Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1068

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1065Archive 1066Archive 1067Archive 1068Archive 1069Archive 1070→Archive 1075

Disambiguation page vs new article

Hello, we are working with a group of scientists on a new article on genetic resources. Currently, there is only a disambiguation page with this name. We'd like to propose to rename that page into 'genetic resources - list' and create an article entitled 'genetic resources' with a definition, history etc. Is this a good approach? Anything we should do before we proceed with this change? Thank you, Ewa hermanowicz (talk) 10:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Ewa hermanowicz, and welcome to the Teahouse. My advice would be not to worry about the disambiguation page, but to create your new article as a draft using the articles for creation process. When you submit it for review, and a reviewer accepts it, they will handle the issues of naming, existing disambiguation pages etc. Please be aware that writing a new article is one of the most difficult activities in editing Wikipedia, and writing for Wikipedia is different from most academic writing, in several important ways. I suggest looking at your first article, and at Expert editors before you start. --ColinFine (talk) 10:57, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ewa hermanowicz: Further to what Colin has said, can I ask if you are speaking with a Royal we? You do write as if you represent a group or body which is helping some scientists. If so, be advised that we only allow one individual person to use one account; each contributing person must have their own account. If you are involved in this work, and especially if you are employed/being paid to create this page, you will all need to read and follow this page about Conflicts of Interest, and this obligatory policy on declaring paid editing. This won't stop you editing, or count against you, but transparency is always needed here. Good luck with the draft article. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello Ewa hermanowicz, welcome to the Teahouse, and thanks for asking. My gut reaction is that it's probably better to find a different name for your article, is it possible there is some overlap with your intended topic and Genetics or one of the many related articles? However, this is not my area. You may have useful input if you ask this question at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Molecular Biology. Also, since you say "we", see WP:NOSHARE. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:04, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ewa hermanowicz: And I'll chip in again to say that, having done a quick Google Translate of your draft at User:Ewa hermanowicz/sandbox, you do seem to be focused solely on forestry genetic resources, so the title you're thinking of doesn't sound specific enough to me. But that can wait. And, at the moment, your draft looks more like a university essay paper. So make sure you focus on a clearly notable topic that either stands alone, or acts as a page related to a larger topic, such as Genetic diversity. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello Nick Moyes,Gråbergs Gråa Sång and ColinFine. Thank you so much for your prompt response and advice. I can definitely confirm that everyone in the group has their own account and we are not getting paid to write the new article. There is no overlap with the Genetics article which is referring to scientific discipline rather than material in the case of Genetic resources. The article is not in my sandbox but that of Theo in case you want to have a look. Any further advice is welcome.Ewa hermanowicz (talk) 11:34, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy for the curious: User:TheOhAgain/sandbox David notMD (talk) 12:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Having read the entire sandbox twice, I'm still wondering what it's meant to be about. It starts by defining the term "genetic resources". That's a task for a dictionary, not an encyclopedia. It defines it "genetic material of actual or potential value where genetic material means any material of plant, animal, microbial or other origin containing functional units of heredity". So that would be physical stuff containing DNA, or possibly RNA or even protein; and computer records (of DNA etc.) sequences, and maybe of their epigenetic state, right? Later it explains that the material can be from animals, forests, plants or microbes. That seems weird - what do you find in forests that isn't in animals, plants or microbes? We also read "Genetic resources is one of the three levels of biodiversity". Is a computer database of DNA sequences a level of biodiversity? If it is, it needs explaining. Maproom (talk) 15:21, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

My first Wikipedia article is non compliant. How do I get published?

Hey folks, happy to have this community to rely on for things like these.

I have recently published my first Wikipedia article, and it's about a company I work for. We are launching cutting-edge AI-powered mental health services. I just wanted to create a page for anyone who might google us, as a general reference.

I don't think my content was that salesy. I also added hyperlinks to Crunchbase and Linkedin, but apparently it wasn't enough.

What should I do to make sure it's published? 98.128.253.114 (talk) 15:40, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP Editor, and welcome to the Teahouse. The above is the only edit from your IP address, so I have no way to know what draft you refer to, or give any specific advice. Please indicate what draft page you refer to, and consider registering for a free account.
As you work for the company, you have a clear conflict of interest, and must edit with particular care, and support your edits with citations to independent and reliable sources. Normally you should use {{request edit}} on the article's talk page, rather than making direct edits. If you are expected to edit the article as part of your job responsibility, or expect to receive any form of compensation for doing so, you are considered to be a paid editor and must declare this before editing further on this topic. If the article is still in a draft under articles for creation you may edit directly, as the text will be reviewed before it becomes an article. Not that no opinions of any sort, positive or negative should be expressed in the text, unless they are quotes, marked as such, and attributed to a named person or source, and supported by a citation. A list of the services or products offered by a company can seem like sales promotion, depending on how it is worded. Details matter here, and there is some judgement needed, so I cannot be more specific without seeing the text. Rewmember that any Wikipedia article should be based primarily on what independent and reliable sources say, not on what a company says about itself. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:58, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Editing

Adding to semi protected pages


How do I edit tell me a protected pages if I am a new user? Warden385 (talk) 16:10, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Warden385: Wikipedia:Edit requests explains the procedure to follow. You can't edit the page directly, but you can request that someone else edit it. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

What Is Sock Puppet?

 Sauidward (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Sauidward: See Wikipedia:Sock puppetry for an explanation. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:28, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Advice please for creating a Redirect

Good day. I submitted a draft article (Edinburgh Festival Voluntary Guides Association) and this has now been accepted for publication. I now want to create a Redirect to this article from EFVGA. So I created a new draft (Draft:EFVGA) containing only the following:

#REDIRECT [[Edinburgh Festival Voluntary Guides Association]]

I submitted this new page for publication. But I then saw a message saying that the page was unacceptable because it did not contain any citations.

So, my questions: (i) Did I follow the correct procedure? and if so (ii) What citations can I insert in a Redirect page?

Thanks in advance. Mike Marchmont (talk) 12:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi @Mike Marchmont:! There are a few issues here:

Hi @Calliopejen1:. Many thanks for your reply and help. Greatly appreciated. Could I just pick up the various points you made:

  • You actually did not submit Draft:EFVGA for submission.
  • The draft creation process isn't supposed to be used for redirects; instead, you should use Wikipedia:Article wizard/version1/Redirect.
Yes, I see that now. But when I (mistakenly) used the New Article Wizard, it explicitly gave me an option to create a Redirect page. This was obviously wrong. But not to worry; I'll know for another time.
  • I created EFVGA as a redirect for you, so that is taken care of.
Excellent. Thanks.
  • The tag about needing more citations at the top of Edinburgh Festival Voluntary Guides Association (I think that's the "message" you're talking about) is on the main article and is not on the redirect. These tags can be added even after a draft article is approved. I'd encourage you to add more citations to the article to improve it. Hope this clarifies things!
I understand what you are saying, but I am sure that the tag in question was at the top of the redirect page (after I tried to submit it). I know about the one at the top of the article itself. The one on the redirect page said that the article wouldn't be approved because it has no citations at all - not because it has insufficient citations.
Anyroad, I'm happy with the result, and will know better another time.

Mike Marchmont (talk) 15:12, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Mike Marchmont: Odd. No one has edited the redirect draft other than you.[1] All's well that ends well though? Calliopejen1 (talk) 15:19, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

As you say, @Calliopejen1:, it's odd. Another of the WikiMysteries that I am coming across. Mike Marchmont (talk) 16:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Afc decline Draft:Wanny Boy

Submission declined on 5 July 2020 by Calliopejen1 (talk) Draft:Wanny Boy

My submission declined on 5 July 2020 by Calliopejen1 (talk) without any highlighed comment Draft:Wanny Boy. I am not able to see some specific comment.

My references are from established newspapers (list given below). I have seen many wiki articles are using eonline.com and metro.co.uk in their references.

Can you please guide me to understand the mistakes. I am open to fix/add/remove/modify those contents which are not meeting the wiki standards.

Thank you so much. Vsp.manu (talk) 15:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

The reviewer's comment: "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." One of your references is his website, and in the others, there is only a brief mention - for example, that he attended the gala and had his picture taken with B. I agree that he does not yet meet Wikipedia's definition of notability for people in the music field. David notMD (talk) 16:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello, Vsp.manu, and welcome to the Teahouse
  • The E! news article has a one sentence mention of Brown, saying only that he appeared in a picture with a better-known performer.
  • https://www.wannyboy.com/ is not an independent source, it is Brown's own site.
  • The 15min.lt sarticel also has only a single brief mention of Brown, as far as I can see.
  • The metro.co.uk says only Once inside the party, Beyonce and Jay Z kindly took a minute for a photo with child star Dawan “Wanny Boy” Brown who looked pretty chuffed to get individual photos with the power couple. (whioch seems to be about the same picvtue mentioned by E!) nothing more.
  • The kbcchannel.tv article again has only a single sentence, apparently about the same picture.
To qualify a topic as notable, there generally need to be multiple independent published reliable sources each of which discusses the topic in some detail. Passing mentions or trivial coverage do not help at all, no matter how many of them are found. Nor do directory entries or fan pages. Detailed independent coverege is needed. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Article decline - support with next steps

All,

Need a support with a decline on this article. draft:Ravi Venkatesan.

Firstly, I understand that there are an inordinate number of requests similar to mine that this team would be getting on a daily basis. But, that said - please allow me to state some facts.

Notability

1. Industry: The person under question is a seasoned senior industry veteran in the Indian market. He has been the Co-Chairman of the Board of Infosys ltd (one of the largest Indian technology services firm), CEO / Chairman of Microsoft India, Chairman of the Board of Bank of Baroda (one of the largest Public Sector Banks in India - top 5 in the country by market capitilization), and Chairman of Cummins ltd. All of these by themselves make him an Industry leader of repute.

2. Government: In addition, he is currently driving the efforts of the Government task force for revival of MSME (micro, small, and medium enterprises), particularly in response to the COVID19 pandemic impact on these enterprises.

3. Venture Capital: He is also a venture capitalist with two leading early stage investment funds, contributing in part to the VC led funding boom that is currently being seen in India.

All of the points above satisfy the notability elements of the question.

Significant Coverage / Reliable Sources

Sources / coverage have spanned the following types of mediums.

1. Newspapers - Prominent Indian newspapers - e.g. Indian Express, Livemint, Economic Times

2. Citations from NGOs - e.g. Rockefeller Foundation

3. Links to Opinion articles / books - e.g. Economic Times, Amazon.

Regarding a statement in the templatized note that has been provided, the coverage in #1, #2, and #3 above are more than passing mentions.


Next Steps

Require assistance from this group on the specific edits that are required before this article can be approved. While appreciation of geographic context is not necessarily required for realizing that this person qualifies as a subject of interest, I am happy to add any additional context required. Kaisertalk (talk) 16:22, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Kaisertalk, Accepted I saw your request. I disagree with the prior reviewer, which is absolutely fine. I chose to submit for re-review on your behalf.
Reviewers are human beings with different opinions. That is quite reasonable. Our role as reviewers is to seek to ensure that an article will not immediately be subject to one of our deletion processes when it is accepted. That is why we push it back to the author. We want to accept articles. I decided to accept yours. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Calliopejen1: Many thanks. Much appreciated. Kaisertalk (talk) 16:39, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Genetics Discussion For Castes In South Asia

Hi Guys,

I am a new user to Wikipedia and recently added some information about a South Asian caste/ethnic group (Gujjars) with valid sources and references, however, another user has stated to me that WT:INB does not allow the discussion of genetics for individual castes which does not make sense to me, furthermore on WT:INB I did not find any discussion saying it is not allowed to add genetic information for individual castes. This article is within the scope of WT:INB as well as WikiProject Pakistan where the discussion of genetic information is allowed on articles. If there is a rule in Wikipedia that says such discussions are not allowed then I will remove the post otherwise if there is not then Wikipedia has to take some responsibility and acknowledge that they are suppressing the freedom of information which is the right of every human being.

My question is why are we not allowed to talk about genetics for individual castes as long as it is well referenced and without bias?

Talk Gujjar Page: Talk:Gurjar#Genetics

India WikiBoard: Wikipedia_talk:Noticeboard_for_India-related_topics

The user who stated genetics discussion is not allowed: User:Sitush

Quote:

We do not do genetics in articles about individual castes. This has been discussed at WT:INB. Donnyexcellence (talk) 18:04, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I was a bit gruff with you, sorry. Was trying to do too much on too many articles. There are past discussions listed using this search for the noticeboard I mentioned (WT:INB), which is the central noticeboard for the Wikipedia India Project. - Sitush (talk) 18:10, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Sitush: if there is a Wikipedia policy that articles should not mention genetic information on individual castes, please provide an actual link to it. If you can't provide a link, you should withdraw your claim that there is such a policy. Maproom (talk) 19:08, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
you should withdraw your claim that there is such a policy Maybe I'm blind but I see no claim that there is a policy. That there is such a consensus is made pretty clear in this discussion from last year, for instance. --bonadea contributions talk 19:19, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, Bonadea. What's more, it is a consensus derived from discussions that include some contributors who have a pretty extensive knowledge of the caste topic area. I've no idea what you have been looking at, Maproom, but it doesn't appear to be anything I've said. - Sitush (talk) 19:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
What I would like to add is that this article is also part of the Pakistan Board and they have made no such objection to the discussion of genetics. If this article was solely an Indian Board article then I would understand however it is not. I think it is not fair for one board to have so much of an influence on certain articles. Again, please provide some evidence where board discussion decisions have to be fully implemented on all articles relating to India? Donnyexcellence (talk) 20:49, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
The Pakistan noticeboard/project is barely active, certainly by comparison with the India noticeboard/project. Since all of these genetics studies tend to be delving into deep history, when it was all India/before Pakistan even existed, I think the chances of a rational counter-argument from the Pakistan project are fairly slim. Have you actually read the discussions? Can you see what the issues are in relation to using such sources? All of the tribes of Pakistan will experience the same problems. - Sitush (talk) 21:01, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Think we are getting side tracked now. I read the discussion one of the main points was that the genetic studies are always changing but this is not really an issue more like an excuse. Again please give evidence where every single article relating to India on Wikipedia has to abdide by the 'rules' set by the India Wiki Board members. If you don't know then please don't say, we don't need to know what you think about what the Pakistan board will say. When they reply, they will reply and if you look at other articles e.g. Burusho People they have a genetics section on the page. Donnyexcellence (talk) 21:32, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

WP:CONSENSUS. Given how familiar you are with formatting, projects etc, I should imagine you already know of it . - Sitush (talk) 21:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

@Donnyexcellence: No such thing as "rules being set by members of the India Board" exists. Discussions are open to all interested parties, many of whom are editors with a great deal of experience. As a user who just showed up yesterday, creating Draft:Genetics Of Gujjars after being advised of that consensus by Sitush at Talk:Gurjar#Genetics, bringing it here, and having it clarified by others, to me seems somewhere between a waste of time and disruptive. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Damn you guys sure responded fast to the article which I proposed (Genetics of Gujjars) , Wiki was saying it would take approximately 6 weeks to be reviewed, but you guys reviewed it overnight. Seems like there is an another agenda behind this. BJP IT Cell hard at work, well done guys! For anyone wondering think about it, why are they trying so hard to surpress this information in India about various castes genetics, its because they are trying to push this OIT (Out Of India Theory) which is garbage and they know it. Every single caste in India is unique and they are all different from eachother, but the Indian government is trying to push this 'We are all Indians' agenda. In the end the truth will prevail!!!! Donnyexcellence (talk) 08:23, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I would be surprised if anyone contributing to this thread or the draft review, other than you and me, even knows what you mean by BJP IT Cell and Out of India Theory. Your opinion that there is some sort of political shenanigans going on also does not align with the edit histories of those experienced contributors who commented in the WT:INB discussions mentioned above. - Sitush (talk) 08:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
hame ajadi miligee ! btw im Gujjar from Rajasthan where we are discrimintated by the Indian government !Donnyexcellence (talk) 08:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a place to right great wrongs. Bishonen | tålk 10:50, 6 July 2020 (UTC).
I apologise to Sitush. He did not claim that there was a Wikipedia policy on discussion of genetics for individual castes. (I formed that mistaken impression from reading the OP's posting with insufficient care). But there is a Wikipedia policy that discourages the use of primary sources, such as the research paper that the OP wanted to cite. Maproom (talk) 17:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Is this correct?

"Tilden was, and remains, the only candidate in American history who lost a presidential election despite receiving a majority (not just a plurality) of the popular vote. After a first count of votes, Tilden won 184 electoral votes to Hayes' 165, with 20 votes unresolved." What about Hillary Clinton 2016? ==

 97.127.158.194 (talk) 17:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. The Teahouse is for answering questions about how to edit Wikipedia, not for general factual questions. The Wikipedia reference Desk addresses those. However, I believe that Clinton, like soem other US presidential candidates, got a plurality but not a majority of the popular vote. (There were some third-party candidates.) DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Clinton got 48% of the vote in 2016, not a majority. RudolfRed (talk) 17:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Upload additional photos and edits to Karl Groeger article?

Hello, I am the second cousin of Karl Groeger. I live in Eugene Oregon. When Karl's mother Frieda died in Chicago in 1975, I received all of her documents including all personal correspondence with Karl Jr prior to his execution. I am having a rather hard time following all of your citation templates etc. Also cannot figure out how to upload two additional photos to this article. Thank you

Intelife13 (talk) 14:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC) Intelife13 (talk) 14:42, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Karl Gröger
Hello, Intelife13 and welcome to the Teahouse. You have a conflict of interest in regard to this article, but you have very properly disclosed it on your user page and on Talk:Karl Gröger, so that should not be a problem. If you are making any possibly controversial edit, you should consider using {{Request edit}} on the article talk page, to have it reviewed by an uninvolved editor.
As to photos, the problem there is copyright. The copyright in a photo is normally owned by the photographer. If these were family photos taken by a family member, you or another family member may have inherited the copyright and be able to release them under a free license and thus upload them to Wikimedia Commons using the commons upload wizard. If they were taken by someone else, such as a professional photographer, that person or thst person's heir(s) will own the copyright, unless the picture has fallen into the public domain (which is possible but not strongly likely, depending on the details). Finding the copyright owner and getting a release may be impossible or very hard. In that case Wikipedia can only use the pictures under a claim of fair use. That means that all of the criteria must be satisfied. It is in my view not unlikely that such an image would qualify, but the details will matter a lot. If you wish we can start a conversation on your talk page or on Talk:Karl Gröger, to discuss further if these photos can be uploaded and used.
As to documents such as personal correspondence, unless they have been published by a reliable source, Wikipedia cannot use them, nor can they be cited as sources in a Wikipedia article. It might be that a historian writing about your cousin would be interested, or that Yad Vashem would be interested. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello again...to respond to your concerns, I did review the upload wizard guidelines. The photos I am attempting to upload fall into two acceptable categories 1. Taken by a family member. 2. " Photos of a certain age" These are from WWII and I believe are in the public domain. I hope that satisfies Wiki requirements.

Intelife13 (talk) 16:13, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Intelife13: You're entering one of the hardest areas of Wikipedia editing.... Image copyright for old family photos is dreadfully complicated. Re: "photos of a certain age", have these photos ever been published and if so when/where? Most photos taken in World War II actually are copyrighted, believe it or not. There are some limited exceptions though I doubt they would apply for your photos. Re: "taken by a family member", which family member? Are they living or dead? If dead, what year did they die? Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Intelife13 I am not an admin on commons. You can ask at Commons:Village pump/Copyright if these photos would be conSIDERD public domain under us law. But unpublished works are generally protected until 70 years after the death of the author (photographer) or 120 years after creation when the author or the author's death date is unknown. There are some exceptions. See this well known chart for key details. If the photographer died in 1949 or before, the photo would be PD. There are more complexities if the work was ever published. The chart covers them. I would be surprised if there was a general acceptance of "Family photos" on commons, regardless of dates. But feel free to upload to commons and see if anyone challenges the images, or (better, IMO) to ask at the link above first. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Juliet Nalukenge

Juliet Nalukenge is a Female Ugandan Football Player at Kawempe Muslim School Women's Football Club and the Crested Cranes.

