 19th century) and that it just hasn't been expanded yet. ‑ Iridescent 18:50, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

thanks for the help Erfan Talk☻ 18:54, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Et0z. We cannot include full song lyrics for the large majority of songs published since 1925, because they are copyrighted. This restriction obviously does not apply to this and similar songs published long ago, but even then, including independent commentary by reliable sources about the song is more important than adding the complete lyrics. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 19:08, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

• (Pinging Et0zl) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for your reply. where can i find a list of these reliable sources that used for this type of article? should i just look at the reference section of the article or does it have a special place? — Erfan Talk☻ 13:03, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Chinu Kala Article Discussion

I am here to raise an issue about Draft:Chinu Kala recently draftified by User:billinghurst I had already disclosed on my userpage that I've been paid for this; requesting that the article be moved to mainspace . I promise that I will not take payments in future . Regards Albertkerl (talk) 14:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC) Albertkerl (talk) 14:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

What issue are you raising? If something is in draft: namespace, then please put it through the drafts process. Have a look at Wikipedia:Articles for creation — billinghurst sDrewth 14:54, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

The draft has not yet been submitted to Articles for Creation. That is the proper pathway rather than a direct move to mainspace. P.S. Paid work is allowed as long as declared. David notMD (talk) 16:05, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello billinghurst , I have submitted it for Afc submission and I had disclosed paid edit at very ealry stage please re-review Albertkerl (talk) 09:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Albertkerl, I'm also keeping an eye on the draft. Hoping that it is moved back to mainspace as indicated by David notMD. The case of suck puppetry raised by dear billinghurst when he draftified the article, does not seem to be a good reason for the article to be draftified. Suck issues should've been raised on ANI as per my view. Best. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 13:35, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

AaqibAnjum Please do not misrepresent what I said, or what I did. I stated that there were three separate accounts working on the subject's biographical information at three different wikis, whether they were three individual paid editors or sockpuppets was noted, though not my concern at that time. The article was put back to draft solely due to the paid contributor moving it unchecked to the main namespace. Once it is suitably reviewed and passes our community's processes it will be moved to main namespace, just like any other draft article. We follow the process laid out, not let a conflict of interest get in the way of due process. [Noting that I don't undertake the AFC process.]— billinghurst sDrewth 13:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

billinghurst, Best. Thanks for the clarification. Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 13:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Sidebox

how to add sidebox in a an article on wikipedia. Jay2930 (talk) 13:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Jay2930:, What do you mean by sidebox? Aaqib Anjum Aafī (^talk) 14:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Jay2930, I assume you are referring to infoboxes. The easiest way is just to find a page that does what you want to to do, and copy it to your page, changing the data.

Help:Infobox has the details on how to do them, and Wikipedia:List of infoboxes lists all the available templates to use. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 14:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Sara sexual pics

107.77.199.93 (talk) 12:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Just in case you're tempted, please don't link to any off-wiki websites with inappropriate content. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:53, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

IP editor, this is Wikipedia, not a search engine. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Precognition

FYI

 – Header created by Tenryuu. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:16, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

This is all very confusing. You do not make it at all easy to contact you and it is very unclear as to where I might find an answer to my question. I think it might be in the question and answer section, so that is the first place2600:1700:C950:E880:D08D:8182:C70D:500E (talk) 13:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC) I'll look. I am interested in adding to your article on precognition. I have a story that will prove beyond doubt that precognition is real and a predetermined future exists. What is an IP address and how do get one? I hope I will be able to find your answer. I don't know what this "four tildes" signature thing is all about, but my name is Allan Edson. 2600:1700:C950:E880:D08D:8182:C70D:500E (talk) 13:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Allan. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. Unfortunately, what you are offering is what we call original research, and is never accepted for Wikipedia articles. The problem is that, since anybody may edit most articles, even if the information starts off as accurate, somebody may have come in and changed it later. For that reason we require that every piece of information in a Wikipedia article can be checked by a reader from a published source - and preferably that the article actually cites that source. (It is true that there are many thousands of older articles which do not meet this standard, but generally we are more careful now about checking that information which is added is cited to a published source). I'm sure there are other places where you can share your story, but not Wikipedia. (The "four tildes", as you see, gets replaced by your signature - in your case, just your IP address, because you haven't logged in - and the time and date: mine follows) --ColinFine (talk) 15:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Revise, rather than re-create a speedy deleted page

Hi Folks. I recently created a page and it was speedy deleted for copyright violation. I understand and do not dispute this claim. However, I would prefer to revise the page, rather than have it deleted. My question is: can I have access to the old page to edit it, or should I recreate it and submit it for review? ThePhantom65 (talk) 15:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

ThePhantom65 We cannot restore copyright violations, you will have to start over. 331dot (talk) 15:04, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Would it be better to create it and submit it to AFR or just post it? ThePhantom65 (talk) 15:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, Phantom65. I would advise any editor, unless they are confident that they can get an article to an acceptable standard on the first attempt, to create it in Draft space first; and anybody who hasn't already created many articles to use the AFC process and submit it for review. --ColinFine (talk) 15:54, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Getting the ping right, ThePhantom65. --ColinFine (talk) 15:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Published reliable source

Greetings Every one Requesting to address my question?

I am Writing an article in English and some of the Reliable source which i have collected are in local language, can i use it or do i have to provide some more evidence to support it.Thoufiq313 (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Thoufiq313. English language sources are preferred when available, but if not, reliable sources in any language can be used. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 07:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Thoufiq313. WP:NONENG has some useful information about citing non-English sources. --ColinFine (talk) 15:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Question

How to do the mirror site template Abdullah Al Manjur (talk) 09:14, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Abdullah Al Manjur and welcome to the Teahouse. I am sorry you have had a long wait for a reply. I am afraid I am not clear exactly what help you are asking for. Perhaps Template:Wikipedia mirror and the information page at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks might be of some help to you? Nick Moyes (talk) 16:18, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

How do you make an infobox?

In most, if not all, Wikipedia articles, there is an infobox that has pictures and little bits of info that helps the reader understand said topic more. The question is, how do you make one? There seems to be no setting in the editor that allows you to make such a box, it would be really helpful if you at least led me in the right direction. Thanks, ArticleMaker456 (talk) 16:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC) ArticleMaker456 (talk) 16:06, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, ArticleMaker456. You should not need to make a brand new Infobox, but are most likely to need to use an existing one and complete the relevant information that summarises the page's content. See Help:Infobox and Wikipedia:List of infoboxes for more guidance on this. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

About DoggoLingo

FYI

 – Header made by Tenryuu.

• Link: DoggoLingo

Hey! I am wondering why we don't have a longer article about DoggoLingo. Yeetyman123 (talk) 16:45, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Yeetyman123: If you have more information about the subject from reliable sources, please add and cite it. It seems that some of the references provided are a little weak, so reliable sources would be appreciated. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 17:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

How to notify or make it clear that I might not be very responsive to questions?

Hi everyone, I’ve been sick with coronavirus for the past few days so I haven’t edited very much. I’m still doing some here and there, but is there a template or something I can put on my user page or talk page that would make it clear that I’m not avoiding questions or anything? I seem to remember having seen something like that before but I’m forgetting where. Thanks. Woerich (talk) 03:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC) Woerich (talk) 03:26, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Woerich, I'm sorry to hear that you've been infected. You may think about putting the {{User health inactive}} template at the top of your user page. There is also a more specific template that no one has used yet: {{Off wiki Covid 19}}. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 03:31, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict)Whoa, terrible news! Here is a whole selection of Wikibreak templates. Wishing you a speedy recovery.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 03:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! I’m using it. I appreciate the well wishes. It’s harder on me, with asthma on top of it all. If it wasn’t for Wikipedia I’d be losing my mind stuck here in the hospital. Woerich (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, advice on dealing with a redirect

I have an article prepared with the title Fourth Inspectorate-General, Turkey, but now there exists a redirect Fourth Inspectorate-General which redirects to the article Inspectorates-General (Turkey) and in part treats the same subject as the one my article is about. But the existing article treats 4 Inspectorates-General while mine focuses only on the Fourth Inspectorate-General. So, if I publish the article under the planned name, there will be a redirect to an other page, but if I use the name Fourth Inspectorate-General, I think it won't really be correct... maybe a Fourth Inspectorate-General will also exist in another country than Turkey. So what is your advice? Paradise Chronicle (talk) 17:33, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Just re-target it to the new article unless you are able to find a better target. Ruslik_Zero 18:34, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Ahhhhh, thank you. Paradise Chronicle (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Rejected draft

 Courtesy link: Draft:Border pairs method

Draft:Border pairs method My personal opinion is that subject "Border Pairs Method" (BPM) is worthy of publishing on Wiki. So I have written draft which was sadly rejected. It is true that I am at the same time also author of the BPM Method. So my opinion is not objective and so I am searching for help of other people. Verifyable Facts:

• BPM is my PhD thesis
• BPM is published in original scientific paper in the Elseviers scientific journal before almost ten years and was after that allways cited by other scientists in positive light.
• BPM is published in two scientific books
• BPM is published in college text book
• many invited talks about BPM have been done

One of invited talks was for example at IBM Reseach in Zurich where works some nobel laureats.

Can sombody help me please to publish somehow my subject on wiki? Maybe not as an (whole) article. Some ideas? Thanks Bojan PLOJ (talk) 20:47, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your draft wasn't rejected but merely declined. That means that the reviewer believed that the subject might be notable if references to independent published reliable sources can be provided. Hence you need to cite where other reliable sources have written in depth about the subject, rather than what you have written. --David Biddulph (talk) 20:57, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Film cast list question

Based on WP:Filmcast it says cast lists arent supposed to contain forced "line breaks" because of accessibility concerns. I have two questions.

1. What are the accessibility concerns?
2. Is this not an example of a cast list with line breaks? Birds_of_Prey_(2020_film)#Cast

thanksToeFungii (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 19:07, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii I'm fairly sure accessibility refers to the ability for those with vision issues or other disabilities to read Wikipedia(either color blindness or outright blindness). I haven't viewed the link you offer, but you may be correct- as this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to go undetected. We can only address what we know about. 331dot (talk) 19:27, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

FWIW, just 222 (0.16%) of the ~136,000 articles that use {{Infobox film}} have a <br /> (or equivalent) tag in their Cast section. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Cornel Chiriac

 Courtesy link: Cornel Chiriac

I have a big request for you. Please correct in your article about the Romanian announcer "Radio Free Europe" Cornel Chiriac the name of this wonderful person. In the Russian text about Cornel Chiriac his name is incorrectly written - Chiriyak. The English word Chiriac in Russian is spelled and pronounced Kiriyak, not Chiriyak. The letters "Ch" in Russian is "K". just listen to the correct name of Cornel Chiriac in Youtube. Thank you. Vladimir from Russia.Rogers kenny (talk) 18:17, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Rogers kenny: This is something that should be asked on the article's talk page. We use WP:COMMONNAME on here for what sources have referred to him as. If it's the pronunciation you wish to be clarified, you can add the {{IPA-ru}} template to the article and transcribe it phonetically (guide for transcribing Russian IPA is here). --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 18:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rogers kenny. I don't see any Russian text in Cornel Chiriac. Are you looking somewhere else? I thought you might have been looking at an article in the Russian Wikipedia: if so, you'll need to ask at ru:ВП:Ф-В, since each language Wikipedia is an independent project. But I can't find an article about him there either, so I'm confused. --ColinFine (talk) 21:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

page declined

Summary

 – Article read as promotional; OP blocked for using company name as username. Following steps have been provided at their talk page. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 23:58, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I didn't save changes but published directly. Is this the reason for decline? Safetipin (talk) 19:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Safetipin Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was initially declined as blank; it appeared as blank due to what I assume were formatting errors. The text now appears and you successfully resubmitted it. However, I think the odds of it being accepted are low, as it reads as an advertisement for the app. Any article about an app should only summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage say about the app. Things like "mission" and "vision" are impossible to independently verify and have no place in a Wikipedia article(for example). Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 19:42, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I fixed the hidden text, which was due to a formatting error. The user name is identical to the organization that the article is being written about, so WP:COI applies, and the username should be changed to be that of an individual rather than the organization. WP:UPE may also apply. @Safetipin:, do you work for the organization?ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

I blocked this editor indefinitely for the username policy violation before I became aware of this conversation. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:27, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your Talk page describes the step necessary to apply to be unblocked (process includes selecting a new name and promising that intent at Wikipedia is not to promote that company). David notMD (talk) 20:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

If a series show's plot is taken from a fandom site ....

Resolved

 – Content was directly copied over from Wikipedia to Fandom; not deemed copyvio. WP:BLAME suggested as a log checker. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

If the plot for a tv show episodes is copied directly from fandom.com does that violate wiki's copyright policy? Thanks all and stay well.ToeFungii (talk) 03:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC) ToeFungii (talk) 03:29, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I should add that I don't know which is the chicken and the egg. I assumed fandom's info was copied here, while it is entirely possible that it was on wiki first and put there. The site's terms of use has info regarding using the info and it appears it's ok. This is the link www.fandom.com/licensing ToeFungii (talk) 03:34, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: It's just easier to say "never copy and paste texts from other websites to this one." There are exceptions, such as quotations, but it's just easier to say paraphrase everything to the point where it's legally distinct.

That said, Fandom hasn't been around as long as we have, and our terms of use would allow Fandom users to post the content there with conditions probably similar to Fandoms. What is the article in question? If we had that info, other users could better investigate the matter.

(Also, FYI, "wiki" is just a software that this site and a bunch of unrelated sites use. This is Wikipedia, which can usually be shortened to WP.) Ian.thomson (talk) 04:58, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ian.thomson:I didn't put any particular show because ive actually found several overlaps, so i apologize. this is the one that caught my eye because it refers to a basketball "match" when it obviously should be "game". oh, thanks for the wp; ive been using wiki to save typing and this is much better.

List_of_Austin_&_Ally_episodes#Season_2_(2012–13) look at s2.21 sports&brains. this is the dup i found: link ToeFungii (talk) 06:04, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@ToeFungii: The Fandom article was created 20 April 2017. The Wikipedia article started with that description way back on 5 August 2015. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:11, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

WOW i didnt even see that they had logs. thanks. (as to how you figured out when it got put on wp im still trying to figure out how to truly understand page histories. it's very confusing to me trying to figure out and understand changes, but like falling off a log practice makes perfect. you're awesome. ToeFungii (talk) 06:27, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

ToeFungii, you may want to take a look at WP:BLAME. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Including notes on cited sources

I'm editing 2nd Portuguese India Armada (Cabral, 1500) right now. I understand that citations and notes are different. So what should you use if you have a citation, but you need a note for the citation? The example I have right now is the first note (all the citations are put in as footnotes on this page):

Castanheda (1551, Lib. 1, ch.30,p.96) João de Barros (1552, Dec. I, Lib. V c.1 p.384); Damião de Góis (1563, Pt. 1, ch.53, p.67); Diogo do Couto Decada decima (c.1600, ch. 16, p.117), Faria e Sousa (1666: v.1, ch.5, p.44) Both Barros and Gois mistakenly list Diogo Dias (Bartolomeu's brother) as "Pêro Dias", an error also found in the marginal gloss of the Relaçao das Naos (Maldonado, 1985: p.10) and subsequently repeated in Couto and Faria e Sousa. Oddly, Couto inserts Duarte Pacheco Pereira in the place of Simão de Pina, but subsequently corrects himself. All the chroniclers in this note (Castanheda, Barros, etc.) give Gaspar de Lemos instead of André Gonçalves. Chronicler Jerónimo Osório (De rebus Emmanuelis, 1571) does not list captain names.