@Kimcephas: Welcome to the teahouse. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hannibal

Hello,

I would like to know how to change the picture of hannibal in the https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hannibal article

the picture is not accurate as it is a statue of a man of european decent when hannibal was an african man. many articles online have pictures that are more suitable and I would like to know how i can change the picture Khrysvic (talk) 14:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Khrysvic: Most pictures online are copyrighted (not freely licensed) and therefore not suitable for Wikipedia. I'd recommend looking for a picture you prefer at https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Main_Page (Wikipedia's media repository), then starting a discussion about the image at Talk:Hannibal. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:13, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

thanks

Hannibal was probably of Canaanite (Semitic) descent, rather than European or African. See the first paragraph of Hannibal#Background_and_early_career.   Maproom (talk) 15:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hannibal was born in Carthage and Carthage was in African, therefore he was African. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khrysvic (talk • contribs) 18:08, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

That is true in a sense Khrysvic, but that does not mean that he was of what we now call "African" or "Negro" ethnicity or appearance. I don't think any of the statutes of him now known were created during his life. In any case classical statutes often showed an idealized rather than a realistic version of the subject. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:16, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

hmm, it is like saying even though Gengis Khan was born in Asia, that it does not mean he looks like Asian people. if he was born in Africa to African parents, there is no way he was anything but Black, wouldnt you agree? the amount of paintings depicting him as white are obviously innacurate, just like the picture of Cesare Borgia that is used to depict Jesus as white, when there was no europeans in the middle east.Are we trying to depict accuracy on Wikipedia or not? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khrysvic (talk • contribs) 18:32, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Khrysvic: As far as I can remember, Egypt is in Africa, hence most of Egyptians are born in Africa. Are they all, or most of them, 'African' in appearance? --CiaPan (talk) 18:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Indeed, however, it is a known fact that the current Egyptians are decents of arab invaders that took over North Africa less than 300 years ago. The original Egyptians were African Looking and the hot weather in those times would not even allow anyone with a lighter skin tone to survive without getting melanoma. so for Hannibal who was born in Carthage (now Tunisia) in 247 BC it is impossible that he looked nothing but African — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khrysvic (talk • contribs) 19:12 6 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Wikipedia attempts to represent what published reliable sources say about any topic. It is certainly true that not all people who live in Africa are Black -- the residents of Egypt come to mind. At this point, further discussion could occur on Talk:Hannibal. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

As mentioned above, the current Egyptians are Arab invaders, and they came way after the era of Pharoahs etc. the african population back then was all black so for Hannibal Born in Africa 247 BC, its impossible that he looked nothing but black and even more impossible that any of the statues or pictures depicting him as white, could be even close to accurate — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khrysvic (talk • contribs) 19:12 6 July 2020 (UTC)

'Current Egyptians came way after the era of Pharaohs', you say. So those Egyptians depicted on paintings from Pharaoh's era are all Black - is this correct? --CiaPan (talk) 19:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Carthage was a Phoenician colony, and there is a lot of interesting information in Ancient Carthage about the different peoples who lived there. In any case, please go to Talk:Hannibal to continue this discussion, but you should start by reading the archives of that talk page, where the question has been brought up several times; as you will see, it is not really possible to draw any definite conclusions about Hannibal's genetic heritage or skin colouring. --bonadea contributions talk 19:35, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Can anyone help me?

My page was started long ago, by who I don't know. I could use some help now in editing my page to bring it up to date. I tried to do it myself, but I was immediately blocked. I tried writing an admin for help but got no reply.

Here's my name (also the name of my page): Jeffrey Skinner (poet)

Can anyone help update for me? I'd rather not learn a complex bunch of stuff to do this myself; if I have to I'll probably leave it as is. But it would be nice if someone could help. Thanks. Jtskin01 (talk) 19:38, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Jtskin01: There's a lot to unpack in your question. I'll start with the first issue I see. Maybe we can deal with that, and then address your question a bit later. I don't see any evidence of you being blocked, or trying to write an admin for help. Do you have another account other than User:Jtskin01? Calliopejen1 (talk) 19:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I presume that Jtskin01 means his edit was reverted, which it was, because the information added was unsourced. Jeffrey, if you'd like to set out changes or additions (with accompanying references) to the article, the best thing to do is to follow the instructions at WP:COIREQ to do so on its talk page. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:52, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Jtskin01 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would correct you in that it is not your Wikipedia page, but a Wikipedia article about you. You don't have any special rights to it as the subject, but your input is welcome. You can visit Talk:Jeffrey Skinner(there is no "poet" in the article title) and offer your suggestions for improvements on the article talk page. To increase the chances that other editors will see your comments(aside from the editors that might follow that article), you can make your suggestions as a formal edit request, but it's not mandatory.
Your edit history indicates no edits to any user talk pages such as that of an administrator; perhaps you sent an email, but most users prefer to conduct Wikipedia business on Wikipedia. I don't see any indication that your have ever been blocked, either. 331dot (talk) 19:51, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello, Jeffrey. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have got the wrong idea about Wikipedia: the article Jeffrey Skinner is Wikipedia's article about you, not "your page", and it is not up to you to update it. Having said that, Wikipedia likes its articles to be factual according to the sources, and you are welcome to suggest edits on the article's talk page; but an editor is unlikely to carry out those suggestions unless they are supported by reliable published sources. In fact, the article is lacking citations to sources independent of you - Wikipedia is basically not interested in what the subject of an article says, or wants to say, about themselves, only in what people unconnected with them have chosen to publihs about them, so the most valuable thing you could do would be to provide citations of a couple of places where that has happened. At present the article does not establish that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and unless suitable sources are added, it is likely to get deleted. See WP:AUTOPROB for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 19:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Beginning of an article

how do i make my own articles

@Bdetfehigj: You can use the Article wizard. Before you start, you might want to read WP:YFA beforehand to spped things up. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 12:00, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
As explained in Help:Your first article. -- Hoary (talk) 12:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Bdetfehigj: Please take the time to read and become familiar with the links posted for you at your "user talk page" (User talk:Bdetfehigj#Welcome!). Remember that Wikipedia is supposed of service to humanity, and editors here contribute toward that end. Any contributions should be made with the aim of improving the encyclopedia for its readers and other editors. Creating an article from scratch is one of the hardest things to do, taking many hours to days of work to do well, and requiring a fair amount of experience and knowledge of finding notable topics about which to write, finding independent and reliable sources, citing those sources, carefully editing for spelling, grammar, and tone, formatting per the Manual of Style, etc. Most people need at least a few months and hundreds of edits to existing articles to learn these things well enough to be able to write an article that will be accepted. Please do consider finding existing articles to improve to help you on that journey. You may also find this interactive game-like tutorial useful. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Christian Delton Kacher

Is there's a way to submit this draft for review, I'm not the creator but it happens to meet drafts with the same situation and don't know how to submit it through AFC. Thanks 103.255.6.3 (talk) 20:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

This was created as an article by a user who has been blocked for undisclosed paid editing; it was then moved to a draft, so that it would go through AFC. Anybody may submit it by inserting {{subst:submit}} (with the double curly brackets) at the top. There are a lot of references that are clearly not both substantial and independent, but I haven't bothered to toil through them to see if there are actually some which will establish notability. --ColinFine (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Sidebar's Journal Impact Factor needs updating -- cannot see how to access that area

The "Publication Details" in the box to the right of this page needs the Impact Factor updated (I have updated it in the text of the main body of the article today): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neuromodulation_(journal)

Many thanks. Negarc (talk) 20:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Negarc. You'll see it as a paramter of the {{infobox journal}}, if you pick "Edit" at the top of the page. It seems odd to me that we should accept a piece of marketing information from the publisher's website, and not require an independent source for it. --ColinFine (talk) 21:05, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

July 6th 2020

What do you do when you see a typo and you try to fix it, but when you cite a reliable source there is none because the the same typo is on every movie website ILoveCocomelon (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC) ILoveCocomelon (talk) 13:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@ILoveCocomelon: what do you mean "every movie website"? Do you mean the same error is on every Wikipedia page about those movies, or the error is on every external website you come across? If the latter, you have to live with it and cite the sources. It would help if you were to link to examples of what you're talking about. (There's no need to start a new thread each time (see two above this one) - just edit the reply and ask follow-up questions. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:54, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
ILC wants to change the name of an actor at The Bad News Bears but has not yet found a reference with the spelling ILC believes is correct. David notMD (talk) 13:56, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@ILoveCocomelon: Please use a concise and descriptive "Subject/headline" for posts on talk pages. It should not duplicate existing sections on the page (as you did here). Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Published Edits not Saving

Hello, we are making edits on the Zanker Recycling Wikipedia page but not of the edits are saving, yet it says "changes saved" after we click "published edits". What can we do to make sure our edits are being published? We work on the marketing team for Zanker Recycling and we need to update our information. Zankerrecycling wiki (talk) 17:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Zankerrecycling. Your edits have indeed been saved to Zanker Recycling. Thus thy are as "published" as any Wikipedia article.
However some of them have been reverted.
Moreover, as a marketign employee, yuou are considered a paid editor. You must make the appropraite declaration before editing the article further. Moreover, your user name is improper. Wikipedia accoutns must be for indivciduals, not companies or5 groups, and must not imply othreewise, and promotional editing is not acceptable under any name. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:18, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
This user= has been blocked indefinitely for username violation and promotional editing. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Four different editors reverted content as promotional. the article is woefully under-referenced, and now, nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 22:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Which version of English is the norm?

This is just a quick question, i am Relatively new but on the Typo Team & usually only fix grammatical errors or help clarify convoluted answers. What i wanted to ask is; what is the accepted spelling protocol, should i use American or British English, for example Honor as opposed to Honour ETC & what is the general consensus among the community? Thank you for your time, Knowledge Knowmad (talk) 22:29, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Knowledge Knowmad, and welcome to the Teahouse. The general consensus, and indeed the stated policy, is that there is no default style of English on Wikipedia. See WP:ENGVAR. Each article should retain the style with which it was initially created, unless a change is determined by local consensus, usually on the article talk page. In general, articels on specifically US topics will use US English, articles on UK topics will use UK English, articles on specifically Indian topics will use Indian English, and so on. Articles that do not have strong ties to any particular country (for example about a topic in mathematics or science) will, use what ever style of English the first contributor chose. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:36, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh ok, thank you DES also if if someone is Deliberately messing up my Edits to stupid words like replacing Steam train with Ice-Cream for example what should i do?  Knowledge Knowmad (talk) 22:43, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

That sounds like vandalism although without seeing the actual edit I hesitate to make a definite statement. Any edit clearly intended to introduce inaccuracy or reduce the quality of the encyclopedia is vandalism. When you see vandalism, whether to your own edits or to any article, you should:
  1. Revert or correct it, with a descriptive edit summary.
  2. Warn the editor who committed vandalism. Twinkle makes this easy, but you may place the appropriate warning template manually on the editor's user talk page. ({{uw-vandalism1}} thru {{uw-vandalism4}})
  3. If the vandalism is persistent and recent, or particularly serious and recent, report it at WP:AIV following the instructions on that page. Generally do not report until after a user has been given a 4th-level warning and has persisted in vandalism, but if you think the situation is serious enough to request an admin to take action sooner, you may use your judgement.
I hope this is helpful. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 22:55, 6 July 2020 (UTC)\

Draft:Annoying

How to remove the "draft:" at the start of the title? YTBirdonWIKI (talk) 00:07, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi YTBirdonWIKI. I think you might be misunderstanding what a Wikipedia article is intended to be. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Help:Your first article for some general ideas. While I believe your intentions are good, none of the drafts you're working on are suitable (at least in this stage in their development) to be upgraded to a Wikipedia article. It looks like you're trying to create dictionary-type entries for certain terms, but that's not really what Wikipedia is intended for as explained in Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a dictionary. Technically, removing the "draft" from a page name is not too complicated to do, but doing so at this time will almost certainly lead to those particular pages being immediately tagged/nominated for deletion. You may, however, continue to work on the drafts if you think you can bring them up to article standards and then submit them to Wikipedia:Articles for creation for review when you think they're ready. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:33, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@YTBirdonWIKI: You're better off adding any missing info to the Harp seal article in Harp seal#Reproduction and Development. The term "beater" is already there - there's not likely enough for a content fork. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 00:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hondon B Hargrove, Author of Buffalo Soldiers of Italy (Black Author)

Dear Wikipedia...I am a new user but I would love, love love it if anyone would upload information on this wonderful, intelligent deceased individual.. There is lots of information on him on the internet and I am in contact with his daughter Loretta Gadson. His name is Hondon B Hargrove. Also you may know more than I on what is allowed. <redacted>Pajober (talk) 00:00, 7 July 2020 (UTC) Patti Berger §

Hi Pajober. Please take a look at Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything and Wikipedia:Notability (people) for some general information that you might find helpful. Someone having lots of information about them on the Internet might indicate the person is Wikipedia notable, but not in each and every case. The type/quality of coverage received pretty much always matters more than the amount of coverage received. If you think Hargrove meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines, you can start a draft about him and submit it to Wikipedia:Articles for creation when you think it's ready. An AfC reviewer will assess the draft and decide whether it meets Wikipedia's standards for articles. If you're not sure whether Hargrove is Wikipedia notable, perhaps someone at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Arts and entertainment can help clarify that for you.
If you've never written a Wikipedia article before, then you might find it a bit harder to do than it seems. There are various policies and guidelines that need to be met and also formatting things that need to be done. You can find some general advice on this in Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners. You might also want to take the Wikipedia:Adventure to actual see how certain types of edits are made and how certain policies and guidelines are applied.
Finally, if you've been in contact with Hargrove's daughter, please also take a look at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest. Depending upon the extent of your contact with her, you may have a conflict of interest when it comes to creating an article about her dad. This doesn't mean that you cannot still try to create one, but only that you may have to be extra careful in doing so since editors who have a conflict of interest often have difficulty adhering to relevant policies and guidelines. They often have the best intentions, but their connection to the subject matter sometimes cause them to stray too far outside the lines of what is considered acceptable. You might also want to look at Wikipedia:Ownership of content and Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing for reference and perhaps even suggest that Hargrove's daughter take a look at them as well. Some people mistakenly assume that Wikipedia works like a personal website or a social media account where they have complete editorial control of the content contained on the page. Wikipedia is not like that at all and neither the subjects of articles (or their relatives) or the creators of articles have any real final editorial control of article content. Content is assessed on whether it complies with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, not whether it makes the subject look good or bad, and disagreements over content are going to be expected to be resolved through Wikipedia:Dispute resolution. In short, Wikipedia articles are written about subjects, not for or on behalf of subjects; so, you might want to make sure that both you and Hargrove's daughter understand before starting a draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:58, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

How to count my non login/ip edits

Hey editors, I want to know how to count the edits of own IP address which I did without login because this is my new phone. I want to know for learning only while I don't have much edits via IP Contribution of 2405:205:B08B:2FD9:5D9A:A232:A773:66A1 . Kindly guide me how to count them in my user profile. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri (Speak🗣️ or Write✍️) 01:03, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@TheChunky: Edits you make while logged out can't be connected to your account. RudolfRed (talk) 01:14, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
RudolfRed Oh, I thought may be it can. — The Chunky urf Al Kashmiri (Speak🗣️ or Write✍️) 01:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Speedrun cites

There are at least a few users who think that the referencing for the article Speedrun is very bad. How would you go about improving it? Bear in mind that this topic doesn't always attract mainstream media attention, so the traditional high quality references are hard to come by. One of the references is to a google doc. I'm guessing that's bad practice, and I have some ideas why, but I'd like another opinion. AshSIreland (talk) 22:48, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello AshSIreland i would be more than happy to Review the article for you and give a second opinion, let me get back to you on it and i will review it in a Few hours or so as my break is almost over at work haha, feel free to send me a message any time you feel the need for a second opinion on a topic, i am always glad to help! Knowledge Knowmad (talk) 22:56, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi AshSIreland, and welcome to the Teahouse. I agree that some internet culture articles are hard to find citations for, which is why Wikipedia's coverage on memes isn't great either. If you find a bad source, I would suggest looking for a better one yourself, and if you can't find one, tag it with Template:Better source needed so another editor can give it a try. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 02:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Regarding translating articles I don't have access to the sources for

I would like to translate ja:人見次郎 (台湾総督府総務長官) → Jirō Hitomi.

He is definitely notable, he held high office under the Governor-General of Korea and even higher office under the Governor-General of Taiwan.

He was Director-General / Civilian Administrator (台湾総督府総務長官). This was basically "Vice Governor-General".[1]

Note that I'm not asking help to find the sources, I haven't tried. I want to know in general, if I see a well sourced article to print sources on e.g. Japanese Wikipedia, or Spanish Wikipedia, the two languages I know well that are likely to have untranslated articles, do I translate it, cites and all, even without checking that the information is in the cites? Do I note this on talk page? Or should such articles not be translated? Psiĥedelisto (talk • contribs) please always ping! 08:39, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ Civil Affairs Handbook: Taiwan (Formosa): June 15, 1944. Office of the Chief of Naval Operations, United States Navy. 1944. p. 72. ISBN 9781258569914.
Like the vast majority of articles in ja:WP, ja:人見次郎 (台湾総督府総務長官) is poorly sourced. There's a list of reference materials, parts of which may or may not back up the assertions in the article; but as for clearly specified references for particular assertions, almost nothing. -- Hoary (talk) 13:08, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Psihedelisto: To answer your question more generally, I don't know that there is a consensus about translating without checking sources. I personally think that it is fine (with the caveat below about taking extra care to avoid copyright violations from foreign-language sources). If I rewrite a sentence in en.wikipedia, I don't check the source unless my rewriting means that I need to check in order to confirm that what I'm writing accurately reflects the source. I often use the same approach for translations, relying on the person who originally wrote the article to have looked at the soruces. Sometimes though, a sentence in another language has a range of meanings in English, and you'd need to go back to the original source to choose among those meanings when you write in English. So that's my approach at least. I will say, like Hoary noted, that other Wikipedias generally do a much worse job of sourcing than the English Wikipedia. Finally, one important note: If sources are available to be checked, it may be a good idea to check them for the purpose of avoiding copyright violations, and also to run the article you're thinking of translating through https://copyvios.toolforge.org/ (though this can find reverse copyright violations, especially for older articles). I've found that a frightening number of Spanish Wikipedia articles are copy/pasted (or inappropriately closely paraphrased) from the sources cited, or from sources not cited. There is nothing more demoralizing than doing a translation, and then having to delete it. And it also really sucks when translated copyright violations are introduced, because it's not easy to sort them out from good content. (Not like you can just paste into Google to check.) So that can be another reason to check sources. Calliopejen1 (talk) 14:07, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Psiĥedelisto: Piggybacking off above: as someone who translates from Japanese and Chinese, I personally think that it's much better to have a shorter article than an incorrect one, so if I can't verify a source, I don't add that sentence in. From my experience, Japanese Wikipedia suffers heavily from poor citations. If you need help verifying something in Chinese, feel free to leave a message in my talk page. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 02:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Updating an existing page - Jack Dempsey

I own an old family photograph of Jack Dempsey with members of my long deceased family preparing to go on a hunting expedition in northern Maine. My long deceased aunt gave me a list of the names of everybody in the photograph when I was a kid. I still have that list, too.

I posted the photo with mention of Dempsey's trips to Maine. I suggested that the trip in my photo was probably around 1924 but unverifiable. I listed the names of everybody in the photo.

It is known that Dempsey came to Maine on several occasions. There was even a dance hall in Moro Plantation with his name.