Obviously, there are a lot of other issues with this note/reference, and I think this one can be solved by including a citation after each person mentioned, and then including the note at the very end of the sentence. But in general, is there a proper way to have a note within a citation? Or should it just be avoided entirely? Somewhat related, but is there a difference between references and sources? This page has a list of sources, but not of references (which are under the heading "Notes," which also includes actual notes). Thanks! hiabc (talk) 00:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hiabc, welcome to the Teahouse. Would {{sfn}} fit your needs? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 00:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Only reference is an old scrapbook of news clippings.

Hi, I've written quite a comprehensive entry for an elderly hairdresser - John Morrey https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:John_Morrey?action=edit - who was quite important in Australia in the 60s and 70's. He has an old scrapbook I referred to with hundreds of newspapers and magazine clippings (most now defunct), and I conducted an interview. My question is how do I reference old clippings? Happy to provide scans of all these stories but will be significant. Ta Danielle!

DD 05:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielledunsmore (talk • contribs)  

@Danielledunsmore: Sorry, but scrapbooks and personal interviews are not sources -- they need to be published materials that someone besides you can access. Ian.thomson (talk) 06:20, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

... but the newspapers themselves, of which you have clippings, may be useful sources. If a clipping shows the name of the newspaper, the date, and the page and preferably column number, then you can cite the newspaper, giving those details. Maproom (talk) 07:02, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank-you. The scrapbook has actual newspaper clippings - but not always the date and/or publication, as well as printed catalogues of results etc. Should I scan these, and where do I store them? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danielledunsmore (talk • contribs) 07:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Danielledunsmore, depending on age, scanning and uploading would probably be a copyright violation. You can try searching archive.org, you may get lucky. For WP:RS-clippings, use Template:Cite news for citing, and fill in the info you have, preferably at least publication (work), year (if you don't have the full date) and a (short) quote that supports what you put in the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Ok thank-you. Will do. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8003:E418:A801:7D25:ED1C:9260:5864 (talk) 01:06, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Too many citations on 'startpage.com'?

startpage.com

"Startpage is a web search engine which highlights privacy as its distinguishing feature.[2][3][4][5][6][7][8]"

Does this strike anyone else as too many? I read a wiki article about it a long time ago. Disoff (talk) 22:51, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Disoff. Yes, I agree with you that this is excessive. Perhaps you had read Wikipedia:Citation overkill, a useful essay about this problem. I notice that many of the references link to press releases, which have limited usefulness on Wikipedia. Press releases are not independent, are inherently promotional, and do not have professional editorial oversight. My suggestion is to remove all of the press releases to start, and then re-evaluate the article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

cullen328. Someone just went through and removed a bunch of refs. I just read through the wiki's intro on press release. How did you figure out that they are press releases? Yes i think i did read cit overkill! --Disoff (talk) 00:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Disoff, your ping didn't work but I noticed it anyway. I figured out that many of those references were press releases because they were clearly marked that way. It wasn't hard. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 05:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

cullen328 Did this ping work? Are press releases allowed to be used as reference on wikipedia? I read someplace that forum posts are not allowed as references.

Draft:Carlo Masi

I wrote a biography of Carlo Masi (Ruggero Freddi) basing mostly on a biography written by Strega Prize winner Walter Siti, who is one of the most important Italian writers alive. This biography is a book published by Rizzoli Libri one of the most important Italian publishers. Apart from the book I used as a source Corriere della Sera, la Repubblica, La Stampa and Il Giornale which are the most important Italian national news papers, very reliable and authoritative (here you can find a list of the most important Italian daily news papers and you can check they are respectively in 1st, 2nd, 5th, and 10th position). Moreover I used Attitude (magazine), Times Higher Education, Gay Star News, Vanity Fair (magazines) (here it says it is reliable for wikipedia) and Vice (magazine)(here it says that its reliability is not consensus ) but mostly in the "media attention" part. I also used for some details about his porn career Xbiz (here it says it is reliable for wikipedia). Finally, I gave the link to the segment of the tv show where he asked his partner to marry him. Every single article I cite here is entirely on Carlo Masi (Ruggero Freddi) apart from the review of theater show he did, but even there his name is in bold and he is the main character.

I don't know if this makes any difference but his biography is present in the Spanish (https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi) , Italian (https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi), Polish (https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi), French(https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlo_Masi) and Korean (https://ko.wikipedia.org/wiki/%EC%B9%B4%EB%A5%BC%EB%A1%9C_%EB%A7%88%EC%8B%9C) wikipedia (I didn't use any of them as source).

As a porn star he was one of the most important and he was definitely the most important at Colt Studio Group, the company he worked for, in fact he is the only one ever named "emeritus" and he is the cover man of the 40th anniversary celebrative book of the company. Apart from the porn career his theater debut rose a lot of attention among critics and media. Moreover, media from all around the world have spoken about him when he become a professor for one of the most prestigious university in Italy, Sapienza University of Rome.

He is not notable as a professor but he is definitely notable as a porn actor and even more notable as a composition of porn actor-professor as the unique ever known case in the world.

If there is a problem with one or more specific sources please tell me which one and I will replace it or delete the specific information. Can you please tell me how come I got a "is not sufficiently notable for inclusion in Wikipedia" message and a STOP? a problem with one or two sources or with a specific part of the bio can not be cause of rejection.

--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 13:44, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello: @AlejandroLeloirRey:, someone will answer you shortly. In the meantime, please stop posting the same request al over Wikipedia. This post is the fourth time you have posted the same thing on different talk pages today.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 15:08, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: i apology, I thought they were different and separated thing where to gather information. i didn't mean to be inpolite. i am sorry. should i delete those posts? --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 15:30, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@ThatMontrealIP: A few days have passed and I had no answer, what is more appropriate to do ? should I re-post it, wait a few more days and than re-post it or simply never re-post it? thank you for your advises.--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:57, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Adding multiple URLs to news networks.

There are news websites which encompass a few other sites. For example, Nine.com.au is actually a network of sites, which includes two subdomains (wwos.nine.com.au, 9honey.nine.com.au) and a different domain name (9news.com.au). The main domain is (nine.com.au).

Currently, it's Wikipedia page only lists nine.com.au under the field "URL" in the sidebar. What is the correct way of linking it's children sites in the sidebar (wwos.nine.com.au, 9honey.nine.com.au, 9news.com.au)? I'm looking to scrape a list of URLs of news sites from Wikipedia for an internet filter, but it seems that some subdomains and affiliated domains are not listed on Wikipedia, so they will be missed. Examples of other Wiki pages that links multiple URLs are welcome. Thank you. Aaronshenhao (talk) 06:41, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I found an example of a Wiki page with multiple URL's: Sina_Corp. I've noticed that some pages use the field "website" instead of "url" (most common) in the infobox. This actually renders differently in the HTML code. With the latter, it is properly classed as "url" in the HTML code and is easier to parse. Aaronshenhao (talk) 11:32, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@Aaronshenhao: Practice is supposed to be to not list sibling- or sub-domains. Just a representative main site is sufficient. Wikipedia shouldn't be a link farm that has to keep track of the structure of its article subjects' websites; we've got enough of that work already in dealing with link rot in citations. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:16, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: Thanks a lot for the info. Do you know where I could read more on the accepted conventions? This does make web scraping harder though :P Aaronshenhao (talk) 16:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1: If it helps, I've also programmatically visited all Wiki pages under the category "News websites" and placed all the pages with multiple URLs as a list in a text file. The list will be available here for 1 year: https://textuploader.com/1l5aa It's a draft only, so there may be mistakes. I've also done it for websites in other categories, but it is not available yet. Aaronshenhao (talk) 10:10, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Another question: Does this also apply to the "external links" section at the bottom too? I've seen a lot of Wikipedia pages of large news sites list multiple affiliated links under that section. Aaronshenhao (talk) 10:06, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Life and hallucinations

Not an issue for Teahouse/Questions. Referred elsewhere

 – WP:Reference desk

Are any things that are undefinable in specific way can be defined? Meaning any thing which is not perceivable. Kpbastola44 (talk) 10:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kpbastola44: Hello. You posted your question at the Wikipedia Teahouse, which is a place for questions about editing Wikipedia. If you have questions about other things you could try asking at one of the Reference desks. --bonadea contributions talk 10:29, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Non-contemporary depictions

I noticed that the image was removed from the infobox of several popes (e.g. Pope Gregory VI, Pope Benedict VIII, Pope Benedict IX, Pope Clement II) with the comment "removing a fanciful and misleading depiction". It is not explained why the image is fanciful or misleading, except perhaps that it is not a contemporary image. I don't necessarily put into question the removal of these images, but it's very easy to think "oh, there's an image missing here, let's link one I found on another page", inadvertently undoing the removal which may be lost in the history of the page.

Is there a guideline that requests the removal of non-contemporary depictions ? How does one tell if an image is fanciful (when it's not overly obvious) ? (I might as well start removing several images of Christ for that reason) Kwakeroni (talk) 08:17, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

If we're using an image that we know is unlikely to be accurate, it at minimum ought to have an accompanying caption to say where it's come from, so readers and reusers can assess it (see Harold Harefoot for example). The images on Jesus aren't a fair comparison; they're all very carefully labelled to explain where they came from and which tradition they represent and the article has an entire section dedicated to explaining this, which in turn links to the more detailed Depiction of Jesus which explains how and why the depictions vary. In general, for western portraiture any image earlier than the 1830s that isn't contemporary or derived from a contemporary original is unlikely to have much relation to reality, and contemporary images earlier than the 1830s are likely to be idealised either to make the subject appear good or bad, depending on the opinions of the artist and whoever commissioned the work. (The significance of 1830 is that it marks the point when portrait photography became mainstream, and artists began to paint their subjects as they actually appeared rather than as they wanted to appear.) The images of the popes may well be appropriate for their articles, but they need some kind of disclaimer to prevent readers and reusers thinking that they're going to be accurate representations. ‑ Iridescent 09:06, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes. Take Pope Benedict VIII as an example. I can't find any when/by who info on the image, but my guess is that it was made about 1000 years after he lived, and it's not exactly Michelangelo. It is not unreasonable to question if such an image adds anything of value to the article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:50, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you, Iridescent, for the clear explanation. This gives a good guideline to go by. -- Kwakeroni (talk) 08:37, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Obscure 19th-century depictions not found in modern academic biographies or reference works, and other depictions not commonly associated with the subject in such literature, should not be included in Wikipedia articles. Such illustrations fail WP:IMAGERELEVANCE, which says that images must be "significant", of "encyclopedic nature", and "not primarily decorative". Surtsicna (talk) 13:26, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

I see your point. But it's not always clear when a work is considered obscure, or not of encyclopedic nature. A work like "The Lives and Times of the Popes" when published by "The Catholic Publication Society of America" may seem very legitimate, even when published over a century ago. Well, continuous improvement is a never-ending task, I suppose. -- Kwakeroni (talk) 08:37, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

A depiction is obscure when it is not found in modern academic biographies or reference works. For example, the illustrations in The Lives and Times of the Popes (1842) are obscure. Surtsicna (talk) 09:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

An image used in oreliable reference works should be acceptable, even in cases where the depiction might be largely imaginary. In most of these cases, there is one or a few images that are the conventional ones used in writing about the person, of placing their figure in a historical picture of similar context. The reader is helped by knowing what the figures are likely to be used to represent. An example is medieval monarchs, where there are normally nothing more than conventional images on a tomb, or seal, or coin. This is the way they are known and recognized, and it is valid information for the reader (obviously the caption should indicate the source, so no naïve reader will think it's a true portrait in the modern photographic sense) DGG ( talk ) 18:12, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes, exactly. Surtsicna (talk) 09:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

So why are museum pieces being deleted outright? What's more, other content is being called "likely poppycock" to delete - because it's doubtful? Perhaps you should establish "yea" or "nay" before sweeping it away. I suggest that the images be restored with captions describing their provenance and authorship. Elizium23 (talk) 11:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I think we need to establish here that it is not necessary for an image to be used in another high-quality reference work in order for it to appear in a Wikipedia article's lede infobox image. That is something the MOS guideline does not say.

It is important to remember that Wikipedia is a Creative Commons shop, and we like freely licensed content. Therefore we prefer public domain and Creative Commons-licensed images, and in order to prefer those, we can't just clip a painting out of Encyclopedia Britannica and paste it in Pope Leo's infobox. Quality is very important, yes, and the quality should befit that of a reference work of this calibre, but when we're handed some PD museum pieces, we don't just rip them out of the article because they are a couple hundred years removed from the subject. Elizium23 (talk) 11:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Edit requesting?

FYI

 – Header made by Tenryuu.

Hello

So I have no clue what I am doing, but I will let you know so I raise awareness for mental health, I suffer really bad from it, my dad passed away so I started going around the UK with my fluffy friend charlie, I have had media coverage, as well as going on BBC radio tomorrow to talk about my journey, I find the layout difficult to understand myself, but everything I do is for the best interest of others, as I dont want others to suffer in silence alone. sorry for going on, how can I get someone to do the wikipedia for me ?, if that is possible I have all the sources, links etc

Thanks sulfurboy for your help mate Neverloseyoursparkle2 (talk) 02:10, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Neverloseyoursparkle2: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're looking to contribute to Wikipedia but are put off by the layout, you can go to an article's talk page (clicking "talk" at the top when you're reading an article) and submit an edit request (WP:EDITREQ goes through the process). --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 02:27, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I moved stuff around at User:Neverloseyoursparkle2/sandbox so closer to format, but that does not address the question of whether there is enough written to meet Wikipedia's concept of notability. David notMD (talk) 02:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

David notMD, I'll just comment to say that the subject of the article appears to be the user himself. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 05:58, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I agree. Will leave note on User's Talk page about difficulties with autobio. David notMD (talk) 11:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanking

How does this thanking thing work? How do they see it? NamelessLameless (talk) 08:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

NamelessLameless, I've just thanked you for this edit to show you. Essentially it sends a notification to the user that made the edit, and gets added to a log of thanks you have sent. It appears as a notification, in the same way as when a user is pinged or an edit reverted. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 08:51, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Alex Noble, it is not quite the same as the other alerts. The MediaWiki interface separates "notices" such as thanks from "alerts" such as user pings and reverts. A blue mailbox icon lights up when a "notice" such as a thanks comes in, as opposed to the red bell for alerts. I am not sure why it was made more complicated. Elizium23 (talk) 12:01, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

What does it mean when it asks you if you want to publicly send thanks? NamelessLameless (talk) 08:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

NamelessLameless It asks you if you want to do what Alex Noble described above. I think the "publicly" refers to the fact that all thanks are logged, and the log is viewable by anybody. --bonadea contributions talk 09:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Yes. The public log is Special:Log/thanks which shows the user and time. The thanked edit is private. PrimeHunter (talk) 11:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Joe Mesmar

Please check the link and let me know should it got the permission of publish in Wikipedia or not? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Joe_Mesmar Thanks in advance. Surelyshubham (talk) 10:19, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Surelyshubham: You have correctly submitted it for review, so a volunteer reviewer will give you feedback at some point, and either move it to the encyclopedia, or let you know why it is not suitable for publishing yet. Thanks, --bonadea contributions talk 10:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

A review can happen as soon as days, but also as long as weeks, sometimes months. There are more than 2,000 drafts awaiting review. While waiting, you could work on improving the draft. Note the comment left on the draft page. David notMD (talk) 12:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

George William Eve (1855-1914) article and questions

Dear Sir, Thank you for your reply to my post about George William Eve (1855-1914). I note your reason for deleting my additions to the article. I'm a little puzzled, about your comment that genealogical material should be left out, because, when looking randomly at another Wikipedia example, in this case, William Wordsworth, that article has both his parents and children listed. I was doing exactly the same for George William Eve. Perhaps you meant that some of the biographical material about his family might in 'inappropriate' for Wikipedia. In which case, I could leave some of that out. I need some guidelines for this, though.

Thank you for pointing me towards a help page for beginners, re referencing. I'll have another go soon.

Many thanks, Chris Eve CelticViking.1 (talk) 20:59, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Apparently in reference to George Eve, and a continuation of this discussion, above. Adding David notMD. Mathglot (talk) 21:09, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Parents and children can be considered appropriate if not too lengthy on any of them. What I meant is don't go big - grandparents, great-grandparents.... David notMD (talk) 01:11, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

. See WP:EINSTEIN: the amount of detail about a person depends to some degree on the extent to which an ordinary reader is likely to want information. There is a considerable difference between the general cultural importance of your subject, and Wordsworth DGG ( talk ) 18:05, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you to both David notMD, Mathglot and DGG for your feedback. Learning about writing and editing on Wikipedia feels a bit overwhelming, like jumping into the deep end! CelticViking.1 — Preceding unsigned comment added by CelticViking.1 (talk • contribs) 12:08, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Can I create the same

I want to ask that recently my one of the partner create an article with myself on my talk page but that time I didn't do anything much and he was the created of the article. When it passes to afd it was totally COI article. I want to create the same article and my wish that I also make article on Wikipedia. I feel that I can make article better than my partner. I want to create the article on my sandbox and submit to AFC because this will be going to my first article. Can I make the same article with better quality of source? Can I do such? Kashish pall (talk) 10:49, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

The article has been created and deleted numerous times most recently at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sandeep Maheshwari the topic is not notable and the title has been salted to prevent further creation, time to move onto another topic. Theroadislong (talk) 10:55, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

From the definition of 'Salted': "Pages that have been creation-protected are sometimes referred to as "salted". Contributors wishing to re-create a salted title with appropriate content should either contact an administrator (preferably the protecting administrator), file a request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection#Current requests for reduction in protection level, or use the deletion review process. To make a convincing case for re-creation, it is helpful to show a draft version of the intended article when filing a request." This means that it is the subject of a proposed article - not the person who had submitted the rejected draft - that is blocked until an administrator reviews and approves the new attempt to create the article. Lastly, autobiography is frowned upon (see WP:AUTO). David notMD (talk) 12:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

references to books

hi, i was going to add a source and image to the parasitemia page, but my source is a book, and i'm wondering about a few things. 1) the book isn't specific to parasitemia. it's a clinical diagnosis book (a colour atlas and text of clinical medicine by C.D Forbes and W.F Jackson, 1993) and so do i have to mention the specific page number where it covers it, or is the book itself fine. 2) the picture is low quality due to the book being a bit old, and i don't want to go ahead and add it if higher quality pictures can be used. sorry if this is a waste of question, this is my first edit + i'm not too sure on a few things. thank you. 81.153.253.64 (talk) 13:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello. Thank you for wanting to help improve Wikipedia. There are two separate issues here. On the subject of a source: yes, if a book was published by a reputable publisher (not, e.g. a vanity press) you may certainly cite it in an article. The citation should include the usual bibliographic information (author, title, publisher, date, etc) and should certainly include the page number. See Template:cite book for a standard (though not compulsory) way to cite it.

The image is a different question. Uploading it to Wikipedia or Commons is almost certainly an infringement of copyright, except in two situations. One is if there is a specific reason to believe that the image is free of copyright, for example if there is a statement in the book that the image has been released under a copyleft licence compatible with Wikimedia Commons' policies: principally CC-BY-SA; the other is if you are able to show that all the criteria in the non-free content criteria apply: the sticking point is likely to be contextual significance: "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding". --ColinFine (talk) 13:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Question on notability

In the field of quantum mechanics (Wikipedia reference), Erwin Schrödinger (Wikipedia reference) illustrated one of his concerns with an area of quantum mechanics with his now-famous thought experiment: Schrödinger's Cat. Taking his illustration but substituting a clock for the cat - where the clock randomly tells the right or wrong time - I invented Schrödinger's Clock(™) as an amusing way to illustrate the same principle. Two examples have been built, one of which is in Moyses Hall Museum in Bury St Edmunds (Wikipedia reference), and the other is for my own amusement. Applications for a patent are undergoing review, and the trade mark (Schrödinger's Clock) has already been registered as United States [Int.TM] Trade Mark Number: 5537676. Part of the novelty for the patent is that the Clock deliberately sets out to create the wrong time some of the time - no other clock does this because they all aim to tell the right time. Schrödinger's Clock deliberately tells the wrong time for a specific reason.

Another version is an app that uses the camera on the iPhone to illustrate the Observer effect (Wikipedia reference).

The web site www.schrodingers-clock.com provides more details.

The presentation of the Clock to Moyses Hall Museum was reported in the local paper, the Bury Free Press (part of the Yattendon Group, Wikipedia reference).

Given the unique nature of this item and my desire simply to bring its principles to a wider audience (i.e. there is no commercial opportunity here, obviously), would this be considered an appropriate topic to be included in Wikipedia? Antonyhurden (talk) 10:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Antonyhurden and welcome to the Teahouse. Bearing in mind my username, it seemed rather appropriate for me to answer your question! Unfortunately, this does not sound like a subject which Wikipedia would accept. There are many unique things in th world which do not meet our Notability criteria for inclusion. It sounds too promotional, and would require two or three 'in-depth' articles specifically written specifically about it in widely available sources to be considered. I was going to suggest it might theoretically be more appropriate to a very short one-line entry in notable exhibits in an article about Moyses Hall, but I don't think we even have a page about that place as yet. Sorry I can't be more encouraging. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 12:28, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Antonyhurden, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, whose task is summarising material which has been reliably published elsewhere. The story in the local paper might be enough to justify adding a mention to an existing article (eg Schrödinger's cat), but on its own probably does not provide enough notability for a stand-alone article (and your own website cannot contribute to its notability, because it is not independent of you). I suggest that you propose adding it on the talk page Talk:Schrödinger's cat, with a citation to the press report, and see what other editors think. --ColinFine (talk) 12:00, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi there - many thanks for your immediate reaction which I entirely understand and expected (if I'm honest). It's the sort of idea to amuse people in 'lock-down' but not an enduring addition to Wikipedia. Many thanks, Antony — Preceding unsigned comment added by Antonyhurden (talk • contribs) 14:18, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Need Your Recommendation about my article Notability

Dear Wiki Users, Happy Easter everyone! i have created 2 draft articles: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lebanese_Yacht_Club https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Beirut_Yacht_Club Need your advise if the above articles can be processed to submission or it is preferable in submitting them in one article the below: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Yacht_clubs_in_lebanon waiting for your kind assistance. -- Princesse Marissa (talk) 07:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Princesse Marissa: See last week's Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1055#Your Feedback is highly appreciated as i am still new on Wiki? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 14:25, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Dear (talk)AlanM1 (talk

thank you for your reply i saw last week feedback and it was well noted. my purpose is to write articles for each yacht club in Lebanon with deep rooted history, i have take a look at List of yacht clubs and i read the article of each yacht club (approved highlighted in blue) mentioned there...and i was thinking that if all these articles (yacht clubs for all the countries) are acceptable so maybe and my articles (2 yacht clubs) can be accepted too... i have added a lot of independent reference to the draft since last time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Beirut_Yacht_Club any recommendation from your side? thank you in advance. Princesse Marissa (talk) 14:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)Princesse Marissa

questionable biographies on wikipedia, poorly sourced and no reliable

Hallo, there is a certain number of biographies very poorly sourced with number of dead links and unreliable sources. here are the bios I am referring to:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

and

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fran%C3%A7ois_Sagat

this last one for being way too celebrative (the article is written as a press release for him).

Is there a special procedure to follow to ask for this pages to be reviewed? I think that this pages were written many years ago when wikipedia had less strict rules about sourcing and they have survived only because no one has looked at them anymore. thank you. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 00:23, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi AlejandroLeloirRey. If your main concern is that the above-mentioned articles have "dead links", then that's not really going to be seen as a reason for deletion. Dead links are often a problem that are found in articles, but it's often a problem, as explained in WP:DEADREF, that can be fixed. Moreover, sources aren't required to be available online per WP:PUBLISHED. Although it's easier to verify a source available online, a source isn't considered unreliable if it isn't online. If you're concerns are that there are "bad" (i.e. unreliable sources) being cited in the article, then that's a different matter. Even it that case, however, deletion might not be necessary if better sources can be found or the content in question is removed depending upon its context. Adding templates like Template:BLP sources, Template:More citations needed or Template:Citation needed is often done per WP:BURDEN to let others know of a possible problem if you're unable to resolve the issue yourself. The main reason for deleting the article is going to be whether the subjects are considered to meet Wikipedia:Notability or one of the various notability sub-guidelines. Notability is not a temporary thing so try and keep that in mind when assessing it. If you feel that the subjects of these articles are clearly not Wikipedia notable, then you can proceed as explained in WP:DELETE; however, you should also take a look at WP:BEFORE, WP:NEXIST and WP:ARTCON before doing so. You might also want to post a query on the talk page of relevant Wikipedia projects to get other input. You'll usually see which WikiProject's scope an article falls under by check the article's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @AlejandroLeloirRey: You did the right thing by raising discussions on the Talk pages of some of those articles about their Notability issues. You could follow that up by adding a {{Notability}} template to the top of each article where you suspect that notability is an issue, and be sure to include the |bio= param with it. For those articles that need better referencing, you could also add the {{Refimprove}} template. For cases where the source is unreliable, tag the article inline by adding the {{better source}} template right after the questionable reference, and be sure to use the |reason= param to briefly indicate your objection to the poor reference. For dead links, see WP:LINKROT. If the url can be found in the Internet archive, you can use {{webarchive}} or the |archive-url= param of the {{cite}} templates. If it's not in the archive, please append the {{dead link}} template inline. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 00:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Mathglot:, @Marchjuly:. tell me if I am wrong. Bad sourcing is not a synonymous of lack of notability but it can be a symptom. Bad sourcing can be improved while there is nothing to do for a lack of notability. Still, those pages have been around for ages and if no one ever cared or could improve the sourcing is not a good sign neither. I will not ask for deletion but I will try to fix the sourcing myself, if I can not succeed I will add templates. but when can you tell that the sourcing can not be improved? for example if in a month no one improved those sources significantly would it be then reasonable to ask for deletion? --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:36, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

"when can you tell that the sourcing can not be improved?" It's pretty much a judgement call. If you look and didn't find any, suggesting deletion can be quite reasonable. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:19, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding "Bad sourcing can be improved while there is nothing to do for a lack of notability": that is correct. Also, and maybe this is obvious, but sourcing is required for the content of the article, whereas notability is strictly about the topic of the article, regardless whether the article is well-sourced or not, or even whether the article exists or not. For this reason, asking for deletion should not be tied to whether the sources have been improved or not, whether after a month or a year; this is a volunteer project, and there is WP:NODEADLINE. Deletion should happen for one of the reasons listed at WP:DEL-REASON. That said, if you believe that the topic itself is notable and you've tagged the article as needing references and none are forthcoming after some time, you can start to remove content from the article until there is nothing left but an article stub; possibly even only a single, defining sentence. Before you start slashing and burning, though, you might want to notify the top ten editors by {{ping}}ing them on the article Talk page, and let them know about your plans; maybe one of them will step up, and start adding references, and you won't have to cut anything. Work with other editors if possible, to develop a consensus on how to proceed. Mathglot (talk) 09:29, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Mathglot: I am still taking time to think well before acting. I know that wikipedia doesn't consider wikipedia a good source but the fact that a person has wikipedia bios in different languages is a prove or a hint of notability? --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlejandroLeloirRey: unfortunately, it's not. As you've already gleaned, WP:WPINARS. Other language Wikipedias—even less so, as their [[WP:V|Verifiability] policy may be different than ours here at en-wiki. So, unfortunately, you can't draw any conclusions about notability with respect to en-wiki, based on the fact that other language Wikipedia's may have biographies about them. Mathglot (talk) 12:12, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Here is the problem, they have been all pretty known porn stars but the sourcing for this type of bios comes mostly from sources judged as "bad" moreover due to the fact that they were in porn years ago now it is even hard to find that type of sources. Most of them had a pretty respectable amount of fame because of their porn activity, but as i said they were pretty notable in their field (like many others) and wikipedia says that if you can not find "reliable" sources than that person's bio shouldn't be here. If we apply this rule it would be fair to submit them for deletion but I am not sure that this would be either fair or an improve for wikipedia. Look at Zak Spears, he was very popular and definitely I would say he is notable but there is almost no sourcing at all. Also for the prizes (this is common for all of them), there is no sourcing for the prices their bios tells they won, I fell this is a major problem. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 14:48, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Can i get a review for the page I've edited?

I've just edited my first page and I don't really know if it was helpful or not and I plan to edit the rest of the page so can I? if yes, what direction should i go? wp:Reviewing pending changes - wp:New pages patrol/Reviewers or wp:Autopatrolled.

Thanks in advance – Erfan Talk☻ 15:04, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Et0zl, thanks for taking the time to edit that page, which was a little too casual in tone. However, please make sure that sentences are grammatically correct after you've gone through them. I'll take a look. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:20, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Tenryuu thanks for your reply, and since English isn't my primary language and I'm still learning I'll try my best, so to speak does that make me unhelpful? (by the way, someone edited the page fixed some of my mistakes) thank you again – Erfan Talk☻ 15:27, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Et0zl: You made some good changes. Editing is a process that is being continuously learned. It's a collaborative effort on here, so you can learn from others by seeing how they edit, take the good points, and incorporate it into your own writing. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:39, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Article was rejected. Where i can find concrete reasons?

Hello, i am posted first of it's kind Article and it was rejected.

"published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject." It's not a concrete reason.