Anyway, why would my photo be removed? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jack_Dempsey


David Currier David Currier (talk) 02:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi David Currier. You asked about the same thing at Wikipedia:Help desk#Addition to Jack Dempsey page and have received a reply there. I'm not sure there's not really much more that anyone can add to what Arch dude posted, but if there's still something you don't understand you can respond to ask for further clarification in that discussion thread. Generally, when you post something on Wikipedia, it's best to try and keep everything in one place because it keeps discussions from fragmenting and avoids redundancy. All Wikipedia editors are volunteers so sometimes you might not get an immediate response, but generally when you post a question either at the Help Desk or the Teahouse someone will eventually get to it. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:55, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Ida Silverman

 2601:199:C300:9CF0:CC80:3F7D:873E:365C (talk) 20:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, can I help you with anything? Do you have trouble making an account? -TheFibonacciEffect (talk) 21:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
[I have wikilinked the query title as a courtesy for those interested. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.56.20 (talk) 08:07, 7 July 2020 (UTC)]

How to add an image copyright tag I have uploaded an image to Wikipedia (not Commons) then added it to the infobox in the article Ruth Clayton. I had determined that the correct copyright tag is {{Non-free biog-pic}}, but I wasn't prompted to add it during the upload process or while inserting the image into the article. Have I missed something? I know this is an important aspect of image use and risks deletion if incorrectly done. What should I do? Many thanks! Ulrich131 (talk) 08:29, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Ulrich131, simply go to the file page and click on the edit source button, then add the tag under image licensing. There is an option to do this in the file wizard by clicking the "other licenses" button. After taking a look, I see that someone seems to have already added the tag for you. — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 08:37, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Enquiry

I have created over 5 articles that has not been verified or allowed to be at the main space. I would like to ask why this is happening to me. James Moore200 (talk) 09:26, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, James Moore200 and welcome to the Teahouse! The reasons why your drafts were declined have been left by users on your talk page - I suggest that you read them. In general, it seems that the subjects you were writing about are not notable. This means that there are not enough reliable sources about them to create an article. If you can find more reliable, independent sources on your topics, feel free to add them to the article. For more info on notability, see WP:N. Giraffer (munch) 09:54, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Changes to ILM

Changes to Industrial Light & Magic Hi i'm trying to edit this particular page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Industrial_Light_%26_Magic I added some titles that weren't in the filmography section, I don't know who this David Tornheim is, he said that i have done disruptive editing to this article which I haven't. Please not I have Autism all i just want to do is just edit the page, add the additional filmography titles which are listed on their IMDB page https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?companies=co0072491 ZTR2001 (talk) 10:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi @ZTR2001: Unfortunately, IMDB is not accepted as a reliable source (as you can see at WP:RSP#IMDb). The content on IMDb is made by random people from all over the internet (just like Wikipedia, which we don't accept as a reliable source either).
It's best to assume that David Tornheim is trying to help, even if there's been some disagreement. If you could find another source that shows that those movies had work from ILM, you could cite that instead. ILM's own website would be appropriate, as would any professionally-published mainstream academic or journalistic sources. Ian.thomson (talk) 10:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi @ZTR2001: Welcome to the Teahouse, i understand that you have Autism and in fact i also have it ( as you can see from my user-page) but i can see from the edit, that you have removed some sources, maybe its a mistake?. your edit has been reverted by @David Tornheim: because you are not allowed to remove reliable sources without a reason, i think it is possibly a mistake and you did not meen to remove them, so next time please preview your edit before publishing it. Thank you Trains2050 (talk) 10:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Is eMachines eOne importers have made anything else

According to LGR, Sotec and Daewoo are both importers who created EOne Computers. Is it true that is reliable for this redirects. Tell me if you know and I search it using Google. ACQ322Acuity   (answer me) 10:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Apollo C. Quiboloy fans: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, i can not understand the full question but i suggest asking it on the article talk page. Thanks Trains2050 (talk) 11:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Creating a page about my Village

I am trying to create a page about my Village. Shannonvale, Claonkilty, Ireland as no page exists for it but I do not know what steps to take. Any help or advice would be much appreciated. Thanks. AnÚllord (talk) 09:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@AnÚllord: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, i suggest checking this page on how to create an article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Your_first_article. Many thanks Trains2050 (talk) 11:08, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Alphabetical List of Districts of India now ready for publication

Dear fellow Wikipedians, The article is placed under " User : Anupamdutta73/List Dist India 2020" and is ready for publication... Please do the needful..... Cheers...... Anupam Dutta (talk) 16:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC) Anupam Dutta (talk) 16:14, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

User:Anupamdutta73/List Dist India 2020 does not appear to have been submitted to AfC or bypassing AfC, made an article. If submitted to AfC, then decision rests with a reviewer, not with the volunteers who help out here at Teahouse. David notMD (talk) 16:36, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear @David, How do I place it to AfC.... please help... Thanks...... Anupam Dutta (talk) 12:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Infobox image size

Reducing an image size I think that the image box portrait that I put in the article Ruth Clayton would be much better if reduced in size. I tried to do this, but it was reversed by another editor who left me a message that I didn't fully understand. I'm autoconfirmed, but still very much a novice. Any easy to follow instructions that anyone could give me to reduce the size of this image to that of comparable infobox portraits? Very many thanks! Ulrich131 (talk) 10:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, i would suggest contacting the editor who reverted your edit. Thanks Trains2050 (talk) 11:03, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi Ulrich131, and welcome to the Teahouse. We usually don't use thumbnails inside infoboxes because it adds an unnecessary border around the image. Instead, thumbnails are used outside, where we can have a border and a caption underneath. Within an infobox, image sizes are specified with a new parameter, | image_size = . Inside you would specify how large you would want the image. The infobox at Ruth Clayton has been trimmed of unused parameters; I've added the image size parameter in, and you can see a full list of parameters at Template:Infobox academic. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 13:17, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Ulrich131. Many if not most infobox templates seem to be set up to automatically size the infobox image to the size deemed most suitable for the majority of readers according to the type of device they are using to read the article. In other words, instead of fixing the image to one size for all readers, the template seems allow the image to be automatically adjust the size so that it is just as optimal for those who use a computer, those who use a tablet, and those who use a smartphone, etc. For this reason and as also explained in WP:IBI, using the thumbnail syntax in infoboxes is not really considered a good idea. Many infoboxes also have an |image size= parameter which can be used instead to tweak the size if absolutely necessary, but in most cases this isn’t needed. If you feel there are issues with the size of the image, the thing to do would be to discuss them on the article’s talk page and see if others feel the same way and see if some kind of consensus can be reached. — Marchjuly (talk) 13:33, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Submitting a declined article as a stub

Can I change a failed AfS into a stub? I had an article for a semi-governmental not-for-profit organization declined Draft:Thai-German Institute. This is in support of Wikiproject Thailand. It is difficult to get a sufficient number of references in English and I did a lot of research. I am unfamiliar of how and when to just submit stubs. I have submitted several other articles that may also qualify as stubs but not as articles (I would possibly like to convert those as well). Any assistance I can get with this would be very helpful as I could proactively help clear the article submission queue. As you can see from this actual article, Ministry of Industry (Thailand), the articles are for sub-organizations of that main Thai ministoral organization. Ian Korman (talk) 05:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@IanKorman: the standards for stubs are the same as the standards for articles, so you would still have to establish notability the same way (coverages in reliable sources etc.). If something qualifies as an article it qualifies as a stub and vice versa. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Calliopejen1: Thank you. When does someone submit as a stub versus normal submittal? I was thinking from discussion threads that I saw that a stub was created for an article within a Wikiproject that needs help with quality/sources. Regardless, if I have these articles that need assistance should I just leave them in my own personal draft space and ask for assistance in the appropriate Wikiproject? --Ian Korman (talk) 06:04, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
You don't need references in English. The references may be in Thai, German, Esperanto or whatever. -- Hoary (talk) 06:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you Hoary. I will work on the article from that angle within the WikiProject Thailand. I will do my own research on stubs and when to use them. --Ian Korman (talk) 13:56, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Indeed, an article has to be independently notable and/or important to be placed in the mainstream wiki. If you consider your article as notable, continue editing it until you think you have improved it, than either resubmit it or put it into mainstream wikipedia for it to be reviewed (though I advice you submit it for reviewing from a professional).PNSMurthy (talk) 09:26, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

HELP EDITING

Hello am new here, need help starting with editing articles — Preceding unsigned comment added by OffeibeaAku (talk • contribs) 15:52, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@OffeibeaAku: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to make it better. Start with the interactive learning game at WP:ADVENTURE, to learn some of the basics needed for editing. RudolfRed (talk) 15:56, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Is this considered incivility here on Wikipedia?

An editor has contacted me off-wiki about his/her issues with a specific user named Howard the Duck. I actually have the same sentiments. I have noticed in the past few months that this user has been aggressive that he resorts to using all caps (aka shouting) in requested move discussions, particularly in here: Talk:MRT_Line_3_(Metro_Manila)#Requested_move_5_May_2020. The reply at support number 3 here in Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Philippine Railways sounds like mockery. It's like assuming bad faith on all other editors. Now, user orders to close the Wikiproject Proposal that he did not start. Given the lockdowns still in place in the Philippines, it is possible that some editors might not be able to go online frequently.

Is this considered as incivility? What should we do? HiwilmsTalk 08:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hiwilms, if you believe that the user is breaking WP:CIVIL then you should start by asking on their talk page, if the matter escalates, they ignore your message, etc., then it might be best to go to WP:DISPUTE or even WP:ANI if it has become very serious. If the editor has been making personal attacks, threats or harassment, then I suggest reading WP:DWH and continuing from there. As per the "shouting" in the discussions I can't seem to find them; could you please clarify where they are? As well as that, please ping users if you are talking about them! ​ — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 08:33, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
But to be honest, Howard the Duck is quite a well-known user, and I struggle to understand how he would have made such harsh comments, he is actually quite well known for sorting out discussion rationally... — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 08:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
A user has already called out his behavior on Support #3 here Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Philippine Railways#Support.
Meanwhile, his is his reply on the RM discussion:

Then LRT-2 was built, then okay, let's use LRT-1, LRT-2 and MRT-3. I still believe these names, or spelling these out are the WP:COMMONNAME for these train lines.... so back to my point. At some point in history, the government used colors to distinguish the train lines. LRT-2 was purple, MRT-3 was yellow, PNR was orange, I forgot what LRT-1 was. (I think I got the colors mixed up. I'm sure though the LRT-2 was the "purple line".) Earlier, they used "Metrostar" and "Megatren" brandings for MRT-3 and LRT-2, respectively. So if I understand that naming these to "Line #" solves the issue of having to rename these lines every time, that's not the case, more to the fact that IT. IS. SIMPLY. NOT. THE. COMMON. NAME. FOR. THESE. LINES. 03:09, Howard the Duck (talk) 8 May 2020 (UTC)

HiwilmsTalk 08:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Hiwilms, I'm confused as to how that is breaking civility, it is simply emphasising a point. As for what was said on Support 3, that is definitely not breaking civility, in fact it is an opinion I agree with, creating a WikiProject dedicated to railways in the Philipines would be a bit pointless, considering these sorts of things are usually merged into a central country or transport project. As he said If you think creating Wikiprojects solves things, it won't. You shouldn't be supporting a WikiProject just to solve one problem. As TagaSanPedroAko said, but this should be a subproject of WP:TAMBAY than a standalone. and that should be what happens. I don't see that breaking and civility rules, he is simply expressing his opinion. — Yours, Berrely • Talk∕Contribs 08:54, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
I'd like to re-emphasize that this is not the place for behavioral problem complaints. WP:ANI is. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:18, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

About archiving data on my talk page

Hello everyone! I have been trying to make an archive for all the data that is there on my talk page, as it is quite a lot of data and also quite outdated, and also cluttering up the page, and I am concerned about it. I saw on some user's talk page that they have added an archive for the older conversations, I tried to do the same but I am unable to find the exact markup required to make an archive. Please help! :) Red Pen (talk) 10:29, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Vr parashar: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! I personally do not like to archive pages, but this link should help : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Archiving_a_talk_page#:~:text=Archive%20pages%20should%20be%20named,there%20are%20no%20leading%20zeros. Thanks Trains2050 (talk) 10:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Trains2050: Thanks for the fast reply! As I see, many users indeed have not archived even very large talk pages, so I guess for now, I wont be archiving my talk page as it actually does not have so much data, nevertheless thanks a lot for your help! :) Red Pen (talk) 10:43, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Vr parashar: This is totally up to you, but if you want a bot to archive your talk page for you, take a look at User:MiszaBot/Archive HowTo. Just slap some code at the top of your talk page, and a bot will come by every so often to archive your talk page so it doesn't get so hefty. You can also define how large an archive is as well as how many sections you want to keep in your talk page. Keep in mind though that it archives a section at a time, and so far you've got 4 sections only. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 13:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ganbaruby: I am highly elated to find a definite solution to my problem! :D Thanks a lot and yes, for now I have reduced my talk page content but surely I will use your suggested solution in order to keep the talk page organised in future :) Thanks again and have a good day! Red Pen (talk) 14:15, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Trains2050: Please try to use internal links (Wikilinks) when possible. For example, the link given above should be to Help:Archiving a talk page#Technical overview (the ":~:" search feature is ignored by some (most?) browsers). Thanks. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:38, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Help with my first article

Good day to all. I was working on a new article, which is a biography, you can check my sandbox Kingintelectual, but I encountered problem during sign up and was blocked by admins. One of the reasons cited, among others, was that I was promotional. I have promised not to repeat such again. However, this article is something I researched myself, I have the full write up already. Please I will appreciate if you experienced editors and seasoned admins can take a look at the article and offer advice. Thanks Kingintelectual (talk) 05:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Link for convenience:User:Kingintelectual/sandbox, seems it's already moved to Kanu Ikechukwu Anthony by Kingintelectual.- Timbaaa -> ping me 05:59, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
I agree that there are so many things wrong with this article that the proposed deletion should be allowed to go forward, meaning that it will be deleted in a week. New editors are advised to submit drafts to Articles for creation rather than directly moving their draft from sandbox to mainspace, which is what you did. If the article was closer to being valid in content, tone and referencing, the alternative would be to move it to draft status, to allow you to work on it. A better path for you might be to save the content off-site, work on it, and submit to AfC as a new draft. David notMD (talk) 12:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Sentences such as "His Igwebuike philosophy is one that is ground breaking, thoroughly applicable, existentially reasonable, and pragmatically influential considering contemporary emergence of discourses in African philosophy." (unreferenced) have no place in an article about him. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

The "Proposed deletion" tag has been removed, so Kanu Ikechukwu Anthony exists as an article. Other tags have been added. David notMD (talk) 17:53, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Inserting references

Hi

Is this the right way to insert a reference? https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Perrystown&diff=966535463&oldid=953501573

Thanks

Stanstaple (talk) 17:02, 7 July 2020 (UTC) Stanstaple (talk) 17:02, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Stanstaple, and welcome to the Teahouse! In short, no. Take a look at WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:13, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Stanstaple: Regarding reference citing in particular, see WP:ERB. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:04, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks both for pointing me in the right direction. Thanks also User:DESiegel who cleaned up my mess!--Stanstaple (talk) 18:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Knowing what sources to put info from

Sometimes i dont know what to put in articles even when they are the start of something, and i can't find good info to put in them, and i am also new RamenPlays (talk) 16:27, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, RamenPlays, and welcome to the Teahouse.
If you can't find a good source for the info, it is often best not to add it. Or you could post on the article's talk page, saying something like 'I have reason to beleiove that XYZ is true, but I can't find a source for it. Can anyone find a reliable source?" -- perhaps explaining at greater length why you think the info true. As for where to look mfor a source, that depends entirely on the nature of the information involved. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, RamenPlays. The first thing is, if you want to add some information, ask how you know it is is true? If you saw it in a major newspaper, or a book from a reputable publisher, or saw it in a news report on a major network, that's probably all you need. If you heard it in the pub, or saw it on Facebook or YouTube, that is not normally enough, and you need to go digging for sources. (Lots of things we hear from friends, or see on Facebook, are not true, even though they might have been shared thousands of times). There is some information in the Reliable Sources section of WP:REFB; and WP:IRS gives a more extensive explanation. --ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Adding a new submission which has few or no references

I was involved with an orchestra in the 1980's & 90's that was made up of a diverse group of musicians that were dedicated to free improvisation. This group performed with a number of known personalities and major venues and concert halls. I think it would be important to tell its story but unfortunately there are no references available on the web if I am understanding the submission process. Please let me know how to create an entry for this organisation.

Thanks

 Kraw-2015 (talk) 19:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

... would be a waste of time. Please read about verifiability. --David Biddulph (talk) 19:13, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Kraw-2015 and welcome to the Teahouse. If you could find off-line sources, for example magazine or newspaper coverage from the 1980s or 90s (no apostrophe on those in articles by the way), they would do, provided that there are several each of which includes significant coverage and that they are reliable sources. There are online archives for many print newspapers and magazines, some behind paywalls, by the way, but far from all are online. But sourcing there must be to have an article, so don't bother writing this up for Wikipedia until and unless you have the sources already identified. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 20:39, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Whistle-bower Article Deleted

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=List_of_whistleblowers&action=edit&section=6#2010s I tried to post an article on the whistleblower page. Can I ask why this may have been deleted? Karenwhistleblower (talk) 16:06, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

@Karenwhistleblower: The article history shows why your edit was undone, namely "Burgess' does not appear to be a "major" whistleblower case. Also, many details are not corroborated by the cited sources." If you disagree, you can start a discussion at Talk:List of whistleblowers. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Karenwhistleblower: As the editor who reverted your edits, you can see that I had already started a discussion at Talk:List of whistleblowers regarding the list's inclusion criteria before I noticed the FAQ at the top of that talk page that indicates that the What about X...? question was already decided at this RFC (request for comments) wherein it was decided that whistleblowers whose whistleblowing event is already the subject of a Wikipedia article should be included. Karen Burgess' event does not meet these criteria, and so should not be included in the list. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!! 20:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

How to add a not-profit organization to list of Canadian Advocacy Groups

. Hello I would,like to see an organization Nation Rising added to the list of groups advocating and lobbying for Canadians. We are lobbying to have animal ag subsidies shifted to plant based food intended to human consumption, more affordable and healthy plant based food especially for marginalized, as well as funding for farmers to transition out of animal ag...for the environment, Canadians health, and farmed animals, thank you! Www.nationrising.ca 74.127.203.100 (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you should review conflict of interest and paid editing for information on disclosures you must make. Regarding your question, your organization can only be added to the list if it merits a Wikipedia article of its own. That would only be the case if your organization is shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organization. Wikipedia has no interest in spreading the word about your organization, we're just here to write an encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 19:23, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
I looked up the group and don't see any independent media coverage, which suggests that the group would have difficulty demonstrating notability. It would be hard to get an article approved without this notability, per the links 331dot shows above. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 19:56, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Remember, IP user, that promotion of any kind is forbidden on Wikipedia. It makes no difference whether the subject is commercial or non-profit, virtuous or vile, an article about it will be based on what people unconnected with it have chosen to publish about it, not on what the subject says or wants to say. --ColinFine (talk) 21:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Help with my first article

Could someone please who has the time review my article and let me know how I did? Thanks! Brandyfortune (talk) 17:31, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy: User:Brandyfortune/sandbox. You are off to a good start. I suggest you do not submit it yet to Articles for Creation because so much of the content is not referenced. Even if content is true, it does not belong in the article if a reference is not available. Secondly, I am guessing that you are writing about someone you know. If so, a statement describing your connection should be created on your User page. This addresses what Wikipedia calls a Conflict Of Interest (see WP:COI). David notMD (talk) 17:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Just an observation for you, Brandyfortune: I don't mean to come across as negatively critical, but if you look at other biographical articles you'll see that the first sentence sums up why the person is notable and of interest. Put the rest after that, and you're on your way. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Images cc-by-sa

Hi All,

While trying to get an image for an article, I found an image on Flickr with the cc-by-sa license. Please can I request one of the volunteers to help demystify what that means for us to upload the image to the article? Obviously, we don't want to be uploading an image that is in violation of any copyright limits.