• Draft:Heated_stick

Where i can find reasons? Because we are the source of unique and relevant information. I can't understand. Paulwingle (talk) 20:48, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Paulwingle Your submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article they don't show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Theroadislong (talk) 20:55, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Paulwingle Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. It actually is not accurate to say that Wikipedia("we") is "the source of unique and relevant information". Wikipedia is not for merely providing information. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia; as an encyclopedia, Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about article subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. The sources you have provided don't seem to have significant coverage of the subject, just brief mentions. 331dot (talk) 20:57, 10 April 2020 (UTC)

@Paulwingle: You wrote It's not a concrete reason so I'm guessing that you missed that the blue links in the message on your talk page are links to the pages that describe the meaning of "published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Click on those blue links to read about those policies. This is a core principle of Wikipedia; it's how we determine whether a subject is "notable" and should have an article, or not. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 13:19, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

331dot I'm not sure that Paulwingle was referring to Wikipedia when he said 'we' there. I note that a chunk of content in the article is about, and based on, some reviews by Wingle Group Electronics, so there may be an issue of COI here. Paulwingle - please read COI and PAID. I am grateful your indication of your affiliation in your username, but there are other steps you need to take, and other restrictions that you need to be aware of. Please take the necessary steps before editing further. GirthSummit _(blether) 16:05, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

need help with this draft.

need help with a draft, and need tips on it, please help link below

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Ali_%22SypherPK%22_Hassan AsmrSasquatch (talk) 18:37, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, AsmrSasquatch. Please look at the answer I gave to the question immediately above this (except that NSPORTS is not relevant: look at notability instead). Remember that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves: it is only interested in what people who have no connection with them have published about them. --ColinFine (talk) 18:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

AsmrSasquatch, have you read the reviewer's comments of needing more independent, reliable sources? None of those would be considered reliable; Famousbirthsdeaths.com has been deemed unreliable in a discussion last year. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Translation

hi! I want to translate this article to English, how can I get in to the translate assistant??

https://ca.wikipedia.org/wiki/El_Pony_Pisador — Preceding unsigned comment added by Petyrocell (talk • contribs) 18:57, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey, welcome to Wikipedia! You can activate the Translation tool here. However, please note that the tool is current restricted to use by extended confirmed users (users with 500 edits and whom's account is at least 30 days old). However, you can still manually translate an article. You can do so by creating an article via the Article Wizard. Then, when creating the article, set the edit summary to Content in this edit is translated from the existing Catalan Wikipedia article at [[:ca:El Pony Pisador]]; see its history for attribution.. Don't forget to submit the article after saving it by clicking the big blue "Submit" button after you saved the article. --MrClog (talk) 19:15, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Minerva Academy Football and Cricket Club

My article is rejected again & again, I want to know where and what is the issue. Draft:Minerva Academy Football and Cricket Club Sisanchobraut (talk) 19:16, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey, welcome to Wikipedia! It is important that all content on Wikipedia is supported by reliable sources. It seems like the reviewer, KylieTastic, believes there are not enough reliable sources cited in the article (which I agree with). Please make sure that everything in the article can be verified through the cited sources. You have made a great start and I'm sure it will be accepted once you've cited some extra reliable sources. Best, MrClog (talk) 19:20, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Merging this to the previous section. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

where you guys think you need more references? Draft:Minerva Academy Football and Cricket Club Sisanchobraut (talk) 19:24, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Sisanchobraut: The rest of the article. None of the prose has been sourced. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Publish my page

 Courtesy link: User:Christine Kato/sandbox

How can page be published? i have edited my photos please help. Christine Kato (talk) 14:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Christine Kato: Welcome to the Teahouse. I will assume you are familiar with our guidelines on submitting your own pictures. Drafts can be submitted by using the {{subst:AFC draft}} template and clicking on the Submit your draft for review! button. However, it seems like you're attempting to write an article about yourself, which is extremely discouraged, as per WP:AUTOBIO. As a solution, consult the very bottom of that policy:

The proper way to get your own writing about yourself into Wikipedia if you really think that you can meet the inclusion criteria and are willing to accept having a neutral, non-promotional article, is to make a proposal at Articles for creation containing the text you want, instead of just putting it into the encyclopedia directly, and seek the consensus of the community through discussion. Not only does this provide independent viewpoints on it that can allow you to discover biases you were not aware of having, it also helps provide an indication of good faith and that you are willing to put the interests of Wikipedia first instead of standing in a conflict of interest.

--Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:14, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

iam read to have Christine Kato Page reviewed and published. Can someone look into this please? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Christine Kato (talk • contribs) 15:35, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – The following was merged from its own section. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I am ready to publish Christine Kato WIKIPEDIA PAGE HELP

I am ready to publish Christine Kato WIKIPEDIA PAGE HELP. Can someone review and have my page published.

Thanks Christine Kato (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Christine Kato, please don't make a separate section for the same topic. Did you take the time to read what I posted earlier? --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝) 15:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Update: Page in question has been deleted under WP:G11 and Christine Kato has been blocked. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

How to create sub userpage

I have seen lot of wikipedia user have sub page like User:KylieTastic/Statusnotice , How can i create subpage like this zebuready/something, User:zebuready/Demo? Zebuready (talk) 19:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Zebuready: Welcome to Wikipedia. Just click on the red link and you can create the page. RudolfRed (talk) 19:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: I have already figure this out. Anyway thank for your support. :) Zebuready (talk) 19:47, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Coronavirus/Covid-19 question

I have no idea how new Categories are created, but unfortunately I think the time has come to create "People who died of Covid-19." Do you agree? DaringDonna (talk) 19:45, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) DaringDonna, welcome to the Teahouse. This has been covered extensively at List of deaths due to coronavirus disease 2019. The current category is Category:Deaths from the 2019–20 coronavirus pandemic. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Never mind. I just found those categories are up and running. I just havent seen it used yet on people's articles who have sadly died. Now that I know this category exists, I can add it. Stay well and safe. DaringDonna (talk) 19:49, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Creating a wikipedia page.

Hello, I have created a new wikipedia page this week and have followed the guidelines as best I can. Can anyone tell me how long new pages take to get accepted or rejected? I am just keen to know before I have a go at doing another one. Many Thanks Pegs50 (talk) 17:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Pegs50, welcome to the Teahouse. You have not submitted your content for review, and I have moved it to Draft:Luke Swann for you. You can submit it for review by using the {{subst:AFC draft}} template then clicking on the Submit your draft for review! button that it creates. I will tell you that it will be declined in the state it is in right now, so I'd take a look at some currently existing articles and see how they're laid out in sectioning and style. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:12, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, that's great, thank you for your help. When you say sectioning and style could you possibly give me some context on that? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pegs50 (talk • contribs) 18:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Pegs50, Sectioning refers to the sections of the article (e.g., Early life, references, etc.) that content goes under after your lead section. In terms of style Wikipedia articles use many conventions, such as emboldening the subject's name when mentioned for the first time, and only using wikilinks in the body's text. Please see Help:Referencing for beginners for appropriate methods of referencing.

(Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Pega50, and welcome to the Teahouse. Far more serious than the layout, I'm afraid, is the sourcing. A Wikipedia article (especially one about a living person) should be almost entirely based on sources independent of the subject. Not one of your current sources is independent of Swann: two of them are from his club, one from his college, and the last one features a very short biography which is likely to come from him. What we need is places where people who have no connection with Swann, and unprompted by him, have written at some length about him, and been published in reliable places such as major newspapers, or books from reputable publishers. Please see NSPORTS and citing sources. One point of layout I will mention: please use wikilinks for links to other Wikipedia articles, not URLs. --ColinFine (talk) 18:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Notifying Pegs50 to read this paragraph as it did not go through via ColinFine's ping. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Misleading/propaganda content

Hello, when we encounter content which is clearly fallacious, how do we get it corrected? I attempted to add factual information and links to correct a clearly biased and incomplete “article” but I would like more input. Thanks. 2600:1700:DB1:5900:15E5:25B5:B40F:AB0B (talk) 21:18, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Which article? Link to it by having the name between double brackets [[ ]]. David notMD (talk) 21:23, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Mobile view cite error displaying short lead

When I bring up the article Marquess on my mobile (Kindle), following the one-para lead there is an error message: "Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags...but the the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template..." The full article has both a reflist & notelist template in the usual position and displays without error. NB I got to the page via a redirect from "marquis" if that makes a difference.

I have no idea how to fix this—I don't know how to edit the mobile-view lead at all—but I would like to learn. Can you help? D Anthony Patriarche, BSc (talk) 17:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

D A Patriarche, if you're still encountering this problem, I suggest bringing it to the attention of the people over at WP:VPT, who deal with the more technical aspects of Wikipedia. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:28, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Phrase Undocumented immigrants

Is the false and incorrect phrase undocumented immigrants used to mislead the nation? If it isn't why aren't people who have been caught driving without a license called undocumented drivers? Undocumented immigrants phrase is used in Wikipedia's Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. The argument that illegal alien children should be rewarded for criminal conduct by their parents is promoting crime because it encourages illegal immigration as it is rewarded. The entire phrase undocumented immigrant is political term for a political agenda. It has no factual basis. Wikipedia is being drawn into the political arena by allowing inaccurate and false terms to be used to further political agendas. The absurdity of the term is shown as more and more people throughout the world are entering the United States illegally through Mexico. When politics ignores facts and changes words to conform to a political agenda the seeds of corruption are born. Joe53566 (talk) 21:58, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Joe53566, this decision, as all of Wikipedia's editorial decisions, are made by consensus between our volunteer editors (including you!), as guided by our policies and guidelines (which, in turn, are also decided on by consensus between volunteers). In the past, this decision has been discussed at Talk:Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals/Archive_2#"Illegal" vs. "undocumented" and Talk:Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals/Archive 1#illegal alien vs undocumented immigrant. If you believe circumstances have changed since then or you have something new to add to the conversation, you are welcome to bring the subject up again on Talk:Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals. Gaelan 💬✏️ 22:06, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Additional Information

I recently came into possession of a rare photograph of Marmaduke Military Academy Faculty, of which my great grandfather was an instructor. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marmaduke_Military_Academy I have a photo of the faculty taken about 1892. Can this be added to the site? ```` Jonrmoore (talk) 21:43, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Is it copyrighted? If it is not, then you can upload to Wikimedia Commmons and use it on Wikipedia. Otherwise, you must be autoconfirmed (your account must be four days old and you must make 10 edits) in order to upload to Wikipedia. Wynn Liaw (talk) 01:46, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

If it was taken before 1923, it's not copyrighted. You will need to state this clearly when you upload it to Wikimedia Commons. Maproom (talk) 06:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Convenience link to c:Special:UploadWizard. Pelagic (talk) 22:07, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Regarding draft

Moved from WT:TEA

You are requested to kindly have a look on my draft:Saqib Iqbal Shami suggestions are welcomed Maizbhandariya (talk) 20:12, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Maizbhandariya, this is the talk page for the Teahouse where we discuss how to run it. Your query is better suited to the main project page which I will be moving it to. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

References need workDavid notMD (talk) 21:20, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I've fixed some errors in the first reference. The others also need work. I noticed that the source cited by the first reference gives a view of the subject rather different from the draft. Maproom (talk) 22:13, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Requesting edit on Draft:Voxa

Hello All,

I've been trying to get a page published for the company Voxa and have been struggling with issues over tone. So far I have made a lot of changes, but both times that that the page has been reviewed it has been deemed as having a non-encyclopedic tone. I have made more edits based on the recent denial for publication, and I was wondering if someone could take a lot at the page and give me advice on how to fix the tone. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Voxa. I would like to have someone more familiar with Wikipedia tone read over it before I try and publish it again. Any help would be awesome. Sachin Zachariah (talk) 16:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Sachin Zachariah. The tone looks all right now, but I have problems with the sourcing. I haven't looked at all your source, but I have yet to find a single one which is 1) reliably published (eg, not Twitter), 2) independent of the company (i.e. not the company's own publications or based on interviews with the company's people), and 3) more than just a passing mention. Without at least two or three sources which are wholly independent of Voxa, and contain substantial material about it, the draft does not establish that the company is notable. Please see common sourcing mistakes. --ColinFine (talk) 18:26, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I will do more research and look for more independent sources and get back to editing. Sachin Zachariah (talk) 18:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

ColinFine I went through and found more citations that are from independent sources or academic papers, and was wondering if you could take another look at it and see if it is up to scratch. Sachin Zachariah (talk) 19:28, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Sachin Zachariah When you say that you are "trying to get a page published for the company", are you an employee or representative? If so, you will need to read and formally comply with the conflict of interest and paid editing policies(the latter is a Terms of Use requirement). 331dot (talk) 18:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I am not an employee or representative of the company. I clarified this on one of the reviewer's talk page Sachin Zachariah (talk) 18:44, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Sachin Zachariah. You have added citations to two different editions of the same paper, where one of the authors has an email address at Voxa, and Voxa is mentioned, precisely once, in a footnote (and in one of the editions only). This is neither independent nor significant coverage, and so adds precisely 0.00000 to the notability. Furthermore, citing two different editions of the same paper looks very like an attempt to pull the wool over my eyes. Please read WP:CSMN again and stop wasting my time. --ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Reporting users for BLP violations

If a user has violated the Biography of a Living Person policy, and continues to do so after a level 4 warning, what is the next step? Is it the same process as for vandalism, i.e. reporting to AIV? I'm basically not sure if it counts as vandalism for this purpose. Thanks! - QuadColour (talk) 22:30, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

BLPN is the place, QuadColour. --ColinFine (talk) 23:00, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Cheers! - QuadColour (talk) 23:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Infobox help request

 Courtesy link: Draft:Lodi Canning Company

Hello! I need help with an infobox for a local canning plant. It seems as if I put in all the parameters correctly, but the area of the factory and its address are written as plain text, apart from the infobox. I'm not sure what do do or what may have caused it, it'd be great if someone could help!

Attached are images of the plain text spat onto the page, the infobox which lacks aforementioned text, and the text editor respectively.

Thank you!! Zagraa (talk) 00:03, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Zagraa, taking a look at your source code, you added closing braces after the "employees" parameter, which is probably what prematurely closed your infobox. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:07, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

​The same thing is happening after "area" as well with extra closing braces that would end the infobox before "address". Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:11, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Help!

I need help! Someone answered my question, and I have no idea of where they went. I clicked on the response in my inbox, and nothing happened. Help, please. Shadowblade08 (talk) 00:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Shadowblade08, if you asked this question a few days ago, it's probably already been archived. Archives are found underneath the table of contents on the right hand side of this page. You should have received a message from a bot on your talk page that informed you of your question being archived.

It's most likely somewhere in Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1055. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Shadowblade08: You asked quite a lot of different questions from the 31st March onwards. You'd be better off going to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1054#Thanks_for_inviting_me! and working down from there. (I found 22 mentions of your username in Archive 1054). One quick way to find past questions (we're so active here that finished threads get archived after about 3 days) is to search for your own username in the 'search archives' box right below the rather long 'table of contents'. But if you've been extremely active on a forum, an even niftier way is to search through your own past contributions for the word 'Teahouse' and, viewing 500 edits at a time, look at all the topic headers you contributed to. When you find the one that interests you, copy the question header and paste that into the 'search archive' box. Hope you find what you're looking for. (PS I noted your question about the unusual barnstar that magically appeared on your talk page. I have added that single-edit user to my watchlist lest they edit again. I suspect an existing user might have tried to create a second 'test' account to edit from, which is not permitted.) Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Question of Terms & Services

How much does wikipedia get for selling my email address to 3rd parties? The junk blasts are pretty insane.