The link to the photograph in question is here. Thanks in advance. Kaisertalk (talk) 17:32, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Kaisertalk: Actually, there is conflicting information there. The description says "cc-by-sa", but the icons and the "Some rights reserved" link on the right side say it is "CC BY-NC-SA 2.0", which means no commercial re-use, and would not be suitable for Wikipedia. I would err on the side of caution, assuming the more restrictive (NC) license is correct, and not use it, if only because the copyvio checking bots will likely see that and not the text. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 17:58, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@AlanM1: Got it. Makes sense, thanks. Just for me to keep in mind - NC (non commercial) is something we want to avoid? i.e. Wiki article would be considered commercial? Kaisertalk (talk) 18:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
A Wikipedia article itself would not be commercial, Kaisertalk, but Wikipedia extends to its reusers the right to use its content for any purpose, including commercially. NC licenses are not compatible with that. Also, Wikipedia has in the past made plans to distribute excerpts from Wikipedia, perhaps on DVD, for a fee, which would at least arguably be a commercial use. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:30, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Makes sense, Thanks DESiegel Kaisertalk (talk) 18:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Hey, Kaisertalk, I see the photographer's email is on that photo. There's absolutely nothing stopping you from contacting the photographer directly and asking them to alter the licencing of their image (or upoading a smaller, web-suitable image for us to utilise) if you explain what you want to use it for, and how it needs to have a 'free for commercial re-use licence. I've done that successfully in the past in work-related settings with other people's images on Flickr. The trick is to ask nicely, explain the reason for your request, and say how you really only need a relatively low res image for a Wikipedia article. Highlighting how resolving the conflict between the written text statement of cc-by-sa in the caption, and the copyright link of cc-by-nc-sa might also prompt them to address the discrepancy. Good luck! Nick Moyes (talk) 19:47, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
This is a great idea Nick Moyes. I was actually thinking this to myself, and stopped going down that thread worried if I would be doing something wrong by reaching out. But, this is definitely worth asking, politely, as you point out. One minor clarification, just so that I don't misspeak -- cc-by-sa license is good for us to use on the article, right? Kaisertalk (talk) 19:53, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
By way of minor chuckle, the photographer seems to be well known in his own right with a (lengthier) wiki article of his own Eric_Miller_(photographer) :) While I am at it - will I be violating some rule, if I ask him for his own photograph as well for his article? Thoughts Nick Moyes? Kaisertalk (talk) 20:06, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, Kaisertalk. The critical thing is that the licence must permit 'sharing, even if even for commercial use' (it's that bit which puts so many people and institutions off) There are many variants of the licence -but they're all allowable, e.g. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0/ and https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/4.0/ The only work-around is to assassinate your subject, then you're allowed to use an image under different Wikipedia rules, but please don't tell anyone I told you that! Flattery often works, so yes, you could ask if he has a selfie he's taken of himself. Copyright resides in the photographer, not the subject of the photo (though if it's their camera and they asked another person to take it, my personal interpretation is a lot laxer than the nerds at Wikimedia like to apply. Don't tell them I told you that, either!) Nick Moyes (talk) 20:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
lol. Thanks Nick Moyes. I have dropped the photographer a mail and have asked re: both topics. Let's see. Cheers. Kaisertalk (talk) 22:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Brilliant. Wikipedians need to be far more proactive in their quest for images, and the WMF and their country chapters could do a damn site more to help us engage with and persuade organisations and individuals to release images for public benefit. Do let us know how you get on. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:04, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Weeks-old page not appearing in search engines

Hi, I created the page Trial penalty nearly 7 weeks ago and it still does not appear in search engine results ("trial penalty": Google, Bing; "trial penalty wikipedia": Google, Bing). The best luck I've had is with DuckDuckGo, which displays the page in the sidebar but not in the main list of webpages. I have not had this problem with any of three other pages I've created, and the trial penalty page features a decent amount of content and plenty of references, so I'm wondering if anyone knows what this might be a result of and how it might be resolved. Perhaps something to do with new page review? Thanks. Jaydavidmartin (talk) 22:10, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Jaydavidmartin: I've marked it as reviewed. If that doesn't fix it (in time), then the problem is in those search engines' indexing and not on our end. Ian.thomson (talk) 22:26, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Ian.thomso: Much appreciated. Jaydavidmartin (talk) 22:39, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Jaydavidmartin: New articles by non-autopatrolled editors are supposed to be marked to not be indexed by Google for 90 days, or until they are patrolled, whichever comes first. That keeps poor articles from getting indexed, only to have to be taken down if they are subsequently deleted. BTW - I linked to your article from Plea bargain#Consequences for innocent accused so it's no longer an WP:ORPHAN. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Ronald Graham has passed away

Hello! Can someone change the wiki page for the mathmatician to indicate he has passed on?

Thank you 47.234.193.133 (talk) 17:02, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

They can if there is a published reliable source for the information. There have been a number of attempts to change the page today, but none supported by a reliable source. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:47, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Just saw an update at Graham's page at MAA (Mathematical Association of America) - link here. They seem to have a banner on the homepage as well. RIP if true. Read Graham's books at grad school.Kaisertalk (talk) 19:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
I would definitely regard that as a Reliable Source and encourage the IP to update the article if they wished to, or to leave the url on the talk page for another editor to utilise. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:16, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: At Talk:Ronald Graham#Death Rumours, I was concerned about the MAA's lack of an actual news announcement; only a tweet on the subject that was a retweet of someone who cited Wikipedia, leading me to think that was their source. The AMS has now issued a substantial obit, which I'm inclined to trust. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:11, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft

I have created a few articles now and every time I intend to start by creating a draft, but instead I end up officially publishing the article and then having to move it to draft space. Afterward someone always has to delete the original article. How do I simply create an article in draft space instead of making a mess like this? TipsyElephant (talk) 12:59, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: You can try using the article wizard. It'll create the draft for you, give you some basic information to know before you start your draft, and will insert the necessary templates to have for the draft to go through the Articles for Creation process. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 13:10, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
@TipsyElephant: I believe that if you create an article with the name "Draft:XXX" instead of just "XXX", the page will be created in draft space rather than article space. Deor (talk) 23:03, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
That's true, but the article wizard automatically adds Template:AFC submission to it, which is helpful for drafts. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 02:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

made changes on accident

i accidentally made changes to this website, its not there anymore i apologize. can someone please fix it?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Princess_Charlotte_of_Cambridge 68.48.60.10 (talk) 04:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, i have reverted the edits, thanks Trains2050 (talk) 04:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

made changes on accident to Princess Charlotte of Cambridge page

can someone please fix this page made changes on accident. Princess Charlotte of Cambridge 68.48.60.10 (talk) 04:56, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

i have fixed your edit, thanks Trains2050 (talk) 04:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft ready for publication

Dear fellow Wikipedians, My draft for "Alphabetical List of Districts of India", placed under User: Anupamdutta73/Gen A is ready for publication.
Please note this is a simple list and a subset of "List of districts in India." Adding links will only rob the table of its simplicity... Thank you dear reviewers in advance..... Cheers Anupam Dutta (talk) 06:29, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Convenience link: User:Anupamdutta73/List Dist India 2020.   Maproom (talk) 08:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Maproom, Is it really necessary ? I had finally managed to finally finish the article.. With slow net connection it is very very difficult to work with such tables with so much data.... So please please tell me it is absolutely needed. Thanks & cheers .... Anupam Dutta (talk) 13:25, 6 July 2020 (UTC) Dear @Maproom, I have shifted the article as you had requested.. I still want to know was it necessary..... Thanks in advance Anupam Dutta (talk) 12:19, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Putting aside the question of whether a mysterious "it" was necessary, I see an enormous table of figures, and a sum of zero (0) sources cited for these figures. Exactly where do the figures come from? -- Hoary (talk) 12:41, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Hoary, The article started with the reason and source of all the data... Anupam Dutta (talk) 12:56, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

The article starts by promising "data of all the 739 Districts as per the List of districts of India arranged alphabetically (updated till June, 2020)", but that article seems to have data from 2011 and earlier (as I sleepily skimread it). -- Hoary (talk) 13:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Hoary, Now you have made progress, though small.... Actually In India, Census is taken in the year XXX1. Last census was on 2011 and next one will be in 2021 (if everything goes all right). So 2011 population ( and related data) are the most accurate and verifiable.... Hope my explanation clear all your doubts..... Cheers Anupam Dutta (talk) 13:47, 7 July 2020 (UTC)


Greetings Anupamdutta73. Firstly thanks for reaching out here. Secondly, I think this is definitely a lot of effort in getting this data written up on this article. I am sure as you say, this might not have been easy - particularly with slow internet connections, as your rightly note.
The question that I think Hoary has for you is - what is the source for this data? E.g. Did you end up digitizing some existing physical record, printed manual etc? Alternately, did you refer to a website of some form to generate this table? Noting of this source will be important as with all articles on Wikipedia. Good luck. Kaisertalk (talk) 05:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Dear @Kaisertalk, My article is a subpage of a main article... This is the list of 739 Districts arranged together.... The main article has the list state/Union Territory wise... Anupam Dutta (talk) 05:32, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Dallas College needs new pages renamed

 Dallasuser2408 (talk) 23:12, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

@Dallasuser2408: Can you be more specific about exactly what you want to do please? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello, Dallasuser2408 and welcome to the Teahouse. Just what pages do you think should be renamed please, and to what, adn why. Usually renames are discussed on the talk pages of the article(s) concerned, or on one of them if several related moves are to be discussed. See requested moves for more detail. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:24, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, the following pages need to be moved:

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Dallasuser2408 (talk • contribs) 01:41, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Dallasuser2408 did you supply on the talk pages of any of those articles, or can you supply here, reliable sources showing that those are the commonly accepted names? Note that Wikipedia uses the principle of WP:COMMONNAME and does not title articles based purely on the "official name" when this is different from the comonly used name, as a rule. @Dallasuser2408: DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:27, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
I linked the above titles for convenience and disambiguated Mtn View. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Feedback received on an article CB Insights

All,

I understand that you get this question from multiple folks. But, I wanted to state this here, to seek this forum's guidance. This note is about a page that I created for CB Insights, after seeing that CB Insights does not have an article, while their competitors e.g. Crunchbase and Owler had a wiki article.

Context

CB Insights is one of the top three (by usage and revenue) market intelligence platforms for tracking venture capital, and funding activities for private companies. Link from one of CB Insights' competitors here.

The company is considered a leader in its domain and a simple test would be searching CB Insights on Wikipedia and seeing the number of articles, particularly in the private equity, venture capital domains. Link here.

The company is quite a significant one in the private equity / venture capital / startup investments domain because it fills a void that very few can fill. i.e. market intelligence / venture capital information for private startups. Currently, they are tracking an annual revenue of ~$50 million, and have ~300 employees.

I received an update that the article is marked for deletion because of the following reason

Per WP:NCORP Nothing significantly notable that distinguishes this platform from similar platforms. (proposed by Comatmebro)

Sources

Sources for this article are quite diverse

1. Newspapers and Media: E.g. New York Times, TechCrunch

2. Market Intelligence Trackers: E.g. Crunchbase, Linkedin Company Intelligence

3. Other Advisory Firms: E.g. Pricewaterhouse Coopers

Next Steps

Please can someone help me on how best I can respond to this note to prevent this article from being deleted, and more importantly inputs on next steps towards review / approval. 


Kaisertalk (talk) 04:53, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Kaisertalk! The article has been proposed for deletion as there doesn't seem to be enough coverage about the company. For example, normally the New York Times would be a valuable soruce, but in this case it is just a brief mention of the company without a lot of detail. There only seems be one source with detail, and that is the second TechCrunch article [2]. The community likes to see more in-depth coverage so that the articles can be balanced - one or two articles doesn't give a lot to go on. There are a few days before it can be deleted, so what is needed are articles that provide coverage about CB Insights, rather than working with them or mentioning their data. If you can find some sources along those lines and add them to the article, you can then simply remove the deletion tag - as this one is a "prod" which anyone can say no to it. I wouldn't remove it too early, though, as if someone disagrees it can still be nominated for formal deletion. Thus I generally recommend using the time to address the problems rather than simply removing the tag. - Bilby (talk) 05:04, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Bilby:, I hear you. But, the credibility of the company is high that it is considered amongst the top 2-3 go to sources for anything related to private equity, venture capital funding for private companies. Marking this article for deletion with a statement saying that "Nothing significantly notable that distinguishes this platform from similar platforms.", is not fully accurate. Just to prove the notability of CB Insights, consider this simple table below.
# Source / Media Number of Articles / Citations Link
1 New York Times 840 [[3]]
2 Wikipedia 4,090 [[4]]
3 TechCrunch 1,260 [[5]]


Kaisertalk (talk) 05:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Just because NY Times uses CB Insights as a source with some frequency doesn't mean that they write about CB Insights, which is what counts. I often do searches for "______ is" to give me a clue whether people are writing about a particular topic. The phrase "CB Insights is" has never appeared in the NYT. Calliopejen1 (talk) 05:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Calliopejen1: Thanks for this note. I will definitely get more links. But, seems like this is the challenge for companies such as CB Insights and Crunchbase. E.g. "Crunchbase is" does not appear in the NYT either.
Kaisertalk (talk) 05:57, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Kaisertalk: FYI, the phrase never appearing doesn't mean that CB Insights (or Crunchbase) doesn't qualify for an article. But it does mean that your citation of 840 references to CB Insights in the NYT is probably not a good yardstick. BTW if you object to the deletion of the article, you should remove the proposed deletion tag at the top of the article. Then the article will get a full deletion discussion with community input. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Calliopejen1: Agree on the comparison note. The only reason I make it is that there will be more mentions of CB Insights as a source rather than articles about CB Insights. E.g. there will be more articles in the Washington Post quoting New York Times than articles about New York Times. I am just super confused when the deletion message says "Per WP:NCORP Nothing significantly notable that distinguishes this platform from similar platforms."
Pardon me, if I ended up using this forum as a debate for the article. I didnt mean to do that. I know that this is a volunter led discussion board and I want to be respectful of that.
In the meantime, @Calliopejen1: wanted to check if this deletion tag would pause the 'review' that is still pending on this page as a part of the New Page Patrol. Please let me know if I should do something different. Kaisertalk (talk) 06:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Kaisertalk: I've clicked the "patrolled" button so that step is complete, if that's what you're referring to. The person who proposed the article for deletion with the tag is likely to open a full deletion discussion, though. There are no more new-page type processes that need to occur. FYI, I tagged the article with a notability tag. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:38, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks @Calliopejen1: Yes, 'patrolled' was the term I was looking for, and used 'review' instead. :) Is there something that I need to do when the deletion discussion starts or is this something that is taken care by the larger community? Kaisertalk (talk) 06:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Kaisertalk: The more important thing shouldn't wait for the deletion discussion -- find good sources ABOUT the company and add them to the article. When the deletion discussion begins, you can chime in with your reasons to keep the article. But really it's going to come down to whether good sources are in the article. Calliopejen1 (talk) 06:53, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Calliopejen1: Sounds good, thanks much. Kaisertalk (talk) 07:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

How to create a page

 86.169.40.78 (talk) 07:47, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 86.169.40.78. The word "page" can have a number of meanings when it comes to Wikipedia. If you'd like to know more about how to create a Wikipedia article, please take a look at Help:Your first article and Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything for some general information. If you're refering to something other than an article, then someone can probably give you some more specific advice if you can clarify what type of page you want to create. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:56, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Can anyone help me

Is BookMyShow liable source as a reference for new article ??? Bijoyonline30 (talk) 13:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Bijoyonline30. No, a ticket agency (just like a bookseller) simply reuses promotional information that the show or book has given them. It only serves to Verify that the show actually exists, but it does nothing to demonstrate Notability - which is the key criterion if you're trying to create a new article. Similarly, user reviews on these sites are also not acceptable sources, whereas published reviews by news media outlets with proper editorial control are. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:49, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Hey Nick Moyes , thanks for your reply. I have another question. Is Google knowledge pannel is a liable source as a reference for new article ???? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijoyonline30 (talk • contribs) 13:56, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Bijoyonline30: No, Google's knowledge panel is not a reliable source (liable has a different meaning) since it is not verified, fact-checked, or even created by humans directly – it simply gathers data from other sources (including Wikipedia) automatically, often incorrectly. Please see those links for more information. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:20, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Can anyone tell me which news source is liable for Odisha State in India ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijoyonline30 (talk • contribs) 06:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi Bijoyonline30. What you should be looking for are the things described in Wikipedia:Reliable sources (please note it's "reliable" source, not "liable" source). Generally, a reliable source is something which is considered to have a failry strong reputation of editorial oversight (i.e. multiple persons are involved fact checking and verifying the content the source publishes). In general, major newspapers, magazines, book publishers, TV stations, etc. often have in-house staff which check the content being published to make sure it's not anything which is going to lead to serious problems for the publisher. This doesn't mean that mistakes are never made, but it does mean that more of an effort tends to be made to try and avoid such mistakes than perhaps in the case of a less established source. Since you appear to be trying to source content related to India, perhaps you should try asking for help at WT:INDIA. Maybe one of the members of that WikiProject can help you find the sources you need. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:46, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your reply. It is really helpful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijoyonline30 (talk • contribs)

Is IMDb reliable source for new article ??? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijoyonline30 (talk • contribs) 10:45, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Bijoyonline30 This should help you Wikipedia:Reliable sources, and no, IMDb is not a reliable source. good day :) Red Pen (talk) 10:49, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you . This is really hepful — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bijoyonline30 (talk • contribs) 08:00, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

New User - struggling to create company page

Hi - I am trying to create a page for the company I work for (well-known, lots of public references, was surprised there wasn't already a wikipedia page). I am going through the steps to note that I have a conflict of interest in writing the article and I get as far as here:

You do not have permission to create this page, for the following reason: The page title or edit you have tried to create has been restricted to administrators at this time. It matches an entry on the local or global blacklists, which is usually used to prevent vandalism.

If you receive this message when trying to edit, create or move an existing page, follow these instructions: 

       Any administrator can create or move this page for you. Please post a request at the Administrators' noticeboard.
       You may also contact any administrator on their talk page or by email.
       Be sure to specify the exact title (especially by linking it) of the page you are trying to create or edit, and if it might be misunderstood (for example, an article with an unusual name), consider explaining briefly what you want to do.
       If you wrote any text, save it temporarily on your computer until you can edit the page.

Thank you. Woomorge (talk) 02:07, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Woomorge and welcome to the Teahouse. The page you attempted to create had been protected (aka "salted") so that it could not be created except by an Admin. Without knowing which page it was, i can't tell you why, but most often this happens when a page is deleted for promotion or for lack of notability and is then repeatedly recreated without seriously addressing the issues.
Do note that articels about a company should normally pass WP:NCORP, which demands multiple independent published reliable sources, each of which covers the topic in some detail. Directory entries, press releases, news based on press releases, and passing mentions do not help at all, no matter how many of them there are or how reliable the places they were published. Do you think you have that sort of coverage at hand? What article did you want to create, anyway? DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 02:52, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Woomorge, and welcome to the Teahouse. The thing to do is first, to declare your status as a paid editor; secondly to read your first article, and understand that creating a new article is one of the hardest tasks in editing Wikipedia, and made immeasurably harder if you have a conflict of interest, as you do; thirdly to look for sources suitable to establish that the company is notable (remember that nothing that comes from the company or its associates counts towards this, whether directly, or in press releases or interviews). If you canot find such sources, give up. If you have found such sources, then you should use articles for creation to create a draft that you can work on and, eventually, submit for review. If the review is accepted, then the reviewer will handle the issue of the title being salted. Do remember that if you succeed in creating an article about your company, it will not belong to the company, and you will have no control over its content: your subsequent involvement will be limited to suggesting changes on the article's talk page. The article will not necessarily say what you would choose about the company, and may end up containing information that you would not want there, if that information has been published in reliable sources. --ColinFine (talk) 08:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Edit warring

 2601:248:681:25A0:91D:2CB7:477C:E543 (talk) 02:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question about edit warring IP 2601:248:681:25A0:91D:2CB7:477C:E543|2601:248:681:25A0:91D:2CB7:477C:E543? The only edit you've made so far has been your post here at the Teahouse which makes it kind of hard to figure out what (if any) problems you might be having. If you can provide a link (or even just the name) to the article or page where you're having problems, it will be much easier for someone to try and help you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 04:44, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Did you read the answer which you received at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1067#What is an Edit War?? --David Biddulph (talk) 10:45, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Adding an article or just editing?

Hi! So i read Terrorism in Indonesia list of attakcs is incomplete, because recently there was an attack towards police station on South Kalimantan.After i read about notability & read news about that particular events, i am sure that it deserves its place, but not sure as a new article or maybe just as an edit on page somewhere.

Details about that attack can be read here:

[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13]

Since i am a new member of Wikipedia and i'm afraid creating mess by wrong-editing, i feel not "correct person" to decide this & edit the particular thing.

Thanks~ Nyanardsan (talk) 10:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi and welcome to Wikipedia, i suggest discussing this matter in the talk page of Terrorism in Indonesia, reply if you need any further help. Trains2050 (talk) 10:24, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
The responsiveness of editors to questions or statements made on article Talk pages depends on how many people view the article, 'watch' the article, and visit the Talk page. Wikipedia's philosophy is 'BRD', meaning be Bold in your editing, but if Reverted (reversed), then start a Discussion. One approach here would be to add content to the article with 2-3 good references, and then wait to see what happens. A common error of new editors is to add true content without references. You are already aware of the requirement for verification. David notMD (talk) 11:38, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

How to get NetWeaving into Wikipedia

Over 20 years ago I created and trademarked two words: NETWEAVING and NETWEAVER. NetWeaving is a Golden Rule and Pay It Forward form of networking. Whereas networking is self-focused. NetWeaving is all about helping someone else, either by connecting them with someone who can fulfill a need, problem or opportunity they have, OR providing them with some resource they need - no strings attached. I was the first elected president of the Pay It Forward Foundation and still serve on the non-profit foundation board created by Catherine Ryan Hyde, author of the book on which the concept is based. The NetWeaving International website is now a totally free website with no cookies and no tracking. Anyone can go and download two of the three books I have written "The Heart and Art of NetWeaving" and "Raising Your R&R Factor". If you 'google' the word, NetWeaving, you can see how it has spread around the world.

I hope that Wikipedia would agree that this concept deserves to be in Wikipedia. Our world needs so much more of this. How would I go about doing this?

Incidentally, SAP NetWeaver came about the same time I trademarked "NETWEAVING" and "NETWEAVER". They had evidently purchased the company who had the original tradmark. I was allowed the trademark since my NetWeaving concept was totally outside their use. I noticed several years after I spelled NetWeaver with a capital W, they started capitalizing it too. Also, with my permission, a non-profit organization "CEO Netweavers" was granted permission by me to use the Netweaver name.

Robert (Bob) Littell, Chief NetWeaver 98.20.249.155 (talk) 10:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello there! I do not understand the question completely but i guess you want to create an article for the word NETWEAVING. As i see that you have a conflict of interest with the word please make sure you declare your conflict of interest and also make sure you have enough sources to create the article. Please make sure your article meets WP:NOTE guidelines. this should help you writing an article: Help:Your first article. Reply if you need any further help. Many thanks Trains2050 (talk) 10:39, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

There is no conflict of interest in that SAP Netweaver, which is already in Wikipedia, is a software platform and has nothing to do with my concept of NetWeaving which is social skill and lifelong practice that not only helps others but enriches your own life. If there had been a conflict, I never would have gotten the I could easily write the article or I saw that if I wanted someone else to write it, they could do that instead. I'm going on the Board of our large Property Owner's Assn which is going to eat up a lot of time. I would be willing to pay someone to write the article unless it would be preferable for me to write. I have many sources in which the article has either been featured or mentioned and as I checked this morning, when I googled 'netweaving', it shows 285,000 hits. Here is what is shown on the US Patent Office website.

Patent office information
NETWEAVING
Goods and Services	IC 035. US 100 101 102. G & S: BUSINESS CONSULTING SERVICES. FIRST USE: 20010911. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20010911
Mark Drawing Code	(1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number	76451369
Filing Date	September 17, 2002
Current Basis	1A
Original Filing Basis	1B
Published for Opposition	April 22, 2003
Registration Number	2902030
Registration Date	November 9, 2004
Owner	(REGISTRANT) Enrichment Company, The CORPORATION GEORGIA P.O. Box 11687 Atlanta GEORGIA 30355
Attorney of Record	Joseph V. Myers III
Type of Mark	SERVICE MARK

NETWEAVER
Goods and Services	IC 035. US 100 101 102. G & S: BUSINESS CONSULTING SERVICES. FIRST USE: 20010911. FIRST USE IN COMMERCE: 20010911
Mark Drawing Code	(1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number	76451368
Filing Date	September 17, 2002
Current Basis	1A
Original Filing Basis	1B
Published for Opposition	April 22, 2003
Registration Number	2902029
Registration Date	November 9, 2004
Owner	(REGISTRANT) Enrichment Company, The CORPORATION GEORGIA P.O. Box 11687 Atlanta GEORGIA 30355
Attorney of Record	Joseph V. Myers III
Type of Mark	SERVICE MARK
Register	PRINCIPAL

Word Mark	SAP NETWEAVER
Goods and Services	IC 009. US 021 023 026 036 038. G & S: Computer software platforms for software integration and application integration, software for application and database integration; application development software; composite software which invokes and modifies or integrates other software applications and components; software for business process automation; computer programs for transferring data to and from computer programs and computer files; computer programs for developing other computer programs; computer programs for running development programs and application programs
Mark Drawing Code	(1) TYPED DRAWING
Serial Number	76488298
Filing Date	February 6, 2003
Current Basis	44E
Original Filing Basis	1B;44D
Published for Opposition	September 13, 2005
Registration Number	3022393
Registration Date	December 6, 2005
Owner	(REGISTRANT) SAP AG JOINT STOCK COMPANY FED REP GERMANY Dietmar-Hopp-Allee 16 69190 Walldorf FED REP GERMANY
(LAST LISTED OWNER) SAP SE SOCIETAS EUROPAEA FED REP GERMANY DIETMAR-HOPP-ALLEE 16 WALLDORF FED REP GERMANY 69190
Assignment Recorded	ASSIGNMENT RECORDED
Attorney of Record	David Davis
Priority Date	October 8, 2002
Type of Mark	TRADEMARK
Register	PRINCIPAL
Affidavit Text	SECT 15. SECT 8 (6-YR). SECTION 8(10-YR) 20150723.
Renewal	1ST RENEWAL 20150723
Live/Dead Indicator	LIVE

— Preceding unsigned comment added by 98.20.249.155 (talk) 12:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Bob. I'm afraid that, like many people, you are under the misapprehension that Wikipedia is for telling the world about things. It is not. Promotion of any kind (which is another word for "telling people about something") is forbidden, no matter whether the subject is commercial or not, virtuous or not, popular or not. Wikipedia's job is to collect and summarise information which has already been written about by independent commentators in reliable places. (Please see WP:NOTSOAPBOX). If enough has been written about your concept and website by people wholly unconnected with you, and without being prompted with information by you and published in reliable places, that an article could be written entirely from those sources, then we could have an article on it. It would not belong to you, you would not have control of its contents, it would contain little or nothing that you had said or published (it would be based on independent commentaries, as I said), and it could end up containing material that you disliked. --ColinFine (talk) 12:26, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Also, regarding There is no conflict of interest in that SAP Netweaver ..., you apparently have misunderstood WP:COI. Based on your opening statement, I created and trademarked two words: NETWEAVING and NETWEAVER, you clearly have a COI regarding this subject, as its creator.

Wiki Page creation query

i want to create a page for someone in the format that is generally displayed on any wiki profile. Aqeel Ahmed Panaruna (talk) 10:23, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, i would suggest looking on Help:Your first article and make sure the someone meets Wikipedia WP:BIO standards. Also make sure you do declare if you have a conflict of interest with the person you want to write the article for. Trains2050 (talk) 10:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Aqeel Ahmed Panaruna. I'd like to add to what Trans2050 has said. Writing a Wikipedia article (which is what you are asking about: we don't have "profiles") is one of the hardest tasks in editing Wikipedia. This is not about format, or technical issues: it is because Wikipedia's policies on notability and verifiability and neutrality are unfamiliar to most people, and difficult to understand at first, and new editors often find the journey frustrating and unhappy. I always recommend new editors to spend a few weeks or months improving some of our existing six million articles, and learn how Wikipedia works, before they try this difficult activity. --ColinFine (talk) 12:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Bembidiomorphum

I've added a website to Bembidiomorphum, currently it's just named [1], I wish to changed the title to David Maddison - Carabids desired for DNA sequencing studies however I loose the link, this should be a simple task. Can someone assist, Regards --Devokewater (talk) 11:27, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it is simple: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking#External links section. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:30, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
David Biddulph --Devokewater (talk) 11:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Devokewater: As much as I love Coleoptera, I don't think the link to http://david.bembidion.org/desired.html is at all appropriate for an External link. It is not adding anything encyclopaedic to the article, as it's simply advertising for material for DNA sequencing. I suggest this source might be more appropriate. Nick Moyes (talk) 12:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Adding my blog to „list of blogs“

Hi there,

I was wondering if it is possible to add my blog on China (www.sinoskop.de) to the page „list of blogs“?

Cheers Sinoskop (talk) 14:06, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi there, I was wondering if my blog on China (www.sinoskop.de) could be added to the „list of blogs“?

Cheers Sinoskop (talk) 14:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

The list is a "list of notable blogs", and it links to Wikipedia articles on those notable blogs. Please read Wikipedia's definition of WP:notable. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:41, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft article

Hello – I've created an article which is in draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Vince_Pope

What happens next? Do I need to do anything to get this published now? JHills20 (talk) 13:38, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi! To submit a draft article for review, you need to click the “submit my article for review” button at the top once it meets article requirements. You should make sure it meets the requirements as it may take 6 weeks or more for your review to be completed and if its denied you have to submit it again. Lucas 13:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditor28582573 (talk • contribs)
@JHills20: I've added the button that WikiEditor28582573 was talking about above. However, in the draft's current state, it is unlikely that it will be passed since it's lacking in reliable sources, especially since it's a biographies of living persons, meaning that it's imporant that we can fact check every single claim within the article. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 14:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

"Multiple Issues" box at the top of Wiki page

Hi, I'm hoping you can help! I'm working on this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rob_Sorrenti It's showing a "Multiple Issues" box at the top of the page, with points from July 2018. The article has since been edited, and I believe these issues have now been resolved. However, I have a COI so cannot remove the "Multiple Issues" box. Do you know how I can get rid of this box at the top of the page? Thank you! 82.14.102.75 (talk) 11:00, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

I have altered the tags to apply to the current article. ote that it currently has no sources at all, and I therefore will consider afd'ing it once I have time. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:06, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Removed content that was a reply to the previous section, and is there now. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your help - I'd submitted a new version of the article (with references) by editing the article, but was told this was against the rules. I then submitted it in my User Talk section, but was told that this should be done in the Article Talk section. In May 2020 I submitted the edited version of the article there (with references), but I have not yet had a response / change implemented. Have I done the correct thing, or do I need to submit the improved artcile (with references) somewhere else? 82.14.102.75 (talk) 11:50, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

You did the right thing. Appears that @Victor Schmidt: missed looking at the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:53, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
I incorporated your proposed changes into the article and moved stuff around. I removed the tag at top of page, but editors may add new tags, as some of your referencing is not considered reliable sources. David notMD (talk) 12:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@David notMD: I hadn't looked at the talk page yet because I diddnt see the need for that. Howewer, I would have looked at that page as part of WP:BEFORE. As a final notice from me, imdb is not a reliable source. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

How to watch the status of an article that I have submitted?

Hello.

How do I watch the status of an article that I have submitted? When I submitted it, Wikipedia told me, there was a queue of 2.000 articles. But how far am I?

Best regards, Martin MartinTiedemann (talk) 10:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

According to your contribution record, the only draft which you have produced is User:MartinTiedemann/sandbox, which has not been submitted for review. The button to use is the blue one labelled "Submit your draft for review!". When you do submit it, it's not a "first in, first out" queue, and reviewers will choose which drafts to review. Hopefully you'll include the draft in your watchlist. You need to improve the draft before you submit it, as only the short last two sentences have any references; the remainder is unsourced, although there are a number of misplaced external links within the text. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:08, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@MartinTiedemann: Since the reviewers are all volunteers, It is not possible to estimate the time left. You will get a message on Your user talk page once it has been reviewed, containing the decline reason if it would be declined. Note that large sections of this WP:BLP are unsourced, so this will probbably not accepted this time. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:12, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Welcome to the Teahouse, MartinTiedemann. I regret that it's not a first-in first-out queue. Article review (like everything else here) is done by volunteers, who take on what tasks they choose. So there's no way to predict when User:MartinTiedemann/sandbox will be reviewed. I see that it has only two references, both in Swedish; and my very limited understanding of Swedish suggests that one reports what he wrote, the other, what he said. If I'm right, that means that they won't count as the "several reliable independent published sources that discuss him in detail" needed to establish that he's notable, so when it is reviewed, it's very likely to be declined. Maproom (talk) 11:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@MartinTiedemann: Just to deconstruct that last quoted phrase by Maproom:
  • several – Generally, you should have at least three good sources that meet these criteria.
  • reliable – The sources have to be reliable as per that policy. That means they have editorial oversight, fact-checking, editors, peer-review, etc.
  • independent – The author of the source needs to have decided to write about the subject without prompting or significant contribution from the subject. While we can expect that there might be some amount of confirmation and fact-checking that goes on between the author (or his editors) and the subject, the material should not read like it's just a regurgitation of promotional facts spoon-fed by the subject.
  • detail – The source needs to discuss the subject in detail. Five-minute talk-show interviews, appearances in festival or even individual events, database entries (directories, discogs, filmogs), etc. are all out. The material needs to be paragraphs of prose about the persons life, career, contributions to society, etc. I.e., the author found the subject interesting and notable enough to spend some time writing about.
I hope this helps. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:42, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

My first “real” article

Hi! Im new to wikipedia and just finished writing my first “real” article, or “kinda real” if you want to put it that way, I wanted to get some help and constructive criticism to help me make this article better and what I need to change for future articles, here is the link:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intel_Corp._Investment_Policy_Committee_v._Sulyma

I would like to also thank anyone else who helped edit the article, they helped me get the template at the correct spot.


I have a really big passion for Justice and Law, and would like constructive criticism so I can help make this article much better. Lucas 13:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiEditor28582573 (talk • contribs)

The refs are considered "bare URLs." Learn how to use proper ref format. Other than that, impressive. Remember to 'sign' your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 15:28, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@WikiEditor28582573: See WP:ERB for a quick tutorial on cites. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Please link "ciclosporin" page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciclosporin with the page on the Jean Borel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean-Fran%C3%A7ois_Borel Borel was the scientist working at Sandoz who helped isolate the drug from the fungus found in Norway & the US (purportedly collected while an employee was on vacation) and then tested the drug on himself, demonstrating its effect on his own T cells and identifying the presence of the drug in his blood. He's not mentioned under "history."

Here are another couple of references: https://www.encyclopedia.com/science/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/borel-jean-francois-1933 https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7994329/

Regards, Maryanne Chrisant, MD Transplant Cardiologist 205.152.238.75 (talk) 16:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse Maryanne, you are free to add this detail yourself, Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit, just be sure to add a reliable source. Theroadislong (talk) 16:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Maryanne: If you are not confident on editing the article directly, please post this same material at Talk:Jean-François Borel an encourage other interested editors to add the information. (In the meantime I've simply added a 'See also' link at the bottom of the page, but I suspect this isn't really sufficient). Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:54, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Improper image

Dear fellow editors, If I find an image with the creator's name inside the image displayed, what should I do ? Anupam Dutta (talk) 10:41, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

If possible, please could you give me the link of the image so i can look into it. Many thanks Trains2050 (talk) 10:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
[14] Not seeing any problem with it? Theroadislong (talk) 10:53, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
I see the name "sourav manna" in pale gray, just west of the northern part of the green territory. The file was uploaded by Sourav manna. I think it would be acceptable to edit the image to remove the grey text; but hardly worth bothering with. Maproom (talk) 11:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Dear @Maproom & @Theroadislong That is the point.... All maps by Sourav Manna have his name imprinted... And also the label "Drawing by Saurav Manna" at below right... in most of his maps/drawings. Please somebody explain to him the rules of Wikipedia.. Cheers. Anupam Dutta (talk) 12:06, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
It's only noticeable if you go looking for it, so I wouldn't bother, personally, even though strictly it is against policy (see WP:WATERMARK). But Anupamdutta73, you are welcome to post on his user talk page, and draw his attention to that policy. --ColinFine (talk) 12:45, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Anupamdutta73: I think you're right – they should not be there. In the example given, File:Map_of_Municipal_Corporations_and_Municipalities.jpg it's in an area of the image where, because of the different font, it could easily be misread as being the name of that bay or a marina. And WP:WATERMARK says we don't do this. We already have proper places to credit the contributor – we don't need people confusing their images and our readers with duplicate attributions, IMO. I'd suggest you report it at c:Commons:Help desk, where you'll find more image-focused attention. Don't forget to ping the author you're discussing, too. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 16:22, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Dear@AlanM1, Before you came along, I have taken @Colinfine 's suggestion and left a message at his talk page... Based on his reply, I shall complain about him at Commons.... As I am just 4 months old here, your guidance are much appreciated.... Cheers.... Anupam Dutta (talk) 17:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Creating a page

When shall I allowed to create a page? What is the technical process of submitting/uploading the page? IstuMistu (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 15:49, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello IstuMistu, and welcome to the Teahouse. Assuming you want to create a WP-article, take the time to read Help:Your first article. WP:TUTORIAL may also be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, IstuMistu, and welcome. The technical process of creating an article is trivial: just create a draft using the Articles for creation process. The process of creating a draft that will be accepted as a Wikipedia article is one of the most difficult tasks there is in editing Wikipedia, and editors who try it before they have spent at least a few weeks learning how Wikipedia works by improving some of our six million existing articles often have a frustrating and unhappy time. Please follow the links that Gråbergs Gråa Sång gave you. --ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Editing Photos

How do I remove a photo that is listed as the photo for a town? I am looking to remove the photo for Canadian, Texas, and it won't allow me to change it. Canadianchamberofcommerce (talk) 19:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Canadianchamberofcommerce, Based upon your username, you should read:
Wikipedia:Conflict_of_interest
You should not be directly editing:
Canadian, Texas
If there is a problem with the current photo please explain the problem. If you think there is a better photo, the usual process is to open the discussion on the talk page, identify the alternative photo and let editors reach a consensus about which photo would be best for the article. S Philbrick(Talk) 19:14, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Editing pages in several languages

Do I need to create a separate account in order to make edits in other languages ? TotoMart1 (talk) 17:37, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi TotoMart1 and welcome to the Teahouse - no, you don’t need to create several user accounts. CommanderWaterford (talk) 17:46, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello TotoMart1 and welcome to the Teahouse. Indeed you not only "don't need to" create multiple accounts for this, doing so would be frowned on, although not forbidden if only one account was used in any given language edition of Wikipedia, and you declared that they were all the same person on your user page. But unless you really want yourm user name to be different in different languages, I would advise against doing this. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:24, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your answers. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TotoMart1 (talk • contribs) 19:35, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Edits by IPs

Hi, I queried an article today for the first time, and received a response that charted multiple edits since 2009. I've never contacted Wikipedia before and those edits, of which most were deemed disruptive or not helpful, were not made by me. Does Wiki use a computer ip address? I'm using a work computer. Could these edits have been made by prior users of this computer? I want my good name cleared so...what do I do? Here's the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:205.152.238.75 Please advise. Thanks. Maryanne Chrisant, MD 205.152.238.75 (talk) 19:24, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Yes, IP addresses (assigned to computers) can be reassigned over time. The way to avoid this problem is ot create an account, and then only edits you make will be attributed to you. See WP:ACCOUNT for more info and a link to create your account. RudolfRed (talk) 19:43, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello unregistered editor Maryanne Chrisant,, and welcome to the Teahouse.
Wikipedia identifies edits and editors by the user account and associated user name. If a person edits without logging in to any user account, the IP address is used instead. Most ISPs now assign IP addresses dynamically, so that the IP address you have now may not be the same one you had a few days or weeks ago. Many re-assign every time a computer is rebooted, or every time a network connection is re-started, but some are assigned more often, and some less often.
The best way to avoid such issues is to create and use a Wikipedia account. See Wikipedia:Why create an account? An account is free, it avoids such con fusion, makes communication with other editors much easier, and actually protects the account-holder's privacy better. Anyone can see an unregistered editor's IP address, which will often identify the geographic area where that user is located, and in some cases identify the specific computer. Only a very few highly trusted individuals can see such information for a person logged in to an account, and they have all signed legally binding documents to keep such info confidential.
In the mean time, you can safely ignore messages or warnings about edits you know you did not make, they are directed to people who used your IP address at some previous time. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 19:48, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Names of people for hire who create wikipedia articles

Please provide a few reputable names of people who are for hire to create Wikipedia pages who meet the Wikipedia requirement of paid contributors? Pilotmichael (talk) 22:18, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Pilotmichael I'm afraid that you will have find such people on your own; Wikipedia does not maintain a list of paid editors, reputable or otherwise. This is primarily a volunteer project. I would strongly advise you that, if you find one out on the internet somewhere, that you not hand over any money until you see the result. Also be advised that despite what a paid editor might tell you, no result can be guaranteed(such as writing an article that will not be deleted). 331dot (talk) 23:10, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
@Pilotmichael: Please also consider that an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing (see that link for details). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
Also consider that, since most people claiming to do that kind of thing do so in violation of our Terms of Service, and often not very competently, a hired-gun "article" about your subject may actually poison the well and damage the chances of a good article eventually being created by an impartial editor with no conflict of interest. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:05, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Help adding info

Hi, I have a bunch of new titles and awards and new info and photos of a client, but as an associate I can't edit her page. I've tried asking for help in the Talk page but I just keep getting told I can't edit. Can anyone help me? I have all the info and reference links. Thanks! 73.4.6.5 (talk) 14:47, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

This must be about Holly Black, an author of Young Adult fiction. Thank you, 73, for raising the issue on her talk page rather than making the edits yourself. Maybe someone will see this and consider your requests. Maproom (talk) 15:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello there! Thank you very much for the disclosure! Please use WP:edit requests to suggest changes to articles you ought not to directly edit. Please make your requests in small packages, each of them well-supported by reputable reliable sources so that they are easily addressed. Doing so should yield quicker responses and better outcomes. Note that you seem to have logged out while making this edit. You should remember to make sure you don't edit the same topic areas both logged in and logged out, as that could give a misimpression that you are two different editors which is usually, though not always, a bad thing (see WP:SOCK). Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello. I guess you are AssistantAtHollyBlack. Thank you for being open about your position, and putting your requests on the talk page. But I'm afraid you really need to do more. As an associate or assistant, you are regarded as a paid editor (whether you actually receive any pay or not) and need to make the formal declaration on your user page - see that link above for how to do it.
If you attach the template {{edit request}} to your requests on the talk page, they will get put on a list that editors who handle talk requests will see; otherwise they may not notice. I recommend that rather than putting in one long request for many changes, you put in a separate request for each change you want, and in each case make it as specific as you can: "Please add the following sentence to the paragraph beginning...", or "please replace X by Y". The future release certainly does not belong in the article, unless independent commentators have already written at some length about it; until that happens any such mention would be pure promotion. For general information, see Edit request. --ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Oh that's a great suggestion. I'll try it that way. Thanks!