Itslinds (talk) 22:43, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Itslinds. I don't believe the Wikimedia Foundation or anyone else connected with this project has ever released anyone's email addresses to any unconnected third party. Might you have used the same email address you've used here on other unrelated and less responsible platforms, and that's where you're getting junk mail from? The only 'advertising' you might see from within Wikipedia would be banner notices about WMF-related events, and you have an option to turn these off. (You only created your account here on 10 April 2020 at 14:52 UTC, so can you describe the type of junk mail you've received, and why you think it is a result of the Wikimedia Foundation's actions?) Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 23:20, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Itslinds: In support of my response above, please refer to the Wikimedia Foundation's Terms of Use and especially its Privacy Policy It is abundantly clear that no sharing of email addresses for 3rd party marketing takes places whatsoever. It states:

"We are committed to:

• Describing how your information may be used or shared in this Privacy Policy.
• Using reasonable measures to keep your information secure.
• Never selling your information or sharing it with third parties for marketing purposes.
• Only sharing your information in limited circumstances, such as to improve the Wikimedia Sites, to comply with the law, or to protect you and others.
• Retaining your data for the shortest possible time that is consistent with maintaining, understanding, and improving the Wikimedia Sites, and our obligations under law."

I hope you find this reassures you that any release of your email address was not through any Wikimedia Project (like English Wikipedia), and that no user is even obliged to reveal any email address in order to be able to contribute here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Itslinds: I cannot recall ever having received unsolicited email at the email account I registered solely for use with Wikipedia since doing so over 12 years ago. Be aware that, if someone sends you an email from the Wikipedia "Email this user" link, and you reply directly to that email in your email client, you will reveal your email address to the recipient. To avoid that, send the reply from Wikipedia instead (with the "Email this user" link on their user page). That's the only way I know that your email address would be revealed (and it's unlikely in this case). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

How do I view a list of wiki pages with a certain template? E.g. "Confusing" pages

I want to be able to find a list of pages using the Confusing template. I think fixing these pages is one of the more productive things I personally can do on Wikipedia. How can I find a list of which pages have this template currently? Ikjbagl (talk) 02:42, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi Ikjbagl. You can click "What links here" under "Tools" in the left pane of Template:Confusing to see Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Confusing. The search hastemplate:Confusing can be combined with other search terms so it may be more useful. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:00, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you PrimeHunter. Wow, that's a lot- is there a quick button to press to see how many pages link to that template? It clearly seems like thousands, more than I expected. Ikjbagl (talk) 03:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Ikjbagl: The search says "Results 1 – 20 of 2,211" at the top right. Special:WhatLinksHere/Template:Confusing has a "Transclusion count" link (currently fails for me). The template adds Category:All Wikipedia articles needing clarification which has 4959 pages but this includes pages with other templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Edits needed in the 'Economic and social changes' section in a Puerto Rico history article.

While reading the subject article, I found numerous typos in the subject section. I do not have access to the book cited as reference material for this section. Can the original contributor be contacted so that the corrections can be implemented? The source cited is the following: 52.Ayala, Bernabe, Cesar, Rafael (2007). Puerto Rico in the American Century A History since 1898. U.S.A: The University of North Carolina Press. p. 42. 24.163.50.66 (talk) 15:03, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

It is technically possible to track down the editor who put the information in, and leave a message at their talk page; the editor may or may not be active currently. But, might I recommend leaving a note at the talk page of the article or even WP:WikiProject United States explaining the issue that other editors who happen to be active and have access to the source may become aware of it? Alternatively, you can request at WP:RX that the source page be made available to you, so you can check it yourself and make necessary corrections. Be sure to ask for the page only, so copyright doesn't prevent sharing of the document with you. This would of course require you to provide an email address where the page may be sent.

You would not need a source to simply fix the typos though. Also, you could amend the content based on sources that you do have access to, changing the citation to the source that you used to make them. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Consensus building

I want to add Alexa rank to Template:Infobox newspaper for which I have to build consensus first. How can I do that? Explanation, why I want to add rank: As more and more newspapers are going online, simply acting as a website (online publication), it will be helpful if we add rank similar to Template:Infobox website. Any help in this regard will be helpful. Störm (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Störm, you propose it at Template talk:Infobox newspaper, clearly laying out why you think the change betters the encyclopedia. If you don't get a reply within seven days, you can make an edit request there, pointing to your proposal and WP:SILENCE, and see where it goes from there. It will either be accepted and you wait for someone to revert and discuss it with them; or it will be declined and you discuss it with the declining editor possibly leading to a more well-advertised official discussion such as WP:RFC. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:10, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

İ would like to help in your sites translation.

Hello my name is Arber Sokoli. İ'm currently an Albanian student studying in Media and Journalism Turkey. İ am 19 years old and i would like to be part of the Wikipedia community. İ recdntly just registered and even though my experience writing articles is limited i belive i can be very useful as a translator. İ am currently able to read,speak and write four languages English, İtalian, Turkish and my mother language Albanian. Currently i am also trying to study international law and as i have been researching different sources about law in Wikipedia i have found many pages missing and further more i have many mistakes in the Turkish and Albanian translations. İ would like to have the possibillity to translate and write these pages myself. İ do not expect any payment and i dk not want any. İ just wish to be able to fix these mistakes. Could you please give me the authority to do so?

Last edited 3 minutes ago by Aether Kayle Wikipedia Content is available under CC BY-SA 3.0 unless otherwise noted. Terms of UsePrivacyDesktop Aether Kayle (talk) 20:16, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Aether Kayle: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to make it better. You don't need permission to translate articles, you just need to provide attribution to where you are translating from. See WP:TRANSLATE and WP:TRANSLATEUS RudolfRed (talk) 21:21, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Aether Kayle: Please note the use of 'I' (U+0049; &#x49;) as the correct capital letter in English. Your text above uses the Turkish "dotted I" 'İ' (U+0130; &#x130;). Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

And we have pages needing translation, a huge backlog awaits you. Lectonar (talk) 10:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

WANTED TO CREATE WIKIPEDIA

HELLO , wanted to create wikipedia for my company IMEX Shipping & Logistics LLC , please help . 86.98.54.211 (talk) 09:48, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello! Please take the time to read WP:COI, WP:PAID and WP:NORG. Short summary: If you try to create a WP-article, it will probably be deleted. However, if you want to try anyway, proceed to WP:YFA. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. Just to expand on the above reply: unless your company meets our notability criteria for companies, you will not be successful. So, of the essential three links you have just been given to read and act upon in order to proceed, first read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). If you cannot, hand on heart, demonstrate sufficient independent sources have written in depth and in detail about your company, you would be wasting your time - and ours. I did a quick Google search and found nothing that looks suitable for this encyclopaedia. You must ignore insider trade magazines, press releases and blogs, and look to books, newspapers and journals to find at least three sound, reliable sources which help meet those criteria. If you cannot, just forget it, and promote your company elsewhere, please. If you still think you stand a chance, you MUST declare your paid connection to the company on your userpage before trying to do anything further. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 10:59, 14 April 2020 (UTC)  

Some consideration about sourcing

Hello, I am not sure if this is the right place where to post this so if it is not please advise me where to move it. I would like to discuss with you some thoughts I have about sourcing, more precisely about biography.

General reading purpose biographies of living people (not academic purpose or journalistic investigations) usually are mostly based on interviews (followed by fact checking) but still there is a questionable interaction between the writer and the subject of the bio. Moreover, biographies for general reading purpose (not academic purpose) make up some details: if it reports a not recorded conversation happened years before it is obvious that it is not reporting the exact words (no one could be 100% sure of what the exact word are), the same happens if they describe any detail like a dress, a room, or tell what a person thought in a precise moment. If we consider this level of "fabrication" unacceptable for a reliable source we need to delete 98% of the biographies of living people.

I believe that general reading purpose biographies should be considered reliable (depending on the author and the publisher) even if they obviously made up some details that no one could ever know as the relevant facts are double checked and are not made up. May be telling something happened 10 years ago the biographer might tell what the person felt or thought in a precise moment. This is either made up or based on an interview but to me this doesn't make the biography unreliable. As long as fiction aspects of a biography are not reported in the wikipedia biography that level of "fabrication" shouldn't be a reason to question the biography as a source. Being so stiff would make sense if there was not common agreement on a fact but in such case you can not question a source without reporting other sources that disagree with it. Moreover, when a source reports a conversation not using the exact words is because of two reasons: first, no one could tell what the exact words were unless the conversation was recorded, and second most often the words are not important. If I report a conversation of a person with his mother in a book I might be way more interested into using that conversation to tell what kind of relation they had, rather than being precise. Another example, if I tell in a biography of when that person argued with his mother, is not important what he exactly said but it is important how bad the fight was. So, sometime conversations are simply used to describe a relation or an intimacy and in such case it is obviously unimportant how precisely the conversation is reported.

Finally, I feel that when it comes up to sourcing we need to be reasonable and check also the context where a source is used. Unless there is disagreement among different sources it shouldn't be important what source you are using for facts like: where and when the person was born, how tall he is and general stuff like that. I understand being stiff if someone reports that a person was an actor, a model, an astronaut, a singer but the only sources one can find are his interviews but speaking of not sensible details basically if there is not disagreement any source should be accepted.

Being so unreasonably stiff with sourcing is discouraging a lot of people to write anything. Plus, most of the material on wikipedia was written years ago when sourcing was not such an issue, becoming so stiff not would make it questionable a big part of the biographies you can find on wikipedia now. So, also to make wikipedia a little bit more homogeneous and even please be reasonable.

what do you think about it? please, feel free to agree with me (jocking). I would like to hear your opinions. thank you

--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC) AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:52, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

AlejandroLeloirRey Please read the Biographies of Living Persons policy. It is necessary to be very strict with the sourcing of such articles, mostly for legal reasons. In most countries editors or Wikipedia itself might be put in legal jeopardy if biographies of living people had poorly sourced or unsourced claims. Perhaps we have different definitions depending on where we live, but where I am a 'biography' has no fiction at all. Interviews are considered primary sources and while primary sources are acceptable for sourcing certain information, it must be put in context. For example, many celebrities(especially but not exclusively women) are not honest about their ages, for various reasons. The person themselves is not always the best source of information about them. This is why independent sources are preferred. 331dot (talk) 13:43, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@331dot: hallo, thank you for your point of view. Don't you fee that if anyone questions one source to determine someone's age or similar issues than he should at least point out another source in disagree with the source in the bio?. I see your point, look at zsa zsa gabor but in those cases you have plenty of sources in disagreement. General agreement on a detail should constitute it self a proof of reliability. While I agree that a biography has to be reliable (an authoritative writer and publisher), I can see that all biography for general reading purpose have a component of fiction, it is impossible to avoid it if you are writing a book, other wise you are not writing a book but filling up a list of things. if you could mention any historical person biography available on internet I would be happy to give you examples of what I mean (a book not one or two pages). If one environment is described or a conversation reported there is no way that the exact words or exact collocation of the forniture are reported but this doesn't make the biography totally useless. Of course the author must have based the description of the clothes and environments on the paintings, and the content of the conversations on some other sources but it is easy to understand that every time you report anything that is not in an official document it is a little bit made up, always. And Also official document can be questionable sometime. A biography of Catherine the Great probably is not reliable to prove what she ate in a particular dinner but it is good enough to prove she was an empress of Russia who died in 1762. This is what i mean when I say that one needs to look at the context where the bio are used. If I am writing the bio of an astronaut it should be not too important where I took the information that he actually was an astronaut as all the sources agree on it and that is not disputable. I feel that such stiffness should apply mostly to questionable facts that do not meet general agreement (you can find different sources that report the fact in different ways). Let me give you one last example, here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Big_Brother_19_(American_season)_houseguests#Mark this bios are written after very poor not third part sources, still they are reliable because of two reason. First they are not reporting anything so amazingly spectacular that you need extra source and second it wouldn't make much sense lying on this kind of information. for legal issue is another things but I am not talking of sensitive information. To make a long story short, I am not telling that any biography is reliable for anything or any biography written by autoritative writers are reliable for anything but that sources, especially books, should be considered on the basis of what you are taking from them and on the context you use them. AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 14:24, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlejandroLeloirRey: Ha ha, I see your point. Well, there is always the WP:IAR rule, but in my experience, most editors deny that it exists (okay to be fair, they don't deny it exists, they deny that it is ever applicable). But they are wrong! There is a higher rule, and that rule is to do that which will lead to making Wikipedia better. The policies are really intended to act as a basis for arbitrating things, but strict adherence to all the rules (exclusive, of course, of IAR) does not necessarily lead to this desirable end.

Here is a particular example. I came across a case where somebody had deleted some particular claim on the basis that there was no citation to support it. The claim made was (at the very least) plausible. I reverted the deletion, asserting that the editor should instead have tagged it with "citation needed" (and so I added this tag myself). The editor's response was that, according to policy, when content is properly deleted, it may only be re-added if a proper citation is included. My response was that it was improper to delete a plausible claim without giving notice that the citation is needed, but in fact, this was "common sense" on my part, not an actual rule, as far as I am aware.

So let's stipulate the other editor is correct, that every editor may properly delete every unsupported claim they feel like, and that other editors can only re-add the content if they include a valid citation. That would be chaos, but it's there in the rules. Editors who want to insist that rules reign supreme over content may want to watch out. They just might get what they wish for.

I must caution that mine is (apparently) a minority opinion. I don't recall any other editors suggesting that common sense may be considered when interpreting policy. Fabrickator (talk) 18:49, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

There's always the WP:COMMONSENSE part of IAR. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:56, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Fabrickator: @Gråbergs Gråa Sång: I am happy to read your post because I started feeling like everyone here had turned off their brain and replaced it with a computer that only checks rules. Wikipedia itself explains that the rules here are general guide lines and not something stiff. If I am telling that Marie Antoinette was queen of France any source will do as it is commonly knows. The same should be for any minor fact where all the sources find agreement. If I am telling the age of an actress I might need extra attention if not every source is reporting the same age but if any think I can find report the same age any source than will do. Sourcing is important and so is good sourcing but extra care is only needed when the fact are controversial, sensitive, incredible, etc. Also for interviews, which I see as not reliable, but if it is used as a source as something like "he lived 3 years in Egypt" it is good enough, this type of detail are not likely to be found anywhere else but in interview and biographies. AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 08:52, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Judging sources you don't know in languages you don't speak?

Hallo, I wrote a draft and sourced 90% with Italian sources (book, authoritative daily news papers ad some magazine). My draft has been declined 2 times and rejected 1 time (each time I worked on it to include the opinions I was given about my work). Is it normal that none of the people who have rejected/declined my draft speak any Italian (especially considering that the main problem seems to be the sourcing)? As a metter of fact I asked the person who rejected my draft to tell me at least couple of specific sources he had a problem with but kept giving me only very generic answers refusing to point out one single specific problem or source.

I know as a fact that the sources I used are universally judged as very reliable (in Italy), but if one doesn't speak Italian it is pretty hard to convince him. Don't you think that before rejecting a draft for bad sourcing one should know both the sources and the language they are written (and check the context in which they are used)?