The querent is now known as User:Matilda Frye, by the way. --Orange Mike | Talk 20:40, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

donation

 TYROTWIT (talk) 22:36, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@TYROTWIT: This is a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. If you want to donate, thank you and please see donate:Ways to Give. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

When to use a signature

I was given a note with instructions on how to add a signature to the "talk" pages, but never to use one when editing an article. When I edited an article, it flipped to the "talk" tab at the top of the page, so I added my signature, however it published the signature details on the article page. So I went back in and removed the signature. Can someone please clarify the difference between "talk" pages and "articles," so that I know when I should be adding my 4 tildes in as a signature? If I am editing an article that's already posted on Wikipedia, do I need to put "Karenpace (talk) 21:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)" at the end of my addition or changes? The instructions said to "add them at the end of my comment." However it's not a comment so much as an addition to an article.

Please let me know where I am to place the signature, so I don't put it in articles! Thank you for your help and guidance, as I learn how to navigate editing on here. Karenpace (talk) 21:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC) Karenpace (talk) 21:29, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Karenpace. No, you never, ever place a signature within an article, but always sign you posts to talk pages. It's as simple as that. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:41, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Karenpace. You don't seem to have edited any talk page since you edited your own user talk page last year; so, I don't know whqat happened, but no, you didn't "flip to the talk page": you were editing the article 54-40 (band). Normally both the "Article" and "talk" tabs are visible, even while you're editing. --ColinFine (talk) 22:16, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Karenpace: Having taken a peek at your userpage at User:Karenpace, I I've popped back as I need to advise you that you are in serious breach of our policy on how userpages can be utilised. If you read WP:FAKEARTICLE, you will appreciate that we do not allow a userpage to resemble a mainspace Wikipedia article. Yours does at the moment, and has done so since 2011. I need to politely but firmly invite you to address this immediately, please. If you really want to keep all that personal information there about yourself, you must write it in the first person singular, and definitely not in the third person voice as if it were an article about you. Pages looking like that, once discovered, normally get speedily deleted, per WP:NOTWEBHOST. Sorry to be a bit of party-pooper, but it should be a quick and easy fix, though I recommend cutting down the content considerably to avoid another editor putting it up for deletion. If it is a draft article, then it needs to be in your sandbox of in Drafts, and with a Conflict of Interest statement on your userpage if you actually plan to try to publish it here. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:18, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Oops! Martin Moran Mountaineer Draft Declined

Hello,

I come in peace... and I fully admit that I am not very familiar with how Wikipedia operates, I seem to have come up against some politics in the last few hours and after some research, I hope the community can help answer some questions I have and in the process, I hope I do not cause any offence.

Today I signed up with a brand new account with the intention to create an article about my Father, a noteworthy explorer, mountaineer and author. In my naivety, I had not realised my conflict of interest and had failed to cite and reference what I had written before submitting my unfinished draft: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Martin_Moran_(mountaineer) This was of course rejected which is fair now I have educated myself a little.

I wanted to create a page for my Dad, Martin Moran who died last year in an accident in the Indian Himalaya and his body was never recovered. He was a well-known mountaineer, British Mountain Guide, author of 4 books and holds many first accents and achievements to his name.

I had no other intention other than wanting to consolidate my Father's legacy and life work in an article on this respected platform. As his daughter, I have no monetary or business-driven motive apart from giving him the notoriety I feel he deserves.

I am however still a little perplexed, my draft was rejected and I believe I am no longer able to write an article on this subject due to my relationship with the person of note. I also understand it is frowned upon to ask someone else to publish this article on my behalf. So I wondered if the community here can help, is there a way to request that a notable person has a presence on Wikipedia or does this come down to whether volunteer editors believe it noteworthy enough to create a page?

I certainly do not want to breach the rules od Wikipedia or risk have my any future articles about my Father removed - I hope someone can help.

Thanks

Hazel HazelMoran (talk) 02:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:Martin Moran (mountaineer) was Declined - not Rejected - and the reviewer provided many instructive comments on how to improve the draft before resubmitting. As long as you declare your conflict-of-interest on your User page ("Martin Moran was my father"), you can continue to work on the draft. All facts need to be verified by published sources. What you know to be true must be deleted unless people wrote it about Moran. David notMD (talk) 02:36, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you David, that helps!

BestChange

Dear editing colleagues, I would like to inquire about the BestChange article (the article about which already exists in RuWikipedia). On 11 April 2019 administrator Sandstein decided to keep the article based on the discussion results, but on 16 December 2019 the article was deleted without discussion. How is this possible? Inbld (talk) 13:21, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Inbld, and welcome to the Teahouse. To make it clear, the result of the discussion was "no consensus", meaning that it isn't a strong keep or delete; even if the result was keep, a later discussion could overturn that result and delete the page, should there be a consensus. As for the page, the reason is shown if you click the red link at BestChange. It's listed within the red banner on top of the page, in this case, a speedy deletion because the page was created by a blocked/banned user. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 13:38, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes, and "G5", which was cited, requires no discussion. -- Hoary (talk) 13:40, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
AFD results are not final - they can be ignored if new information comes along - in this case, it did. MER-C 17:33, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
I see. Thank you very much for your reply. Can you please tell us how we can restore the page? I need to write a new one or there are other ways? --Inbld (talk) 19:50, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Inbld, you say "we". Any particular reason for this? -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
No. I must have put it wrong. Sorry. --Inbld (talk) 04:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Inbld. It is possible that the deleting admin, MER-C, would agree to restore the text of the deleted article so that you could work on it - I don't know whether the policy if deleting articles by undeclared paid editors even allows them to be restored. In any case, you need to make your relationship with BestChange clear: if you are connected with them you should, and if you are in any way paid in connection with them, you must, make a declaration of this before you start: see paid editing. Then you should read your first article. Also, since it appears from the ruwiki article that BestChange has something to do with cryptocurrencies, you need to be aware of WP:General sanctions/Blockchain and cryptocurrencies. As far as I can see, these do not place restrictions on creating such articles, but I am not an expert in this area. --ColinFine (talk) 21:25, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Let's make this clear: I will not restore any article at the request of anyone with a conflict of interest. Even if it was asserted there was no COI, I wouldn't restore the article under these circumstances. There is also zero tolerance for promotional editing or intent in the topic area. This sounds very much like WP:PAID, so I will hand out a general sanctions notice. MER-C 07:33, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for your advice. I am in no way affiliated with BestChange. What should I do in this case? --Inbld (talk) 04:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Help with Korean drama pages

I want report an annoying user I love cloy (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:I_love_cloy). This user always try to make destructive edit on Korean drama page. Can someone help? Where i can report this annoying user? Thanks before and sorry for my bad English.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Michaelelijahtanuwijaya (talk • contribs) 04:08, 9 July 2020 04:08 (UTC)

@Michaelelijahtanuwijaya: Hello and welcome to the Wikipedia Teahouse, if you think the user is vandalising Wikipedia, you can report them here: Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism. Make sure you read the instructions on the page before you report them. Thanks Trains2050 (talk) 04:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Approval of draft article

Hello, I've been trying to get some articles published but every time that are rejected, would anyone please help! draft:$aintBandit Isaac Olek (talk) 03:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Isaac Olek, Welcome to Wikipedia. Your draft is being repeatedly declined but has not been rejected as it fails Wikipedia notability standards. Also, the references provided are non-reliable as per Wikipedia source reliability. It appears that the sources do not demonstrate that this person meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician or person, as shown with significant coverage (not brief mentions) in independent reliable sources. ~ Amkgp 💬 04:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Does DHGate ever really talk to anyone?

Wrong place. Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:31, 9 July 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.

I have tried for several days to bu a doll on DHGate. I have two favorites picked out, but every time I click "Go to checkout" I get some meaningless blather like "Bad Gateway" or "Bad Request, " and advice to "try again Later." How much later do they mean: "whenever we are not here."? If this is their notion of Customer Service," how do they ever stay in business? 70.59.95.39 (talk) 05:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello there! I am afraid the Teahouse can only help you with queries about editing Wikipedia. You'll need to contact the customer care department of the organisation you are trying to transact with. Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:31, 9 July 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.

Tag, talk, take more time?

Hi Teahouse, I am relatively new editing wikipedia and have come across a few pages I'm stumped about what to do with as they read either NPOV or like a personal website, or feel "on the edge" of encyclopedic. I'm posting here to see what a more experienced editor would do. Example: Biographical page of extradition lawyer Gary Botting. This page reads like a personal account/resumé with a lot of unnecessary info, is it best to tag for NPOV? Peacock language? Get more involved on the talk page? There are many references to numerous personal books but would these not be considered proper references? Cheers, Uninspired Username (talk) 05:45, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

It does seem a bit odd, yes. If I could devote more time to it than I'm willing to, I might work out how/why. If it has peacock language, then you might remove the peacock language from one section, thereby demonstrating what you had in mind more efficiently and more constructively than if you described it, and flag the article as a whole for peacock language. If there's an NPOV problem, flag that too, but be sure to describe it in the talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 05:58, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Vc bro ki hits

Wrong place Trains2050 (talk) 09:38, 9 July 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.

Vc bro ki hits

Vivek choudhary, Bettter known as vc bro is an Indian youtuber comedian and a rapper. From Rajasthan, India. He is known for his comedic skits and reactions on various topics on his Youtube channel "Vc bro ki hits".

Youtube : https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCnGcCnN87HozHlUJtYoJsPA




}} Vcbrokihits (talk) 04:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello there!, seems like you are using the Teahouse for advertising, advertising is not permitted in the English Wikipedia including the Teahouse. If you meant something else, please reply here, thanks Trains2050 (talk) 04:55, 9 July 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.

Gustav Klimt

Wrong place Trains2050 (talk) 12:09, 9 July 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.

1- Who were Klimt's friends?

2- What did the painting "Death and Life" look like in his inner-circle?

3- What commonalities/ differences are there between the kinds of symbols/ techniques they worked with (Klimt and his friends?

4- When did that painting (Death and Life) see its first large audience?

5- How did Klimt's work (in general) finally gain an audience?

6- How now has he been linked to the "Golden Age" of Austrian art and design? 213.89.13.216 (talk) 23:03, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. Are you setting us your homework to do? This is a forum to help people edit Wikipedia, not to do their work for them. I find Wikipedia a great source of information, so suggest you not only read the article on Gustav Klimt, but follow the many references at the bottom of the page, as these often reveal a lot more than is the article. Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:08, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

It is not homework, I am doing a comparative study since I am a visual arts students, I've already read the Wikipedia page about Klimt and of course many other sources, I've tried to reach curators to ask them directly but they simply don't answer, these are the questions that I haven't found an answer to. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilysequeira (talk • contribs) 23:11, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

OK, Emilysequeira, I'm sorry you haven't found the answers you need. You certainly won't find them here at this forum for the simple reason I explained above. Are there not specialised arts fora you could enquire at? I suspect that many art curators around the world (certainly here in the UK) have been furloughed and are not responding to emails, or are busy trying to get their institution covid-19 secure. You could try the arts subsection of our own WP:REFDESK, where someone might have a stab at giving you an answer. I am, however, surprised you say you couldn't find the answer to Question 4. It took me all of 45 seconds to follow links from Wikipedia to find out. Good luck. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:29, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Alright, thank you and really there is no need for passive aggressiveness, bye! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Emilysequeira (talk • contribs) 00:35, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

An editor telling you they were easily able to find an answer to your question is not passive aggressiveness, it's active aggressiveness. David notMD (talk) 02:52, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
It's also helpfulness! I was simply pointing out that the answer is there for you to find, and all you needed to do is go look for it. I'm certainly not going to provide an answer to a University student as I believe they should have already got the skillset to investigate and research for themselves, or learn to develop it. I gave up telling my kids where the Easter eggs were hidden when they reached 12.[sarcasm]. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:53, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
This page is for questions about editing Wikipedia. Please consider asking this question at the Reference desk. They specialize in knowledge questions and will try to answer any question in the universe (except how to use Wikipedia, since that is what this Help Desk is for). Just follow the link, select the relevant section, and ask away. You could always try searching Wikipedia for an article related to the topic you want to know more about. I hope this helps. 2A02:C7F:241:3D00:1146:8167:760C:CC8 (talk) 17:00, 8 July 2020 (UTC) ps: this is me trains2050, i did not realise i was logged out, Trains2050 (talk) 17:02, 8 July 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.

can i take a breather?

 Ajcole29 (talk) 12:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Of course you can, Ajcole29! You stopped after five edits in 2016, then did nine more edits recently. Pace yourself! Is there any specific question about editing that you'd like us to help you with? Nick Moyes (talk) 12:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Interface button to abandon Visual Editor window?

Hello, in the WP:Visual Editor if I wish to abandon editing without publishing changes, I press ESC. What is the corresponding interface button that I can click with the mouse to accomplish the same task? Elizium23 (talk) 06:52, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Elizium23: You can click "Read" besides the "Edit" button. The same confirm prompt will appear. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 08:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Exactly what I was looking for, thanks! Elizium23 (talk) 13:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

How to re-submit a rejected draft?

I just created a draft page like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:KorGE_(Game_Engine)

It was rejected because lack of citations. I have now fixed it, but can't find any link to re-submit the page for reviewing. Any help here? Thanks in advance Soywiz (talk) 19:58, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

@Soywiz: You removed the template that displays the resubmit button. I restored it, along with the draft article's review history which needs to be kept. You need more sources - everything you have is from a blog, and is therefore not reliable. See WP:RS TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 20:13, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
@Soywiz: Since you appear to be affiliated with the subject you've written about, you should disclose this information. See the plain and simple conflict of interest guide. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 05:00, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Drm310: Thanks for your help and patience. I totally need for an independent news source to publish about the engine? I mean, we have a blog, youtube videos showing it working, we organized a GameJAM where people participated and created some games with it that you can play directly on the browser and we have youtube videos showing it, I have also done talks and it is possible to use webarchive to ensure that the repositories were created in 2017. Any of these sources are reliable? External people to the team talked about it on social networks. If that is required we might want to focus on appearing on independent media first. Is this the case?
@Soywiz: Independent sources are needed to prove that this topic is notable enough to be included in Wikipedia; just because someone or something exists isn't good enough. Wikipedia doesn't really care what a person/organization wants to say about themselves or their work; we need to see that several reliable, independent sources have chosen to write about it, without any kind of inducement to do so.
Social media and blogs are not reliable because they are self-published; that is, the users themselves post the content without any kind of fact-checking or editorial oversight. Sources we look for are mainstream academic and journalistic press: major news organizations, newspapers, magazines and books from established, respected publishers. Primary sources can be used to provide basic facts and figures, but won't be enough to establish notability.
So in answer to your question, yes... significant coverage in reliable, independent sources is required before an article about your company/product will be accepted. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Drm310: Regarding to being myself the one writing it: just wanted to create an initial entry that anyone else could update after that. Tried to be as fair as possible and just expose facts. I'll check how to this info, but didn't notice that info in other articles, so maybe other people wrote about that in those articles and I should consider not doing this myself. Again, thanks for your support.
Yes, I would advise you not to write any more about it. Even well-intentioned edits could be interpreted as an attempt to promote or publicize your project. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Error to skye edwards status wiki says she's married when at present she is single.

 HarrisHawk66 (talk) 13:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, HarrisHawk66 and welcome to the Teahouse! If you would like a change to be made to an article, the best place to go is to the article's talkpage. Also, if you want a change to be made, you will need to cite a reliable source, otherwise it won't happen. If you can find a reliable source to back up your request, please put both (request and source) on the article's talk page and an editor will make the changes for you. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 13:24, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@HarrisHawk66: As mentioned, you need a reliable source to back up this claim. I found an article in the The Sydney Morning Herald from March 12, 2020 [15] that says she's still married. --Drm310 🍁 (talk) 13:29, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Tau Omega Phi Order of Topans Collegiate Fraternity Sorority

Can you repost Tau Omega Phi Order of Topans Collegiate Fraternity Sorority as among the SEC registered fraternities and sororities in the Philippines? Following are the details of the fraternity sorority: 

! Name        = ΤΩΦ
! Letters     = Tau Omega Phi Order of Topans Collegiate Fraternity Sorority
! Founding    = {{1979!10!15}}
! Location    = University of Cebu
! Type        = Fraternity Sorority
! Span        = National
! Affiliation = Order of Topans
! SEC         = R CN.202064481


Thank you, Topans 60 Topans 60 (talk) 13:40, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Topans 60. Whatever page this relates to, I suggest you post your request directly on the talk page of that article. As a general help forum, that WP:EDITREQUEST seems a little incomprehensible to me here. If sources are used, do please link to them. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
The recommendation in the case of such lists is to write the article first, presuming that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. --David Biddulph (talk) 14:34, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

my article

well, my article submission was declines, because there is already another one, but I don't know what to do an article of, seeing as wiki has so much stuff on it! suggestions please? Ezzieuwu (talk) 11:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I would suggest looking at: WP:WANTED for articles that are in demand to be added to the wiki. Kind regards Trains2050 (talk) 12:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi @Ezzieuwu. It looks like you have decided to try to do the most difficult thing for new users of Wikipedia - creating an article. It's much better to spend some time editing existing articles first, to learn how things work around here. If you go to the WP:Community Portal, you can find many ways to help out with this project and learn the rules as you go along. Happy editing! Turner Street (talk) 12:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Ezzeiuwu. I understand the desire to add to Wikipedia by creating a new article: I remember when I started, I desperately wanted to do that (fifteen years on, I don't think I've created a single article). I'm now convinced that, especially for a new editor, you are likely to add much much much much much more value to Wikipedia by improving some of our six million existing articles than by creating a new article even about a subject that meets our criteria for notability (and many attempts fail because their subjects don't do that). Given the amount of frustration and disappointment that many new editors go through as they have drafts declined or rejected over and over again, this doesn't seem to be a good investment of their time. I always recommend spending some weeks or months (or years, in my case) learning how Wikipedia works before trying it. --ColinFine (talk) 14:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Correction: I'm bemused to find that I have actually created 11 articles. In mitigation, apart from two DAB pages, they were all before 2010. --ColinFine (talk) 15:25, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Ezzeiuwu - one other big issue is that content must (almost) never be copied from another source. Doing so would be a copyright violation and would result in the article being speedily deleted. The only exceptions are sites with the same or very similar licensing arrangements as Wikipedia. Sorry that this makes life here even more complicated, but, as noted above, creating an article here is an activity best done with several weeks or months of experience editing other articles first. Best of luck.  Velella  Velella Talk   15:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Afc decline Draft:Left Coast Extracts

Afc submission declined Draft:Left Coast Extracts


Can you please guide me to understand the reason of declining Draft:Left Coast Extracts in bit of detail. I have used reputed independent newspaper as citationreference. But it seems something is missing due to which same is declined.

Also guide me the case when articles are visible on wiki with a note that this article needs additional citations and improvements. Vsp.manu (talk) 15:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Some of the content and five of the refs are about Left Coast donating masks to health care workers vis-a-vis COVID-19, which adds nothing to the business' notability, and should be deleted. The other are brief mentions of the company rather than lengthy content. Give it up. To your second question, some articles exist, but need work. The 'tags' at the top tell viewers that the article may be flawed, and also point out possible work for editors. David notMD (talk) 15:28, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Deletion of Revised Article on Tia Walker

Tia Walker article was deleted in July 2019 with indications that the subject did not meet notability requirements. However, I had found (2) additional sources for notability to be provided— one I posted via my sandbox on July 6, 2020. Now it looks like the original article Creator Bawana90210 published the updated article on Tia Walker before i could add found links and it was again deleted. Tia Walker is the creator/founder of The Quest for it publication that appears in the Wikipedia references of Veronica Varlow Ling Tan Asher Levine Lo’renzo Hill-White  Ikon72 (talk) 12:43, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Ikon72, Welcome to Wikipedia. It seems the article Tia Walker was removed as a result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tia Walker (2nd nomination). The article is currently protected (requires extended confirmed access) due to repeated creation without any improvements. Wikipedia accepts/allows article that proves notability and is supported by indpendent, verifiable reliable sources. ~ Amkgp 💬 16:09, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

informal review

Is it possible to have a draft article informally reviewed prior to submission? Thanks, Palisades1 (talk) 15:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Palisades1, Welcome to Teahouse. The draftspace is a facility that helps new articles to develop and receive feedback before being moved to Wikipedia's mainspace. ~ Amkgp 💬 16:00, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Palisades1: Yes, thats possible. Yust ask here of at WP:AFCHD for advices before submitting. Please dont forget to name the draft. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Template1

This is my first and easy template. Can I have a short feedback please? Template:Chatbox --DanielArtikel (talk) 16:49, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Removing Template Notice

I saw this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Student_Press_Law_Center with a notice that it relies too much on primary sources. I have added numerous secondary sources, so that there are now 20 secondary sources and 10 primary sources. Since 2/3 are now secondary sources, is it appropriate to remove the template notice? Ihaveadreamagain 20:45, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Ihaveadreamagain, welcome to the Teahouse, I would think so! Thanks for your work on that article! Cheers -- puddleglum2.0 21:00, 8 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks! I will do that. Ihaveadreamagain 16:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

WP temps

Is it possible to only create templates at the Wikipedia? DanielArtikel (talk) 16:08, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

DanielArtikel, Welcome to Wikipedia. Yes, you can start a new template in the same way that you would start an article page. The only difference is that its title must start with Template:. ~ Amkgp 💬 16:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok, thank you Amkgp --DanielArtikel (talk) 16:20, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Amkgp is that good? Template:Chatbox --DanielArtikel (talk) 16:57, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

...

Insert non-formatted text here1. Hi, is there any need of providing newspapers' pages where that person's news or feeds are? 2. We've a channel with 180k subscribers is that okay for popularity purposes? Bapuji Dashrathbhai Patel (talk) 16:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I don't think so, sorry. I had something with 700 followers the day, and they denied. Don't be sad if they say no --DanielArtikel (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not interested in popularity; what matters is notability. --David Biddulph (talk) 16:16, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Which depends almost entirely on what other people, unconnected with the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject, in reliable sources, Bapuji Dashrathbhai Patel. What they say themselves, or what people say about them on fansites, forums and other unreliable sources, is of no value at all to Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 17:06, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Kamala Harris

If fWikipedia says that they do not alter information in response to email requests, then why did they alter the bio for Kamala Harris? Why are the postings for President Trump so negative (i.e., that he does not tell the truth) and Obama's are so positive. Just to point out that President Obama lied over and over again; you can keep your doctor, that he did not know that Hilary Clinton had a private surver when he emailed her on it, Bangazi, Fast and Furious, etc. If Wikipedia is just another false media outlet, then what is your point. If Kamala Harris did not have things in her bio that were negative, then why did you remove them? TheMotherShipRollsIn (talk) 17:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, TheMotherShipRollsIn. Wikipedia doesn't have an editorial board, so there is no "they" who can be contacted by e-mail. Article content is determined by volunteer editors, who are free to make changes to articles. If there is a dispute between editors, then the issue is discussed on the article's talk page until consensus is reached. You are welcome to participate in these discussions, or make or propose changes to articles. Please see Help:Introduction for more on how Wikipedia works. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

ESTATE

 Pedrito2009 (talk) 17:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Pedrito2009. This is a help forum to assist new users with Wikipedia editing problems. Do yo have a question we can help you with? Nick Moyes (talk) 18:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Leopard 2PL

Hi, I translated my article from Polish Wikipedia, and I'd like to ask you to review it and add infobox, because in Polish Wikipedia that is much easier than there :D Polskiarmator123 (talk) 15:09, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

When translating an article from another Wikipedia, you need to credit the source article, Polskiarmator123 (unless you were the sole author of and contributor to that source article). See WP:HOWTRANS on how to do this. Cordless Larry (talk) 18:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi there. I see User:Ashashyou has placed this image Mahmoud Khalil Al-Housary under public domain by the virtue of Egypt's 1954 law that was applicable on works published prior to 2002.

So, would the Qur'an recitations of the famous Egyptian qurras (El Minshawi, Al Hussary, Abdul Basit Abdus Samad, Mustafa Ismail) fall under public domain too, especially since most of them published their works well before 2002 regardless of whether anyone claims legal rights to the recitals (record companies or firms that acquired rights to the recordings post their deaths or secured rights in other countries)?

Thanks.

Originally asked here: User_talk:Ashashyou#Egypt_copyright_laws. Murtaza.aliakbar (talk) 17:28, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Murtaza.aliakbar: Welcome to Wikipedia. I suggest asking at WP:MCQ, where folks knowledgable about copyright hang out and can answer your questions. RudolfRed (talk) 18:17, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

How do I create an article?

Hi, I'm new to Wikipedia and am wondering how to create an article. I've searched and the article doesn't exist yet. NightmareXP (talk) 16:47, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

First you need to get information etc., about what you want to write about. other things, people will tell you then, if you done that --DanielArtikel (talk) 16:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
NightmareXP Please go through your first article for a beginner's guide to Wikipedia editing and article creation. ~ Amkgp 💬 18:26, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

How do I report undisclosed paid editing?

Hello fellow Wikipedians, I would like to report a couple undisclosed editors working for a company called wikiprofessionals inc. They have an online profolio (can't post link because it won't let me due to the filter) and that the page creators from the page creation log does not appear to have disclosed their editing. I also had a live chat with a rep and that they have admitted these accounts, but claim it is allowed. On their FAQ, they say that wp:iarpermits them to do so, except they actually don't. What should I do now? The creeper2007Talk! Be well, stay safe 18:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

The creeper2007, You can report at Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents ~ Amkgp 💬 18:31, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Amkgp: I have never filed a report at ani before. Also, the group involves a lot of people, so it would also take a lot of time to leave a note at each one's talk pages. could you give me a example report or instructions?The creeper2007Talk! Be well, stay safe 18:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
The creeper2007, Actually that is the best venue. Still, If you want to save time and avoid WP:ANI then check the Recently Active Admins list for admins who may be able to help directly. ~ Amkgp 💬 19:07, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Courstesy pinging @331dot, Cullen328, and Nick Moyes: for further guidance. Thank you ~ Amkgp 💬 19:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A more appropriate noticeboard would be WP:COIN, The creeper2007. See WP:COICOIN for some guidance on this. You could also contact ArbCom, as described in that section and also at Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Solicitations by paid editors; I'm sure they would appreciate any evidence you have from the live chat. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:15, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
COIN is indeed the right venue. I have posted it there as a courtesy. @The creeper2007: you can continue the discussion at this link.ThatMontrealIP (talk) 19:21, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Button "This article has multiple issues...." on the article Ali Kaaf

Please excuse me if I don't know the english customs of Wiki.en that well. I don't understand the remarks. I write mainly in German. The article on Ali Kaaf was written after an interview in the studio of the German Foreign Ministry on the occasion of his scholarship. There is no takeover from the website. The written article is original and was translated by a native speaker Mitch. All facts are correct, including the titles of the pictures and names (the only word repetitions on the artist's website). The article was a lot of work. Also my efforts to get in contact with curb safe charmer via talk on June 16th didn't help, as he hasn't answered until today. Please help me, what else needs to be done? Thank you. --best regards~~ Artemesia (talk) 11:39, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

In my opinion, Ali Kaaf needs work, and the tags are valid. Curb Safe Charmer put them on, but other editors can remove them once improvements have been made. Large sections of text are without references. Much of the description of his style of working is not encyclopaedic in tone, and may have been copied or closely paraphrased from his website's "About" section. David notMD (talk) 15:11, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Artemesia: I removed the "copy/paste" warning, which was true when it was applied, and had since been resolved by other editors. The remaining tags are pretty straightforward:
The citation tag says that there are statements in the article that should have citations, but do not. Perhaps Curb Safe Charmer (who applied the tag) can comment on some examples.
The copyedit tag is related to some grammar problems and a lot of "art-speak" that may not be understandable to a general audience – resolve by fixing grammar and using more plain English.
The orphan tag is because the article is not linked to by any other Wikipedia articles – resolve by finding other articles that mention or should mention him. I linked from his mention in Syrian cultural caravan, which makes it technically no longer an orphan. Can someone comment on whether one link is enough to remove the tag? (BTW, we prefer to keep the Summary/headline used for talk page section names short (like a newspaper headline) and in plain text only (without URLs, formatting, etc.) ) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Banned?

I want to appeal being banned from editing for one year. Who do I contact? Smorgan01 (talk) 21:28, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Smorgan01: which of your accounts was blocked? TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:40, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Saving article in Sandbox

How to just save an article in sandbox without publishing? Slayer2493 (talk) 16:51, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

That is not possible, but you can put a {{sandbox}} about it --DanielArtikel (talk) 16:53, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
DA's reply is wrong. You can work on a draft in your own Sandbox. Clicking on "Publish changes" saves your content to your Sandbox. While the draft is not in mainspace, i.e, not found by searches, it is "public," in that you can ask editors to look at it. Think of it as a semi-private space. David notMD (talk) 22:32, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

So-called review of my article Lorenz Kienzle

Hey there, I've written quite a few articles for the english wikipedia so far. Usually I'm more familiar with the german WP. What happened to my article Lorenz Kienzle (translation of german article I also wrote, but quite a few years ago) now in a so-called "review" is something I honestly would consider as vandalism. Anybody here who'd help me out? The vandalist in question added like 100 "citation needed" blocks, marked a source I actually possess as a real book (containing the pics in question) with a "failed verification" note and furthermore added those "citation needed" blocks in a way that the html shows in the reading mode. I have not seen any article on a living (or dead) artist that verifies every single exhibition the person has made and had with an extra source. Of course I included the person's website where these solo shows easily can be traced (apart from the books and catalogues that were published and are listed as well in the "publications" section). I'm quite pissed, but don't want to start an edit war by just reverting the edits. Anybody here who would take a look? Thanks a lot in advance ... Grizma (talk) 20:58, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Grizma. The edits to the article are most definitely not vandalism, which has a very specific meaning on English Wikipedia. False accusations of vandalism are disruptive so please stop. My suggestion to you is to provide a reference in each place where the "citation needed" tag has been added, and remove each tag as you add the reference. I have written several biographies of artists and photographers, and I provide a reference for each exhibition. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 21:08, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hello, Grizma. I get that you're annoyed; please don't be. This is a collaborative project, and articles that you create are not your articles. You have not opened a discussion on either Talk:Lorenz Kienzle or User talk:Vexations. I agree that Vexations has added a lot of {{citation needed}} tags; but they have also improved some translation, attended to the formatting, and added at least one reference. That doesn't look like vandalism to me. The "failed verification" is on a citation that points only to a website (it doesn't mention a book). --ColinFine (talk) 21:14, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
OK, I see. The publication is mentioned in the text. In that case the citation should contain useful bibliographic information (author, title, date, page) not a useless link to the publisher's site. If the text is not available online, don't provide a link in the citation. --ColinFine (talk) 21:17, 4 July 2020 (UTC)

The "citation needed" has been inserted many times inside the brackets of the wikilinks, the excessive use of the "citation needed" makes the article unreadable. I think this is very bad style and it creates a lot of work for both of us, fixing the wikilinks etc. I have no problem with including more sources, I have a problem with the style here. Usually a note is left on the discussion page that you can deal with instead of this disruptive use of the citation stamp. I will get in touch with the user, but I wanted to hear more opinions before. Are you really telling me I should list every single catalogue and book which is already in the "publications" list again in the references? That's just blowing up the references without any meaningful content. Check out these article: Peter Keetman, Herlinde Koelbl, Toni Schneiders, Peter Thomann, Gottfried Jäger. Grizma (talk) 07:38, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

The article is VERY poorly sourced, notability has not been established. The argument that other poor quality articles exist is not a good one. Theroadislong (talk) 08:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Just a question: Since there are lots of places in that article that are not sourced, would using the {{refimprove}} template instead of in-line {{citation needed}} suits better for readability? Datapass (talk) 22:52, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

posting error Social Security

how does one contact and editor to change an error.. Example, Social Security is not a welfare program, because of being paid for by the individuals who will receive the funds. they money does not originate and come solely from the federal government, it comes, again the funds come from individuals.

there are other errors 2601:243:4100:FAE0:F926:FAC9:6EA3:311F (talk) 23:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

If you have a suggestion for changes to an article, post a note on that article's talk page. RudolfRed (talk) 23:28, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Romanisation of Greek Surnames

There are two different romanised variants of Δημόπουλος: Demopoulos and Dimopoulos. If I wanted to create a list of people with the surname Demopoulos, would I create a separate article or add them to Dimopoulos. Considering Athina redirects to Athena, wouldn't it make sense to have one article for both variants?

In addition, the feminine suffix for Greek surnames ending in -poulos is -poulou, would someone with the surname Papadopoulou be part of a list of people with the surname Papasthatopoulos?

Thanks

1dimlight (talk) 23:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@1dimlight: From what I know, as long as they come from the same native name, they go to the same disambiguation page (see Saitō and its many romanizations). Then, use WP:COMMONNAME for the disambiguation page title, which should be the most common romanization of the last name. Each entry should also follow COMMONNAME, but for that individual only. I really don't know about the masculine/feminine suffix though. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 23:47, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Why is there no article on Zachary Bush?

Zach Bush MD is a physician specializing in internal medicine, endocrinology and hospice care. He is an internationally recognized educator and thought leader on the microbiome as it relates to health, disease and food systems. Dr. Bush founded *Seraphic Group and the non-profit Farmer’s Footprint to develop root-cause solutions for human and ecological health. His passion for education reaches across many disciplines, including topics such as the role of soil and water ecosystems in human genomics, immunity, and gut/brain health. His education has highlighted the need for a radical departure from chemical farming and pharmacy, and his ongoing efforts are providing a path for consumers, farmers, and mega-industries to work together for a healthy future for people and planet.

Dr. Zach Bush obtained his undergraduate degree from the University of Colorado. In 2002, he received his medical degree from the University of Colorado Health Sciences Center. Dr. Bush is triple board certified in Internal Medicine and Endocrinology and Metabolism from the University of Virginia Health System, and in Hospice/Palliative Care. In 2012, Dr. Bush discovered a family of carbon-based redox molecules made by bacteria. His focus is on the use of these molecules in humans to compensate for the disruption of the body's natural defense systems by glyphosate and other dietary and pharmaceutical toxins.

In 2019 he co-authored with Robert Rountree "Alternative and Complementary Therapies." Jun 2019.121-128.http://doi.org/10.1089/act.2019.29220.zbu

He has made the rounds of the health and social consciousness community and is a compelling, charismatic speaker with some genuine insights about the gut biome that should be heard but are overextended beyond his zone of expertise and delivered with a rock-solid surety that makes other people assume he must be right.

His questioning of the wisdom and accuracy of research and policy relating to the cornoa virus (COVID19) has won him a following among conspiracy theorists and argument among the medical research and practice community.

Internal Medicine and Endocrinology and Metabolism

University of Colorado (BS) University of Colorado Health Sciences Center (MD)

 PVHoward (talk) 18:44, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to The Teahouse PVHoward the simple answer is because nobody has written it, we are all volunteers here, if you think he might pass the criteria at WP:GNG and there are sufficient reliable independent sources you could begin at WP:AFC. Theroadislong (talk) 18:59, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A quick internet search found very little content about Zach Bush that was either not created by Zach Bush, interviews with Zach Bush, or taken from press releases. I doubt he meets Wikipedia's definition of notability. You can try, but in my opinion any draft will be declined. David notMD (talk) 23:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

User page edit

Hello Wikipedians, I'm having some trouble with the appropriate templates to use on my user page, I'll appreciate if someone helps me with that.

Thanks Josedimaria237 (talk) 01:06, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Josedimaria237 (talk) 01:06, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: If you're referring to the userboxes that are showing up as red links, it's because those userboxes do not exist because a user has not created them yet. Please visit Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries to see what people have created so far. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 03:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Removing a questionable paragraph

I'm working on this article - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Perkins and there is a paragraph with a citation that simply says "Former employee from 1966 - 1970". May I remove it since it is undocumented and seems to be a minor issue? I can't find any reliable source (or anything other than fake copying websites) when I googled "Margret Geraghty dorothy perkins"

"One newspaper advertisement for management trainees asked: 'Will curls come in? Will maxis make it?' However, the stores never really got to grips with sixties boutique culture. Author Margret Geraghty who worked there for a while in the late sixties remembers that all the sales staff had to wear nylon uniforms: 'They were cerise with a zip up the front. Forget dolly birds. They looked more like canteen assistants.' There were also blue nylon ones with zips down the back and turtle neck with bow, which were exceptionally hard to zip up, and the assistants used to have to zip each other up. The exception was the store manager, who was permitted to wear her own clothes.[citation needed] Ihaveadreamagain 20:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Ihaveadreamagain, it appears to be an original research, which is against Wikipedia's policies. Also the statements made remains unsourced. You can remove them with proper explanations in edit summary ~ Amkgp 💬 06:09, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Author Wikipedia Page

I think there should be an article about historian and author Eric Cervini who's new book The Deviant's War: The Homosexual vs. The United States of America was an instant NYT Bestseller and is the first LGBTQ History book to make the NYT list in nearly 30 years. I do want to make sure he passes "notability" standards before spending time writing an article.