Note: the first 2 times the draft was rejected it was because they found in the sources list (Notes) not reliable sources. Those "bad" sources were not used to prove anything but the fact that in every part of the world magazines and tabloids spoke about the Biographed so they were in the bio only to prove that his name was actually everywhere in the world. For as bad as a source can be, it will still be good enough to prove that it spoke about something (not that what it says is correct but that it said it). I can see now that reporting such a thing might be too celebrative but than I should have got a different message. I really didn't want to waste time explaining something so obvious so I fixed it cutting off that part. But guys, it is frustrating, you can not rush into delinting/rejecting stuff. Don't you think that for rejecting someone's work you should spend a fairly amount of energy to check it out and also to inform the person who did the job about the specific reasons for rejection?

thank you --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC) AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 09:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

(see also the section Wikipedia:Teahouse#Draft:Carlo_Masi above)

@AlejandroLeloirRey: well, for the draft Draft:Carlo Masi I can't see where anybody has said that they haven't reviewed the Italian-language sources, so that appears to be an incorrect assertion. In the draft, you have made extensive use of a book that was published a month ago, so claiming that it is universally judged as very reliable (in Italy) may be a bit of an exaggeration. Furthermore, the only claim to notability is the media attention in 2017 when some students discovered that their lecturer was a pornographic actor, and that is pretty tenuous. I think one reason this was rejected may have been the repeated re-submissions and requests for review, here and on other boards and user talk pages. There is no deadline, and there can be no reason to be in such a hurry about this. --bonadea contributions talk 11:29, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bonadea: How could someone review an Italian source if he doesn't speak any Italian?. when I say universally judged as very reliable (in Italy) I am referring to the daily news paper (La repubblica, il messaggero, etc). I was suggested to base the biography on the book as the author is one of the most recognized in Italy (see Strega Prize Walter Siti) and also the publisher is one of the most respectable: Rizzoli Libri and I follow every piece of suggestion I am given. If the problem is the book as a primary source then I can change it. As a matter of fact Carlo was known as one of the most famous gay porn actors in the world (only ever Emeritus for Colt Studio Group) and as far as I can see this is good enough to be on wikipedia(Category:Gay_pornographic_film_actors). Am I wrong?. I agree with you that he is even more known as a combination of porn actor and an academic but this is one more reason for his bio to be here. you say I think one reason this was rejected may have been the repeated re-submissions and requests for review, here and on other boards and user talk pages and this discloses one of the main problems here. When a draft is rejected is the draft itself to be judged or it is rather its author's behavior? as far as I understood if my behavior is somehow "problematic" I can be suspended or other disciplinary measures can be taken but this should have nothing to do with the draft itself. What you say means to me that probably here the problem is me rather than the draft itself. Please notice that before re-submitting it I worked on it and changed it to fix the problem risen. Going back to notability, you say he is more known for the combination of being an academic and a porn actor, well Pietro Boselli, Mary Kay Letourneau, Pamela Rogers Turner and many, many others are on wikipedia for stories with a very much similar kind of notability. They were teachers, they did something that gained the world attention and now they are here (for no other reason). I think that Carlo should be here first as a porn star, but if you question this (I wouldn't know how), he should be here because of the word wide attention his story gathered. I already know you will not answer again as it has happened again and again, when I answer something reasonable either I don't get any other answer or they change subject and this is why after a while I try to ask to someone else. A discussion is an exchange of opinion that should extend to more than one answer. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 14:17, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

you say he is more known for the combination of being an academic and a porn actor No, I did not say that – sorry for being unclear. I said that the existing claim to notability, in the article at the present time, is the media attention from 2017. (As you point out, he is not notable as an academic.) --bonadea contributions talk 14:40, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bonadea: thank you for (very, very, very partially, but still) answering, I really would have bet you wouldn't have. As far as i understood notability doesn't age (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Notability#Notability_is_not_temporary). So, IF he was notable as a gay porn star 1000 years ago, he still is now. Yes, he is not notable at all as an academic. I claim notability for both: porn actor itself and for the combination of porn actor-academic (like Pietro Boselli, Mary Kay Letourneau, Pamela Rogers Turner and many, many others). --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 15:00, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlejandroLeloirRey: Absolutely, notability is not temporary, but it looks like a couple of reviewers agreed that it does not look like he meets the notability criteria for actors. I want to emphasise that I have not actually made a proper review of the sources, but I do have some sympathy for your position here – I don't think it is completely obvious that WP:GNG is not met, but as I say I haven't evaluated the sources properly, and WP:BLP1E is also relevant here. If a person is known for one event only, and the news coverage is all about that event, it is less likely that they are in fact notable. I'm afraid I can't really help you further (at least not at this time of night) – I mostly wanted to provide a different perspective. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 20:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bonadea: Look, I am not as stupid as I sound and I perfectly got that no one here wants to question a decision made by a respectable members of this community but in this case I think that it is a rushed decision and it was taken by people who could not read the sources as they do not speak the language. If you can give it a chance and check it out when you have time you would make me happy.

As I said I claim him to be notable also as a porn actor. He was an exclusive model for what was considered the most prestigious company on the market Colt Studio Group, not only that, he was the main actor of the company. Supporting this there are three major facts: first he is the only one ever named Colt Man Emeritus, second he is the one chosen as the cover man for the 40th year anniversary book of the company and third, even if he retired almost 10 years ago, in the model section of the company's web site he is still the most popular. Here is the link: https://www.coltstudiogroup.com/models . If that is not enough, how many gay porn actor do you think were famous enough to make tour across USA, Mexico and Europe in clubs and discos?(this is pretty easy to be checked). Look at this page, merchandise with his pictures is still sold: https://coltstudiostore.com/search?type=product&q=carlo+masi . He is on greeting cards, fridge magnets, tens of calendars (mostly covers), shower curtains, lap top sleeves, books, notebook and consider that most of his merchandise is sold out now as, once again, he retired years ago.

Supporting his notability before he become professor (before 2017) Look here: he was the guest star of the most important Italian tv shows. He was the first and only gay porn stars ever accepted in the circuit of the national Italian tv. This video is from his FaceBook: https://www.facebook.com/RuggeroFreddi/videos/253527992083794/ . It is Chiambretti Night one of the most followed Italian tv show and he was the Guest Star (he was the special guest there a few times), and this was 2010 so way before he became a professor. Not enough?, here are a few national daily news papers writing about him quitting porn and doing a theater piece of Beckett: la Repubblica-articolo, Corriere della Sera- articolo, La Stampa-article, and these are just those I could find with a fast search through google. Just give them a look and you shall see that there are article only about him not a note or similar. I don't tell any of this, even if in my opinion it is more than worthy of mention (firs and only gay porn actor in the national tv as a respected guest star), because if I say any of this I would be told to be celebrative and be rejected.

One of the most important Italian writers wrote the book of his story, his whole story not only that fact. The book starts with Carlo Masi as a 3 months child and ends with his wedding (2018), once again first and only gay wedding ever brodcasted live on national tv ( Pomeriggio Cinque). I really would not consider such a person notable for only one fact, unless we agree that gay porn actor should not be on wikipedia, than I would claim notability for only one fact. I know I am stubborn but I know I am right and I know that the people who rejected my draft didn't have any clue of who Carlo is and they pointed out the easiest thing, sourcing. None of them read Italian and most of the sourcing is in Italian, I would take it if I was told that one or two sources are arguable but I can't take that it is bad sourced. So, at the end of the day, what do we have here? a notable person biography with a reasonable sourcing, why shouldn't it be here?

--AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 23:08, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

AlejandroLeloirRey, AFC gives opinion of one experienced editor on whether the article is likely to be kept in a community deletion discussion (WP:AFD). No matter how many re-submissions have happened or declined/rejected, it doesn't amount to "community consensus" unless an actual widely publicised community discussion has happened on the notability of the topic. So, if a few members disagree on whether a topic is notable, and a few others seem unsure about it, that looks like a prime candidate for AFD. Would you rather it were moved to mainspace with the sole purpose of putting it through an AFD so that you have a definitive answer from the community? Usedtobecool ☎️ 09:34, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: well, at this point I feel that no one would ever stand for this draft, it doesn't matter if carlo masi cured the cancer or gave a proof of Riemann hypothesis no one is going to say than another editor was wrong. Plus, it wasn't me to say in first place I think one reason this was rejected may have been the repeated re-submissions and requests for review, here and on other boards and user talk pages and I think he was 100% right, the problem, whatever it was it was not the draft, the sourcing or notability. So, yes, go ahead and candidate it for AFD so I can have a bunch of people who have not clue and who speak no Italian (so they can't read or judge the sources) telling me how unreliable are the most important Italian news paper, how irrelevant is a Strega Prize winner's Book and that all of this doesn't prove that a gay porn actor is notable (give a look to the bios of the other gay porn actor here). Here is like if you had to convince a person from Cina that if some one is interviewed by Oprah is a big thing, that the times, the sun, the new york time, etc are reliable news papers and that Charles Bukowski was one of the most important German-American poets.

So, yes go ahead and promote his deletion because even discussing all of this is ridiculous. Would you please explain me how is it like? is there going to be a discussion? can I partecipate to the discussion? can you give me the link to the discussion?. anyway, thank you, way better to get a senseless no than having to keep telling blind people the sun is yellow. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 10:05, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

AlejandroLeloirRey, An WP:AFD (please follow the link) will be a community discussion which will be widely publicised and everyone is welcome to participate in it. People will argue why it should be kept or deleted and those who disagree can rebut and provide counter-arguments; after at least seven days have passed, an administrator will assess the consensus and close it with concluding remarks/actions. The discussion will be listed at the Italy-related discussion AFD discussion board (please follow the link) as well as other relevant topic boards (actor, academic, biography come to mind). Optionally, WP:WikiProject Italy (please follow the link) can be notified asking that people who know Italian look in.

There are plenty of notable people from my country who I don't create articles on because it is difficult to prove that with sources I can access, and no one will believe me when I say they are notable. There are some topics where there is a critical mass of active editors who can just say "Come on! Every one knows that this subject is notable" and get an article kept, there are subjects like those related to my country where there are only a handful of editors and so, we just don't bother no matter how notable a topic is, unless the subject meets WP:GNG (please follow the link) unequivocally from available online sources. If an AFD gets it wrong, there is not much we can do; it's an imperfect universe and Wikipedia is part of it. I understand you are frustrated and if it's venting you are after, I am fine with that. if you are looking for options; i just gave you one. To improve your chances at an AFD, perhaps try and find help from WikiProject Italy first? Post at the talk page asking that someone look at the draft and provide an opinion as to whether it should be an article. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 10:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Usedtobecool: well, in this case it is hard to prove notability only because the people who are supposed to check it didn't speak the language and didn't have a clue of what the most reliable news papers of the country are. On one hand I get a "not enough notability" answer but on the other hand if I put all the relevant thing Carlo did I get a "too much celebrative" answer. I was also told that most of the sources "didn't pass a mention", a mention. What? his name is in the title! and the whole thing is about him. Even if you do not speak the language you can tell that those articles are entirely based on him. I was also told "he could have wrote some of those sources himself". How? if you are not registered in the Italian journalists' register you can not write on those papers. I was told he is famous only for one thing but his name kept popping out those important news papers since he was a porn star. Plus, once again, look at the other gay porn stars bios here on wikipedia, 90% of them never have been mentioned by any reliable news papers or ever have been on a national tv show. Why are they here than?. For being a gay porn star he was more than notable. I know it might not seem like this from my posts but I appreciate your help, believe me. I am not frustrated because Carlo Masi will not be on wikipedia, but for the complete lack of pertinence of the answers I got so far, all of them are very random answers and this proves that whoever was reasonable for checking out didn't give a damn and they only wanted to have one more thing (quickly) done. Look, I read those guides many times and they are all interpretable and not as stiff as someone here would like them to be. I don't think there is much I can do at this point to improve it. I could add other 1000 sources, all reliable, but I was told this is not a good thing to do, that it is better to have a few sources all reliable. what more could I do?. I prefer to get a definitive no at this point and know this is not a war I can win with facts or evidences. Once again, I know how any community is, there is always a hierarchy and no one whats to piss off the respected members of the community, even when they are wrong. So, I know I will get a 'no' but I also know why I will get such an answer. At the end of the day at lease I got to practice my english but I am not going to write anything anymore for wikipedia, it is pointless. --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 11:41, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Freedom Mobile page

I was just looking at the Freedom Mobile Wiki, and it seems that the writer(s) of the description do not like Freedom Mobile at all! They describe it as the worst provider, and say that they are 'thieving' money from Canadians. I don't think this is honest or professional. Freedom Mobile is probably the smallest provider, and might not be the best, but it has many satisfied customers who are getting the deal that they wanted. 76.69.114.23 (talk) 13:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for drawing our attention to that piece of vandalism, which was done yesterday, and has just been removed. --ColinFine (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

You have omitted Henderson and Indian.

2600:1702:2FD0:8280:A104:C7F0:DA13:770D (talk) 11:49, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi, welcome to the Teahouse. We have six million articles. Please be more specific and link to any pages you refer to. I guess it has something to do with Henderson Motorcycle and Indian Motocycle Manufacturing Company. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

List of motorcycle manufacturers includes Indian as current manufacturer and both Henderson and Indian as past manufacturers in the United States section. David notMD (talk) 13:42, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hyperlink / Reference / Footnote

Can we put the same matter under hyperlink and as a reference/footnote also? Please clarify. -- Mkjoshidcpl (talk) 12:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello Mkjoshidcpl, and welcome to the Teahouse. I am assuming you are asking about Draft:Vidyanidhi Dalmia? Please always name or better link the specific article in such questions. To create a successful draft, you should look into guides like WP:Your first article, or specific guidelines such as WP:GNG (what is a notable topic?), WP:RS (reliable sources for Wikipedia) and WP:REFB ("how to" format references). Very briefly summarized, you should generally not use raw external links, but put each reference directly behind the content it verifies, in a format like this: Content here.<ref>Reference details (author, title, name of publication, etc.) and link if available</ref> Hope this helps a bit, but please feel free to ask here again for more specific details. GermanJoe (talk) 14:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

an alphabet of words

It has come to my attention that we have disambiguation pages for A_word (autism, adultery, etc.), B word (bastard, Brexit), F word (fuck, feminism), K word (word processor, Christian radio), and various other letters. (And redirects: the "H word" takes you straight to Hell.) I'd like to make these more findable, from one dab page to another. Is there a more elegant solution than listing them as "see also", as T-word does? Carbon Caryatid (talk) 16:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC) Carbon Caryatid (talk) 16:44, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@Carbon Caryatid: Like maybe User:AlanM1/Template/Navbox x-word, to be transcluded at the bottom of each of those pages? I'll note the articles are not hyphenated consistently, either (I think they should be hyphenated). Feel free to move that to Template:Navbox x-word and modify as needed. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:50, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

@AlanM1 and Carbon Caryatid: in general this sort of navbox is not appropriate for disambiguation pages, see MOS:DABICON. older ≠ wiser 13:53, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

@Bkonrad and AlanM1: Oh dear - I've spent rather a long time implementing the kind suggestion that User:AlanM1 prepared for me. I had just come back to this page to report on progress. If navboxes are "in general...not appropriate", then can you suggest a better way to alert readers to the phenomenon of referring to contentious topics by their initial? Carbon Caryatid (talk) 15:28, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

I was wondering how best to disambiguate those template entries when I stumbled across this discussion. Transcluding a navbox in a dab and having intentional links to dabs in a navbox are both highly unusual, and we don't really have procedures in place for dealing with either. Certes (talk) 21:22, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Dab pages don't normally have navboxes because navboxes provide topical navigation and dab pages don't represent topics so don't need topical navigation. But I don't see any reason not to make an exception here – dab page can sometimes assume a topical aspect, as happens when dab pages that list people with a certain surname might be categorised somewhere under the otherwise clearly non-dab Category:Surnames. All the X-words are related as members of a class, so it's not unreasonable for each member to link to the others. – Uanfala (talk) 21:46, 13 April 2020 (UTC)
Having said, I would like to add that even though I have no objection to seeing this navbox on dab pages, like K-word, it certainly strikes me as inappropriate for articles like The D-Word to have that. – Uanfala (talk) 21:50, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

There's nothing connecting these pages other than an arbitrariness of language. I object to including them on disambiguation pages as they do not help readers to navigate between ambiguous topics per MOS:DABICON. older ≠ wiser 21:58, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

It is the very linguistic phenomenon that interests me - I quite like the phrase "an arbitrariness of language". We list and link plenty of other arbitrary collections, for example significant events that happened on April 14, no matter what year or country. X-words are members of a class, just as April14-events are members of a class. If an exception can be made such that the navbox may be included, great; if not, what other mechanism can be suggested to make the class findable by curious readers? (By the way User talk:Uanfala, is your comment above -- "I have objection" -- missing a "no"?) Carbon Caryatid (talk) 12:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Ah, yes, fixed now. As for the analogy with events and dates, we might have an article about April 14, but any articles there might be about events that happened on this date will not link to the other events that happened on the same date, either via navboxes, or in the text. – Uanfala (talk) 13:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

OK, it's not a perfect analogy, but readers looking at an article about one April14-event will know that there are plenty of other events that happened on the same day, and plenty of April13-events and April15-events too. I don't think the same can be said of x-words. I am thinking particularly of the large part (half?) of our readership for whom English is not the first language. If you know that there are one or a couple of words so powerful they must never be spoken (e.g. the N-word), it does not follow that you realise that most of the English alphabet has received a similar treatment, sometimes with highly ambiguous results. Yesterday I discovered that "the W-word" has been used since the turn of the century for whore, worship, witch, woman, wetback, and I can't remember how many other subjects. It is a linguistic phenomenon worthy of daylight, surely. Carbon Caryatid (talk) 14:29, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Correcting an article

Hi. I've never edited a Wikipedia page before. But I saw an error, an incorrect date, on a page.

I created an account, and tried to correct it, but got all kinds of "citation error" notices. Thus it appears that I don't know what I'm doing. I would appreciate your help (or someone else correcting the error).

The page in question is this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1992_Landers_earthquake

The website talks about a foreshock that happened in Joshua Tree, but it lists the date as April 23rd. This is wrong. This Joshua Tree quake happened on April 22nd, and I have several sources to back me up. It happened just before 10pm on the 22nd, and thus a lot of news stories might be dated April 23rd. However the actual quake happened on April 22nd.

Thanks for any help you can offer.

Russ Rwflash (talk) 22:48, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Rwflash. The date of the foreshock is currently reported as (UTC), which is Coordinated Universal Time, a worldwide standard. UTC is the local time in London, and Wikipedia operates on UTC. UTC is often used in articles about scientific topics, and April 23 is correct in UTC. On the other hand, the date and time of the main earthquake is reported in local time. So, there is a discrepancy that should be discussed at Talk: 1992 Landers earthquake. I added a reference to the Los Angeles Times story about the foreshock. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 23:15, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

We might have a template similar to {{convert}} that shows both local and UTC times. I have a feeling I saw something once, but can't recall if it was intended for article space or just talk. Pelagic (talk) 15:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination

Greetings Editors If a page is recommended to Speedy Deletion can we move it into Draft so that we can improve or make necessary changes.Thoufiq313 (talk) 14:13, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thoufiq313, yes. WP:DRAFTIFYing is done quite often for articles that have some potential, but aren't at our standard yet. However, do not draftify junk from the draftify policy applies - it should be used for poor quality articles with potential, not just to delay deletion. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 15:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Matthew Devereux

FYI

 – Heading created by Tenryuu.

 Courtesy link: User:Hibaesque/sandbox

Hello,

I wrote an article that was rejected in relation to the singer "Matthew Devereux". I was wondering where you would suggest I should change/alter some information on my page or could you help me with understanding how to cite a page better? Most of my information was taken from a podcast in relation to his life. His band has a verified page called "The Pale Band" and I thought it would be suitable to make one for the artist himself.

I am new to Wikipedia and welcome suggestions or edits offered by you and your team.

Thank you for your time,

Hibaesque Hibaesque (talk) 17:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Hibaesque: Welcome to the Teahouse. It appears the reviewer has deemed your subject unqualified for their own Wikipedia article due to the references used. I suggest going through our music notability guidelines before contacting Sulfurboy to make your case and/or ask for assistance in making it acceptable. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I am not getting what references to give

hey, I have just edited a page called bhuvan bam, I added a table of his songs on YouTube but it is removed. One editor named Aguy777 removed it saying that I didn't provide a reliable source. I an not getting what source to give. I tried giving the youtube channel link but he still removed it. KingeVishesh (talk) 17:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

KingeVishesh, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia asks for independent, reliable sources for subjects to meet its general notability guidelines. While the Youtube channel link can be considered a decent primary source, Wikipedia is more concerned about secondary sources that have reported on the subject. For more information see WP:RS. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Inconsistencies between pages

Hello, I would like to ask a couple of questions:

• Why can I do visual editing in the articles, but not on pages like this one and my own discussion page? I find the visual editing much easier to use.
• The Wikipedia page looks different in my country (NL) compared to the English version. The NL version has a search box (which is very useful), while the EN version doesn't. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hoofdpagina (NL) vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page (EN)
• Another example is the references. NL editors seem to put these nice boxes around them, while it's plain in EN. https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Schloss_Itter (NL) vs https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Itter_Castle (EN)
• Last question. When you want to submit a new page in EN, it first goes through some kind of drafting process, but an NL page is up right away. I can understand why it needs to go through an approval process, but it makes me feel like the bar is set high right away. Rather than I can make an alright page (since I'm new) and more experienced user can polish it up.

Thank you for your time. Mikalagrand (talk) 17:38, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Mikalagrand, in short, all of the different language wikipedias are independent, and developed mostly in isolation from each over.

For the first question, it can only be used on talk pages by editing URLs, this isn't an oversight, but a deliberate decision - pinging Whatamidoing (WMF) who will have a much better answer to why this is.

2 and 3 are more stylistic changes which realistically came down to what the users preferred when the site was much newer.

For your last point about drafts, this only applies for users with less than 10 edits over 4 days - anyone over this can create pages themselves, the same as any other wiki. The details on why this became the case are at Wikipedia:Autoconfirmed article creation trial/Post-trial Research Report. ~~ Alex Noble/1-2/TRB 17:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Mikalagrand, and welcome to English Wikipedia.

• • Sadly, the Visual Editor is not fully functional, and there are some limitations on what can be done with it. This is the responsibility of the Wikimedia Foundation.
  • Each language version of Wikipedia has a high degree of autonomy and visual features in one language may not appear in another language.
  • On English Wikipedia, in order to create a new article directly, an account must be autoconfirmed which means the account must be at least four days old and have made at least ten edits. This is a necessary deterrent to spam and inappropriate articles. We have multiple levels of quality control. I am not sure how you define "alright" but we want new articles to be in basic compliance with our policies and guidelines. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Mikalagrand, welcome to the English Wikipedia project.

• The visual editor is limited to certain spaces, like the articlespace, Its limitations (in English) can be found here. That is why I stick to learning source coding. :P
• I'm not sure why you aren't seeing a search box in the EN Wikipedia. Assuming you're using the same skin they should be in the same place.
• NL and EN are separate projects and are managed independently from one another. While we will cross-link to articles for translation purposes the standards that each project has do not necessarily apply to other languages.
• Again, different standards. We've had a lot of issues with bad articles being made and being improperly referenced; as such the drafting process was born. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

(ec)Hello and welcome, Mikalagrand!

• I don't know the why of it, Wikipedia:VisualEditor#Limitations doesn't say, just that it is so. "Current known limitations" hints that perhaps this will change.
• As it appears to me, both pages have searchboxes in the same place.
• I don't know the reason, perhaps noone has suggested it. It doesn't look like an obvious improvement to me, but I'm used to "our" way.
• You can create articles directly when you have become WP:AUTO-confirmed, but such articles should fairly obviously fulfill WP:GNG, otherwise they'll disappear quickly. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Draft publication

FYI

 – Heading created by Tenryuu.

 Courtesy link: Draft:Morgan Brittany Osman

So I tried to publish a page called Draft:Morgan Brittany Osman. She is a US Reality TV star who featured on two notable TV shows on Oxygen & VHS. She has since left but has many brand deals & endorsements online, I think she should have a wiki page, as she is a notable person who has dontated clothes during this current situation (COVID:19). So please any help on writing a wiki page on a public person that doesn’t class as “unambiguous advertising”, i’m all ears, KylePippen1 (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@KylePippen1: The first thing you want to do (aside from layout) is provide good, reliable sources. See WP:REFBEGIN for more help. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:06, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Gordon Ramsey request

Can someone please edit Gordon Ramsey’s page to list Masterchef Australia 2020, April 13th to present? Thanks CDart950 (talk) 13:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

CDart950, the page is semi-protected, so you should be able to do it yourself. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:07, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I don't think CDart950 has yet make enough edits to be autoconfirmed, Tenryuu. In the meantime, you can request additions or changes to a semi-protected article by following the instructions at Wikipedia:Protection policy#semi, CDart950. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Cordless Larry, my apologies; I'd forgotten that semi-protected pages were editable only by autoconfirmed users and above. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

is it OK to remove catalogue hyperlinks in references

in past i removed some universities hyperlinks which clearly states price, for ex oup. however, i need suggestion about whether to remove if hyperlink given is a catalogue. for ex https://catalogue.nla.gov.au/Record/1133049. the reference contains hyperlink, isbn, oclc. Leela52452 (talk) 14:29, 13 April 2020 (UTC) any other suggestion or critique is preferred here

Good question, Leela52452. If our citation already has sufficient bibliographic information, does the link add any extra value? Maybe if it leads (even indirectly) to an online copy. I guess it demonstrates that the book does exist and allows confirming the metadata if not the contents.

There used to be some magic applied to ISBNs; the {{cite book}} template still has an isbn= parameter that links to Special:Booksources like this one for ISBN 0195537688. Thats a search rather than a link to a specific record, though.

Pelagic (talk) 21:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

What are Administrators?

So, I tried to edit the Main Page, and when I tried, a message came up that said, “This page is protected so that only Administrators can edit it.” Why is it protected, and more importantly, what are Administrators? Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) 20:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Total Eclipse 2017 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Main Page is protected from editing because it is often a target of vandalism. What is is that you were trying to do? Administrators are editors that have certain abilities that would be irresponsible for every user to have, such as deleting pages or blocking users, and are chosen by a community vetting process. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

No reason, I literally just wanted to see if it had an “edit” button like other pages... Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) 21:02, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Total Eclipse 2017, you can find much more information at Wikipedia: Administrators. Please do not try to edit any Wikipedia page for "no reason", although you can always use your sandbox for experimenting. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 21:16, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

‘Kay... Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) 21:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

"Eisenhower's treaty with the Grey Aliens" is a phrase which appears in a catalogue which is sent to me by "Inner Traditions/Bear & Company/Books for the Mind, Body & Spirit Since 1975"

On p. 29 of the catalog, headed "NEW AGE/METAPHYSICS", they offer a book called Alien World Order: The Reptilian Plan to Divide and Conquer the Human Race by Len Kasten which reads in part "Kasten shows how Eisenhower's treaty with the Grey Aliens, signed in 1954, gave reptilian aliens the authority to abduct humans for 'research.' "

I would be interested to read a review or critique of the company that publishes this catalog and/or of the book mentioned above.

yours truly, Paula Bonnell BonnellP (talk) 21:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

BonnellP Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. This is a place for new users to ask questions about using Wikipedia, and is not a general question asking forum. You could try the Reference Desk. 331dot (talk) 21:40, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hey Paula, welcome to Wikipedia! Unfortunately, we do not provide such help here; this page is dedicated to helping users with editing Wikipedia. However, I would advise you that there is no such Alien World Order and that anyone that claims that aliens signed a treaty with Pres. Eisenhower is a phony. --MrClog (talk) 21:42, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Improving Images on on Article

Hi, WikiNOOB here!

I'm currently going through public domain/CC0 images from the Smithsonian and seeing if they are useful in Wikipedia articles. I've come across the article for Gladys Bentley, which has a single image. I have found a better image that is basically the same, but has far higher quality here: https://www.si.edu/object/gladys-bentley-americas-greatest-sepia-player-brown-bomber-sophisticated-songs:nmaahc_2011.57.25.1 Would replacing the current image be considered an improvement? RevoltoftheBeavers (talk) 13:51, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

That looks to me to be a better version of the same photo. I suggest that instead of uploading it as a new image to Commons, you use it to replace the high-contrast version there, and give the source in place of the current "Source en.wikipedia (Unknown)". Maproom (talk) 14:20, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello again! In the File History section of the Commons image, I see a message that says "You cannot overwrite this file." Is my account not old enough/experienced enough? How should I proceed? RevoltoftheBeavers

Hi, RevoltoftheBeavers. In the File history section, for me it says "Upload a newer version of this file". So it might very well be an issue with account-status. If you don't get an answer here from somebody more knowledgeable about Commons (sorry, I'm inexperienced there), you could try at c:Commons:Help desk. I did a search of their Helpdesk archive, but the only hits I got, saying that you need autoconfirmed, were a little old. Pelagic (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@RevoltoftheBeavers and Maproom: The file's used on a lot of pages, would a cropped or non-cropped version work for all cases? I'm guessing most will be infoboxes or similar. Pelagic (talk) 21:57, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

edit semi-protected article

Can i edit wikipedia article which are semi-protected? My article name is Overwatch (video game). Anmol Jindal (talk) 23:46, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Anmol Jindal, your account is autoconfirmed, so you should have no problem editing that article. Gaelan 💬✏️ 23:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

How to edit a feature film page

Hey there! Old school HTML editor here and new to wikipedia, I feel I'm picking it up quickly! While making a few small edits here and there I'm working on entering a feature film (documentary - independent) into the site. I noticed generally speaking the best practice is to insert a type of quick reference infobox to the right of the screen to list directors, runtime, studio,etc. Examples of notable comparable entrees here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minding_the_Gap https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Solo

Almost embarrassing, but I'm not even sure how to search for what this functionality would be. I have the page built and cited except for this. Any thoughts of what to research to find what this is that I need to insert?

Thank you!

Nick Venicenothing (talk) 22:53, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Venicenothing: Welcome to Wikipedia. What you are looking for is called an infobox, in this case it is {{Infobox_film}}. Click the link to see the documentation and examples of how to fill it out. RudolfRed (talk) 23:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hey there RudolfRed, so much appreciate it! I'll look into it now. Thank you!

Hey there RudolfRed, one last question. I'm trying to upload an image for the film poster, which falls into the non-free but able to use in context of the film on the page I'm creating. It keeps asking me for license info, is there any help documentation to help me upload this? Since I'm unverified there's a process to ask for it to be uploaded I'm using. Is there any help-info on this process? Thank you!

Hey Venicenothing, I'm not Rudolf but let me try to help you. While you can use it once you have published the article, you cannot use a non-free file while it's still a draft. If you are having problems uploading the non-free file once your draft has become an article, feel free to leave a new message here or at my talk page. --MrClog (talk) 00:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi MrClod Thank you for your help! Here's the page I was just published (my first!) : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blood_Road_(film) Here's a link to the film poster that I'd like to put into the infobox. Can you help me upload this and insert it? Not trying to bother you, if there's a tutorial or way I should do it let me know.

Film poster to insert: https://m.media-amazon.com/images/M/MV5BOTAyZGEzOTUtZjFmNi00ZjMyLWIzYTEtY2NmMDk1ZTljNGQxXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyNzI0NTkyNzY@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,707,1000_AL_.jpg

Thank you!

How can I help?

So, I’ve been clicking “random article” and fixing spelling and grammar errors. What I want to know is, are there any other ways to find articles that need work? (I’ve found that Wikipedia articles aren’t in as good of shape as I thought, and I want to help a little.) Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) 17:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to help. Check out WP:TYPO for hints and tips on how to find articles that need spelling, grammar, and other fixes. RudolfRed (talk) 17:39, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks! @RudolfRed:

@Total Eclipse 2017: Shameless plug: you may be interested in joining the Guild of Copyeditors, where we keep an eye on articles with the {{copy edit}} tag and proofread requests sent in by editors. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:48, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I’ll check it out. @Tenryuu: Total Eclipse 2017 (talk) 17:54, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I just realized that copy editing is what I did to those two snail articles. I find it kind of fun, actually. I just go to random articles and fix their spelling and grammar. How do I join this copyedit group? @Tenryuu: Total Eclipse 2017 (talk)

@Total Eclipse 2017: You don't have to formally join; adding your name to the list of participants is a formality but if you want to make it known you can go here. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:10, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Total Eclipse 2017:, You might also look at Wikipedia:Community portal. Near the top you will find nine groups of articles that need improvement. Scroll farther down, and you will see a box, "Active Wiki Fixup Projects", that contains links to 22 projects that aim to improve articles in a number of ways.Eddie Blick (talk) 00:32, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

@Teblick: I’ll check it out.

Article Editing Issues

Seemingly resolved

 – Edit button appearing on mobile device without any intervention. WP:VPT suggested as a venue to ask technical questions. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hi guys. I was trying to edit the filmography section on the Wikipedia article for the actor Joel McKinnon Miller (I intended to add a show he cameoed in - the link to the article is https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joel_McKinnon_Miller), but when I clicked the edit button and brought up the editor view it only showed the table for his basic information (i.e: name, date of birth, spouse etc...) and the brief description of him below said table, but it didn't even show anything for the other drop-down articles (i.e: filmography, references etc...). I checked the visual editor and the source editor, and neither of them show anything of these other sections. There also wasn't an edit button next to the drop-down article for his filmography section as there usually is on other people's articles, so I was wondering what to do about that and if it could be fixed. Thank you for your time. 2A02:C7F:D847:7C00:3426:AB1C:F0AE:EFF7 (talk) 18:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Out of curiosity, if you press on where the edit button is supposed to be on your mobile device, what happens? Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:12, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

It appears that it's fixed now - the edit button appears next to the filmography section. Thank you anyway. :)

Good to hear. If it happens again the folks over at WP:VPT might be able to answer your technically-inclined questions. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

One more question about submit

 Courtesy link: User:Kashish pall/sandbox

One more thing I want to ask actually I made article on my sandbox but I am creating from mobile so I don't get any button for submission. Can you help me regarding this? Kashish pall (talk) 16:54, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kashish pall: The template for submitting a draft, {{subst:AFC draft}}, is not on the page. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:23, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Kashish pall: In other words, you need to add the code {{subst:AFC draft}} to the top of the page and then click the submit button. No comment on whether it is acceptable as an article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:24, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Scientific paper on Covid 19 infection management strategy based on scientific research.

How can I publish an article on Covid 19 infection management in Wikipedia? Dr Mukundan M K (talk) 17:30, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Dr Mukundan M K: If you are trying to publish a paper that you wrote, then this is not the place for it. See WP:OR. Articles must be based on information in published reliable sources. If I misunderstood your intent, then go to WP:YFA for guidance on creating a draft article for review. RudolfRed (talk) 17:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Dr Mukundan M K: Note, though, that we already have a significant amount of content on the subject. Check out WP:WikiProject COVID-19 for more about our coverage. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:33, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Jambyl Region

Summary

 – KzShop blocked by Bonadea. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:42, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello everybody. I ran into the following problem. In this page Jambyl Region I saw a mistake (the name of the region is in Arabic script (in this region and country there is no Arabic language and Arabic script), therefore, I decided to fix it. I deleted the error, wrote the reason, but after a few minutes, my edit was canceled. I still didn’t understand the reason, I didn’t understand what the moderator who deleted my edit meant.

By the way, this error is on almost all articles about the regions and cities of Kazakhstan. I consider this a gross mistake, since in no region of this country is there an Arabic language or Arabic script.

Before that, I wrote about this on the talk page (check the talk page of that article). But there was no answer. However, how can I fix this error? I mean the error in the article. KzShop (talk) 18:44, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@KzShop: It seems you are editing under this account after being blocked as JackAtkinson22. If this is across all Kazakhstan regions and cities, then you should argue your case with evidence as to why it shouldn't be so, even if it isn't in use anymore; otherwise, status quo takes precedence. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:54, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Tenryuu:I know this user, he created a post in reddit (in Kazakhstan subreddit), and there I found out about this error. Therefore, I want to fix it. My question was, how can I prove it? And where? On what page? On the talk page, or is there a special page for consensus?

@KzShop: You would discuss this issue over at Talk:Jambyl Region. I think an unregistered IP did the same thing already. --Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:37, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

The note on the talk page is just from today. You need to give time for responses. RudolfRed (talk) 18:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

FTR: KzShop has been blocked as a sockpuppet of a previously blocked user, JackAtkinson22. They had already been told how they should go about trying to get consensus in favour of their change, but they chose to edit war and attack other users, and now create more accounts to do the same thing, instead. --bonadea contributions talk 20:29, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

How to lock the page for further edit ?

Summary

 – ANAMIKA6SI raised concerns about protecting page; investigation led to account being blocked and page being deleted. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

How to lock the page for further edit ? to save it from mischievous people editing it or deleting it . only reliable source can edit .. how to do so ? ANAMIKA6SI (talk) 20:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

ANAMIKA6SI, please link to the page in question so that we have context. Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:19, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

ANAMIKA6SI, Wikipedia's philosophy is that "anyone can edit." Therefore, while we can and sometimes do "lock" (we call it "protecting") pages from editing by inexperienced editors, we don't do so unless we really need to. If the page isn't getting unusually large amounts of vandalism, it's usually enough to quickly undo the vandalism after it occurs. Gaelan 💬✏️ 20:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

How can I protect this Wikipedia page I wrote ?? Surabhi Prabhu . All the credentials are verifiable. Competitors hire PR to malicious ruin the page 202.134.174.127 (talk) 20:22, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

ANAMIKA6SI Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume this refers to Surabhi Prabhu. Articles are not protected("locked") in anticipation of vandalism or other inappropriate editing; there must be a demonstratable problem with vandalism in order to protect a page. You also cannot have a page protected to limit editing it to yourself; any editor can edit any article. Ordinary editors cannot delete a page; they can blank it, but that is easily reversed. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

I assume you also made the above IP comment; remember to log in before posting. 331dot (talk) 20:24, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

ANAMIKA6SI Since you are concerned with other PR firms, does that mean you work for Prabhu's PR firm? 331dot (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

no I'm not Pr, THIS MY FIRST contribution to Wikipedia, I'm learning . I will contribute more in future .

ANAMIKA6SI You referred to "competitors"- an odd term to use if you aren't in PR or otherwise working for the person you wrote about. 331dot (talk) 21:14, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

331dot, I parse their sentence as Competitors [of the subject of the article have] hire[d] PR [firms] to malicious[ly] ruin the page

ANAMIKA6SI, I wonder why you say this is your FIRST contribution to Wikipedia, when you had made 20 edits to five different articles before you came to Surabhi Prabhu, including an undiscussed (and subsequently reverted) move of another article. --ColinFine (talk) 21:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Perhaps a language issue conflating contribution = submission (as in submitting a new article versus 'just' improving existing ones)? I wish we could somehow get the message out there that there are better ways of contributing than creating new articles. [Please ping me in replies. I didn't think my comment warranted a ping to Colin, but apologies if I should have done so.] Pelagic (talk) 22:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

On the other hand, I see no vandalism there, so I wonder why ANAMIKA6SI would be expecting "competitors" to show up. Pelagic (talk) 22:26, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

talk please check BONADEA is vandalising all my contributions. he is saying I'm paid and reporting me . isn't it like bullying??? since I'm new , I'm trying to write and he is being aggressive. he says it looks like paid advertisement. please anyone can help me with this bully ??

(ec) To get the ping to work, ANAMIKA6SI, use [[User:username]] and sign with ~~~~. It needs to have the User: prefix rather than User talk: The mechanics of discussion here can be daunting, but you'll get used to it.  :) I'll address the maintenance templates when I can; I'm late in getting ready for work and must go. Pelagic (talk) 23:08, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

P.S. A bit off-topic, but you shan't steal pictures from Instagram and upload them to Commons as "own work". If you really did take the photo, then what is your relationship to the actress? (Bonadea has tagged the file for speedy deletion and provided a link to the Insta post.) Pelagic (talk) 22:35, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Note my paragraph here posted near simultaneously with the reply above, but I didn't get an edit-conflict message. Pelagic (talk) 22:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@Pelagic: It looks like WMF turned off 2-column edit conflict on 6th April. I've also experienced problems losing work and not getting a conflict message. See this. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:55, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks, Nick, I did get a full-page EC just now, so might be unrelated. I'll be watchful for further weirdness, though. Pelagic (talk) 23:08, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Well, four "different" accounts are tag teaming to keep the current version of the article a poorly written promotional piece – and other accounts have created drafts and articles about the actor since 2015, all deleted as non-notable or pure spam. --bonadea contributions talk 23:09, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Oh, I only saw two users on a cursory glance, and was about to ask ANAMIKA6SI "what is your relationship to Maya82ster?" Thanks for looking into this, Bonadea. Pelagic (talk) 23:15, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

What's gone wrong with fonts in Watchlist? My eyes hurt.

Assume this has already been addressed, so if you could just point me to relevant conversation, that would be great. Thanks. --Hobbes Goodyear (talk) 02:45, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hobbes Goodyear, hello, welcome to the Teahouse. I haven't seen any changes to the Watchlist. Could you be a bit more specific about what you are seeing, what skin you are using, and if you have any gadgets enabled that would affect your watchlist? --AntiCompositeNumber (talk) 02:54, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Muhammadu Buhari

Resolved

 – Former removed sentence on page re-added without trouble after sentence was revised to only include what was in the cited source(s). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:19, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello.

I was just wondering if I could get some advice concerning the president of Nigeria's page. A while ago, I added a cited reference to his chieftaincy titles to the section on "Honours". By the time that I came back, it had been removed. I assumed that it was due to the edit warring that had been going on in my absence (my president is a popular guy 😂), so I restored it and pointed out that it was cited in the edit summary.

By the time that I found my way back today, I found that the entire "Honours" section was gone - cited contribution and all.

Now ordinarily, I'd just restore it - because as far as I could tell, nobody had called its verifiability into question - but there has been quite a bit of tomfoolery going on on that page more widely, and I'd just like some advice from above on how to proceed.

Thanks in advance.

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 09:33, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@O.ominirabluejack: Hi your edit was reverted because it was unsourced. I would advise adding some reliable sources if you choose to add the honours section to the article in question. I am not an expert on these things but that is my advice if someone more senior or more experienced on these things would like to correct me please do. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 09:46, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Hello, @REDMAN 2019:...

Thank you for responding. I really appreciate it.

The subsection that I was referring to - about his other honours - was referenced. I made certain to include a link to a local news source that would corroborate my contribution.

I admit to not knowing whether or not the rest of the "Honours" section was properly sourced. I just came and grafted my information into the pre-existing section where it seemed to belong.

If everybody is alright with it, I think that I'll just add my bit - with the appropriate citation - to the most recent revision. I'll leave the other honours to people that are more knowledgeable about the president's complete list of honours.

What do you say?

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 10:04, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Good idea. However that's not to discourage you from finding a reliable source for the other awards. REDMAN 2019 (talk) 10:08, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

You added the statement "These are only two of the numerous titles that the president holds ...", and followed it with a reference to a source that makes no mention of those numerous other titles. If you add a statement and follow it by a reference that does not confirm it, both statement and reference are likely to be removed. Maproom (talk) 10:27, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

@O.ominirabluejack: To get better input from editors interested in and familiar with the subject, and to keep it grouped with the subject for future reference, discussion should be at the article's talkpage (Talk:Muhammadu Buhari). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 12:58, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks you, @REDMAN 2019:. I'll give it a look.

Very well, @AlanM1:... I will do so in the future.

Forgive me, @Maproom:... Clearly I fail to understand the notion of basic verifiability. That having been said, I would have thought that deleting everything provided would lead whomever does so to delete - presumably inadvertently - that which clearly has already been substantiated. After all, those titles were clearly referenced in the offending article provided.

At any rate, thanks to everyone for their help.

O.ominirabluejack (talk) 13:25, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

So many FA reviews in 2006/2007?

I'm fairly new to WP editing. Looking at talk pages, I've been getting the sense that a lot of FA reviews occurred around 2006 or 2007, as opposed to being evenly distributed in the last, say, 15 years. Is my observation correct? And if so, I'm just curious why it is. Thanks! Ambrosia0 (talk) 18:34, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

"Active editors" (English Wikipedia editors with >100 edits per month)

The monthly statistics for FAC are here. As with all of Wikipedia, FAC was more active back then; there was a spike in editing between 2005-08 which rapidly dropped, and levelled off at its current level of around 3500 active editors (see the graph to the right). Plus, there was more low-hanging fruit back then, and the general standards were lower so it was easier for an article to pass. ‑ Iridescent 18:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the super fast response! Ambrosia0 (talk) 04:09, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Compliments to Wikipedia

Hi everyone! I know that this isn't really a question, but I would like to give my compliments to Wikipedia and all of the Wikimedia projects. I haven't been a user for very long, and I'm so surprised at all the things that go on in the background. It's like when I wasn't a user, all I saw was the tiny top of an immense iceberg of edits, talk pages, and users. I'm so glad I'm able to experience all of this now and hopefully make a difference on Wikipedia. Thanks a lot! Wikiforever47 (talk) 02:11, 15 April 2020 (UTC)

Hope you enjoy your time here as many of us have! Take your time to explore and have fun. :) bibliomaniac15 05:21, 15 April 2020 (UTC)