Here is the NYT review of his book: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/06/02/books/review/deviants-war-eric-cervini.html The Guardian: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2020/jun/07/the-deviants-war-frank-kameny-gay-equality-review-eric-cervini Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/outlook/how-a-stubborn-ex-federal-employee-launched-the-gay-rights-movement/2020/06/11/b7d0a6b8-a059-11ea-b5c9-570a91917d8d_story.html Anderson Cooper 360 appearance: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/2006/15/acd.01.html

Thanks! Teachinghistory (talk) 19:10, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Teachinghistory Welcome to Wikipedia and Teahouse. If you think he might pass the criteria at WP:GNG and notability and there are sufficient reliable independent sources as you highlighted above then you can begin at WP:AFC. Also you can have a look at your first article for a beginner's guide to Wikipedia editing and article creation. ~ Amkgp 💬 19:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Teachinghistory. In my opinion formed by some Googling, his book The Deviant's War is almost certainly a notable book, but I found much less significant coverage of Cervini himself in reliable sources. I suggest starting with a Wikipedia article about the book, which could contain a section about the author. Of course, if the book keeps getting lots of coverage, perhaps the author will as well, or maybe he will write other notable works. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:44, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Draft:Anne Kabagambe

Are there any reviewers willing to take a look at the draft above? It's been pending review for over 5 weeks now. Davykamanzi → talk • contribs • alter ego 21:04, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Davykamanzi: I'm not a new page patroller, but took a look to get you feedback. I'm not sure the sources and her position demonstrate notability. Almost all the sources are primary sources put out by her employers, with only the French African Shapers site seeming to be independent coverage. I doubt that one article about her in a French semi-reliable publication is enough, and I'm also unsure that being executive director of the World Bank Group's Africa Group 1 constituency is enough either. I think the submission will be rejected unless you can find better sourcing. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:38, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A reminder that Teahouse volunteers do not serve as AfC reviewers. David notMD (talk) 23:50, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
A reminder that any editor is welcome to comment productively on any AfC draft they find interesting, whether here at the Teahouse or at any other appropriate venue. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

 Chemboy545 (talk) 22:14, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

@Chemboy545: Because that's the way the wiki software chooses to organize its filesystem. If I've misunderstood your question, perhaps you can re-phrase or expand on it? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:20, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@AlanM1: I cannot integrate your response given the software is written by administrators and does not explain why the organization is as such. Chemboy545 (talk) 22:31, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Chemboy545: The software is written by developers who work for the WMF and others. I am not one of them, nor are many of them likely to be readers of this page. It's not clear what your question is. Perhaps you'll have better luck waiting for someone else to answer, or ask at WP:VPT, but you might consider better explaining what it is you want to know. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:37, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Chemboy545. You might find an answer at meta:Help:Contents. --ColinFine (talk) 22:42, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Chemboy545: /wiki/ identifies them as wiki pages. The following is a bit technical. The url form is determined by mw:Manual:$wgArticlePath. Wikipedia and other Wikimedia wikis set $wgArticlePath = '/wiki/$1'; in [16] and [17]. A website can have other content than wiki pages. Wikipedia is only a wiki but it also has page histories, diffs, and so on. They usually have different url's starting with https://en.wikipedia.org/w/. Our robots.txt at https://en.wikipedia.org/robots.txt says Disallow: /w/. This asks bots like web crawlers to not burden our servers by visiting url's starting with https://en.wikipedia.org/w/. They are also omitted from search engine results. The "View history" link at Example says https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Example&action=history. The /wiki/ url http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Example?action=history also works but the /w/ form is preferred and used by builtin features. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:09, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Suppose I want to mention about the section 2.2 of the {{refimprove}} template page. What is the right way to link directly to that section? Datapass (talk) 23:02, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Interesting questions, Datapass. The documentation for templates is usually transcluded from a /doc page, so the answer seems to be [[Template:More citations needed/doc#{{More footnotes needed}}]]. Note that in this case, because the section header contains a link to a template, I had to use {{tl}} for it. --ColinFine (talk) 23:31, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@Datapass: The above doesn't work. [[Template:More citations needed#%7B%7BMore footnotes needed%7D%7D]] works: Template:More citations needed#{{More footnotes needed}}. I used Help:URL#Fixing links with unsupported characters to encode the brackets so they don't call {{More footnotes needed}} instead of linking the section. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:40, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
That's weird, PrimeHunter. My suggestion does work from the "Preview changes" screen (I checked at the time, and have just verified), but not in the published page! --ColinFine (talk) 08:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@ColinFine: It doesn't work in preview in the default editor. It works for you because you have enabled "New wikitext mode" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-betafeatures. VisualEditor also gives another result than the saved page. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:14, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Templates


{{Chatbox|header=About me|text=I want to help the Wikipedia by creating templates, like this.<br>I will try to create a template for you, if you want to.<br>If I did something wrong, please tell me.|signature=[[User:DanielArtikel|DanielArtikel]] ([[User talk:DanielArtikel|talk]]) 09:44, 10 July 2020 (UTC)|color=9392031|color2=#992839}}





Is that ok? --DanielArtikel (talk) 09:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Or need I help with designing Templates? --DanielArtikel (talk) 09:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
DanielArtikel Hello there! unfortunately you are not allowed to use the Teahouse to promote your templates, i will now close this case, many thanksTrains2050 (talk) 10:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Reversions on talk page

Hello,

I have been patrolling the edit filter and doing vandalism reversion and user warnings, etc. An IP attempted to vandalize, but it got disallowed by the edit filter. I left a level 1 edit filter warning on their talk page, followed by a level 2 after they repeated their actions a couple minutes later. An hour ago, they undid my edit adding the second warning.

I know that you can remove things from your talk page, (and that it is frowned upon), but I was wondering if it would be acceptable to add the warning back in, so that in case they continue to vandalize, all of their warnings are actually there? Or should I just leave them alone?

Thanks, Giraffer (munch) 09:11, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Giraffer: Hello there! As you said they vandalized a few times, it is a good idea to report the ip address to: WP:AIV, Please explain the whole case and an admin will review your case.Trains2050 (talk) 09:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Trains2050, they haven't reached their 4 warning limit (they only have 2, now 1 due to this issue) yet so I haven't reported them to AIV... is there anything else you recommend? Giraffer (munch) 09:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Giraffer If the IP stops vandalising, yust dont do anything; leave it be. If the IP continiues vandalising, yust scale up to a lvl 3 warning, and if they are beyoynd the fth, yust report. Blanking warnings doesn't mean you never go them, and I can say you that Wikipedia admins are very good at looking up such simple things. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 09:50, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Ok thanks. Giraffer (munch) 09:52, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Giraffer, i suggest that you give them a level 3 warning next not a level 1 warning as anyone can see the talkpage history and will understand why you gave them level 3 warning not a level 1 warning, if you want you can also put a note in the warning saying ' this is your level 3 warnings not a level 1 because you had previous warnings that you deleted'. Thanks Trains2050 (talk) 09:53, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I also feel happy to jump up one or more levels, often leaving a warning like: "this is the third bad faith edit you've made to this article" - that lets others appreciate the level of activity, even if they've not been warned before. Thank you for not warning and immediately notifying at AIV. It wastes everyone's time if you don't wait until the warning has been breached, as the report will more than likely be rejected. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:13, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

AAAS members listing — what to do?

Hi All,

I patrol the dead end pages category and came across this article [ List of American Academy of Arts and Sciences members (2006 - 2019) ], which seems to be just a listing of all AAAS members by year (seemingly lifted from the AAAS website cited as the source); there are a couple of other similar articles, accessible from this 'TOC page' of sorts: [ List of American Academy of Arts and Sciences members ]. I'm guessing that many of the names on the list could be linked to existing articles (which would obviously be a mammoth task if done manually!), but before I even think of tackling that, I wanted to ask for advice on this, as I've never come across a page like this.

Hence my questions:

  1. Should this article be kept, or does it violate some policy? (If it's likely to be deleted, then obviously no point in expending energy on linking it.)
  2. If kept, should the names be linked to articles, or should this just be left as a dead end page (whether tagged accordingly, or not)?
  3. If it should have links, is there a bot or some other automated way of adding the links, or must it be done manually?

Any advice welcome, thanks in advance! :) -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 07:08, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Pinging HRShami, who created the articles. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 07:55, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
On HRSami's Talk page there is a recent conversation with several well-respected Wikipedia editors that appears to end in favor of creating these lists even though many of the members of these prestigious organizations had not yet had Wikipedia articles created about them. David notMD (talk) 10:05, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
I suppose a person could Wikilink every name one at a time to see what turns up blue or red. Alternatively, HRSami could consider doing the Wikilinking during the process of creating the lists content. David notMD (talk) 10:19, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
@DoubleGrazing, HRShami, and David notMD: I was concerned that it seems to be nothing more than a duplicate of the source, with no value added, which is not really what we're supposed to be about. Looking at the discussions with Nick Moyes, DGG, and Robert McClenon a year ago (about the IEEE lists), they felt the members were all notable by virtue of the selective nature of the membership and so the list's redlinks would provide a good tool for working through those missing articles. It was suggested to add relevant info, like dates of activity and election to membership. It was also suggested that Wikidata be the repository for that additional data so it can be maintained in one place and keep both the list and the articles updated, which makes a lot of sense to me.
Linking seems to be the very least that should be done. When I have to add links to many items, I basically add all the link markup and then preview each one with the Navigation Popups gadget to make sure it goes to the right article (not someone else with that name), disambiguating as needed. It's a slow, manual, necessary process. If someone wants to move the discussion to somewhere else, please feel free – there were too many options for me to decide on. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:38, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
adding links to these lists is particularly helpful in indicating people about whom we need an article. Such articles are a particularly good way for beginning editors to start, because the people are certain to be notable by WP:PROF. DGG ( talk ) 20:48, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
I will comment, now that the IEEE list is mentioned, that the terminology for the AAAS is somewhat different than for other comparable learned societies. The IEEE is a professional society, and membership is open to electrical engineers and computer scientists, and is nothing special. The IEEE also honors a few people as Fellows, which is covered by academic notability criterion 3. The term Fellow is also used in Great Britain in for royally chartered bodies such as Fellow of the Royal Society and Fellow of the Royal Society of the arts. It appears that membership in the American Academy of Arts and Sciences is selective, not just a matter of paying your dues. To further confuse things, there is another AAAS, which is the American Association for the Advancement of Science, which has both members and fellows, where members are simply subscribers to its journal, and being a fellow of the AAAS is a significant honor. Robert McClenon (talk) 00:01, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
That's why I created this list because being member of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences is an honor and seemed to me like an honor that makes one notable. I thought it would create a good list where people can find academics to write about. I created the List_of_American_Physical_Society_Fellows and XOR'easter helped me in completing the list and linking all the people. I pinged them for their help on this as well. They might come up with an easy solution to create all the wikilinks. Alternatively, I will manually make the wikilinks. But I would like to get a consensus here first that this list does indeed belong on Wikipedia. As a few people have mentioned above, it is just a copy/paste from the source. If this does not belong on Wikipedia and would be removed down the road, I would hate to put in all the effort for creating wikilinks.HRShami (talk) 04:00, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Since no one else has linked to it, WP:LISTPEOPLE would seem to be the relevant policy here.--Shantavira|feed me 11:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

About my Draft called Draft:Pop Fun Tv

Hi can I ask if my draft is ready for review?Tommy Turnbull (talk) 12:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Tommy Turnbull (talk) 12:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Tommy Turnbull, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is, No, Draft:Pop Fun TV is nowhere near ready for review, because it does not have a single reference. You have made the classic beginner's mistake (I made it myself 15 years ago) of writing an article from what you know. Wikipedia isn't interested what you know, or what I know, or what any random person on the Internet knows: it is only interested in material that has already been published in a reliable place - and mostly, material that has been written and published independently of the subject of the article. Solid, substantial, reliable, and wholly independent sources are the starting point for the extremely difficult task of creating an article: anything you do before that - any notes you make, any text you write - is at risk of being entirely wasted if you can't find the necessary sources to establish taht the subject is notable. Please have a good look at your first article.
Also, the fact that you have created an account, and the very first thing you have done is to try the extremely difficult task of creating an article (no, it wasn't an accident that I repeated that phrase) makes me wonder if you have some connection with Pop Fun TV? If you have, please read about editing with a conflict of interest. --ColinFine (talk) 12:47, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

User:DanielArtikel

User:DanielArtikel does not appear to be here to work on the encyclopedia, and from looking at his contributions, appears to have been blocked at the German Wikipedia. Any thoughts on whether he should be blocked here? David notMD (talk) 11:17, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

David notMD Hello, the only thing i can tell you is that he was advertising his templates on the Teahouse, but if he has a history of vandalism he should be blocked in my opinion, thanks Trains2050 (talk) 11:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
He is blocked on german Wikipedia for being a sock belonging to this socking zooo. Said page on german Wikipedia says that this user wants to add a successor/clone of Tay (bot). Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 11:58, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
"DA" now cautioned on User page (thank you VS). David notMD (talk) 13:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Juegos Y ESTATE

— Preceding unsigned comment added by Pedrito2009 (talk • contribs) 14:58, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Pedrito2009 this is the English language Wikipedia, so do you have a question about the English Wikipedia? Those files appear to be in Spanish, if you have a question about the Spanish Wikipedia, their help desk appears to be at es:Wikipedia:Café/Archivo/Ayuda/Actual. Joseph2302 (talk) 15:03, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Creating of userboxes

Thanks @Ganbaruby: (Say hi!) but I couldn't find some of those userboxes.

My question is; Can I create a userbox and how do you create a userbox? Josedimaria237 (talk) 15:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC) Josedimaria237 (talk) 15:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: Of course you can create a userbox! To start, go to a subpage of your userspace, for example, User:Josedimaria237/userbox1. Play around with the parameters of Template:Userbox to make something you like. Check out this one that I made as an example. To use the userbox, simply put the name of your userbox page in curly brackets, for example, {{User:Josedimaria237/userbox1}}. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 15:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Full Length Feature Black Lives Matter Film

Full Length Feature Black Lives Matter Film Edit Hello my name is BK Wilson, owner of Name Day Studios LLC. I've advocated for black rights for over a decade and currently on Amazon Prime with my short #BLM film, Dichotomy Brewing.

I am campaigning to create a feature film to educate everyone in America and beyond about the expendability of black people currently in the USA. Change has to come and alot of potential supporters are confusing the Black Lives Matter movement to the Black Lives Matter website that contributes to ActBlue, a political organization.

My film will be a unbiased report on this issue and the movement surrounding Black Lives Matter. I recently made the front page of the paper, Tuesday June 23 this year in the Daily/Sunday Review serving NEPA and upstate NY.

My purpose for requesting your help is to hopefully appeal to your better Angels regarding the systemic racism keeping artists that work as hard as I am from being heard on the same level as anyone else that works as hard and for this long. I primarily would like to not be confused by potential donors with the ActBlue website while fundraising on Facebook and other sites. Wikipedia gives this film and our cause legitimacy.

Please consider my request for help. I tried to write an article myself but was told it was not valid and only people with news articles about them are included on Wikipedia. Now that I have made the news can your website please grant me the same public acceptance as IMDB.com, The Daily/Sunday Review and Kickstarter.com granted my films.

Thank you for your time in this matter, B.K. Wilson 2601:98A:8180:17E0:B023:CE37:BFB8:B4EB (talk) 17:06, :Hello Unregistere3d editor 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Unregistered editor B.K. Wilson
Wikipedia is not the place to campaign for anything, to tell the world about anything. Wikipedia is not present to help raise funds for anything (except to a limited degree for Wikipedia itself). Also, as per WP:CRYSTAL, Wikipedia rarely covers things that have not yet happened. Wikipedia summarizes what independent reliable sources have already published about notable topics, not what people or organizations say about themselves. When reliable sources are systematically biased Wikipedia will inevitably inherit some of that boas, as it will not have articles about topics not covered by sources.
If you individually been covered in some detail by independent published reliable sources (which are not limited to news articles) then there could perhaps be an article about you, but it would be best if someone else were to write it. I might add that the IMDB, in particular, is not considered a reliable source here. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 17:27, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

How to create a wikipedia page for the company I work for?

The company I work for wants to create a Wikipedia page. I am not sure how to create a Wikipedia page for the company I work for. Can I directly create a page for the company I work for? or I need some permission first to create it? Stephanie.ecms (talk) 21:44, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi Stephanie.ecms and welcome to the Teahouse, please have a very close look at these guidelines here Wikipedia:Plain_and_simple_conflict_of_interest_guide and Wikipedia:Notability_(organizations_and_companies) and the tips you already received at your talk page. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:47, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

I am confusing that can I create the page for the company I work for. The company I work for is a technical support international Express company with a global cross-border end-to-end delivery capability. We also have like LinkedIn account. Could you advise can I create a page for the company I work for? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephanie.ecms (talk • contribs) 22:09, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

On your Talk page, Ian put a ten step process for writing about a company if an employee. It is allowed. First step is declaring your paid status on your User page. You can then create a draft and submit it to Articles for Creation, for review. Key is finding published content about the company written by people who have no connection to the company. David notMD (talk) 22:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
@Stephanie.ecms I worry that the advice above might encourage you. It is technically possible, but please don't try. You will very likely fail. Kind regards from PJvanMill (talk) 23:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

The source like this if they consider as unbiased? Could I use these sources to create an article? https://ecommerceberlin.com/ecms-express,c,1353 https://blog.shipandco.com/en/ecms/ When we introduce the company. Can we use this to show we are a qualified shipping vendor for Amazon? https://www.amazon.com/gp/help/customer/display.html?nodeId=201910090 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephanie.ecms (talk • contribs) 17:06, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Stephanie.ecms. Frankly, Wikipedia doesn't care in the slightest whether or not you are a shipping vendor for Amazon, unless an independent commentator has found that fact sufficiently interesting to mention it specifically in a published article. And "independent" means "not prompted by your company in any way". That is the kind of information which is typically important for promotion, and typically unimportant for an encyclopaedia. --ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

I read the Talk page for the steps. But I am not sure how do I fill out the template on my user page for the first step. Could you please advise? Stephanie.ecms (talk) 18:33, 10 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stephanie.ecms (talk • contribs) 18:23, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

More references templates

Hello. Is it appropriate to remove the "needs additional citations for verification" template after adding references from RS, while leaving individual "citation needed" tags within the article? Or phrased another way, can an editor add RS references to an article, remove the broad banner at the top, and leave the individual citation needed tags? I sometimes feel that an article, in general, is adequately sourced after I add more references, but that old "citation needed" tags remain, often from years ago, both legitimately, and in some cases, due to edit warring, petulance, etc. Thank you. Caro7200 (talk) 16:14, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Caro7200: Yes, that is fine. The banner is if the entire article needs more citations. If most of it is cited except for a few places, the inline template is less obtrusive and more helpful. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 16:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you! Caro7200 (talk) 16:24, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Caro7200: See also WP:WTRMT (should be linked from the template itself). Mathglot (talk) 19:39, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Constitution of India citation

Dear fellow editors, in the article of <<Constitution of India>>, the preamble

has the ta"full citation needed". Can you explain what type of citation needed ?

Cheers... Anupam Dutta (talk) 16:21, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

User is referring to the tag following Note 12 at the article. Mathglot (talk) 19:44, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Anupamdutta73:, they are asking for details about this journal article, in order to properly fulfill the requirements of Wikipedia's WP:Verifiability policy. The reference currently is coded this way:
{{cite web | title= Constitutional supremacy vs parliamentary supremacy | url= http://www.cesruc.org/uploads/soft/130306/1-130306154F7.pdf | accessdate= 12 October 2015 | archive-url= https://web.archive.org/web/20151208060028/http://www.cesruc.org/uploads/soft/130306/1-130306154F7.pdf | archive-date= 8 December 2015 | url-status=dead }}
That's a good start, but it doesn't identify the journal name, the title, or other important features. Also, {{cite journal}} is a better template here, than {{cite web}}. Please fill out the following model, place it between <ref> tags, and use it as the reference:
{{cite journal |journal= |last= |first= |title= |url= |publisher= |date= |volume= |issue= |pages= |doi= |access-date= |url-status= |archive-url= |archive-date= }}
If you have questions about the fields, see {{cite journal}}. Mathglot (talk) 19:54, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Understanding Why a List Was Deleted

Hi everyone,

Not sure if a content warning is necessary but as a heads up the page in question relates to child abuse.

I've read the page about the deletion of Wikipedia pages, but I feel like I must be missing something since the page in question was deleted 13 years ago and obviously hasn't been restored. So, I'm seeking a bit of clarity here before bothering the person who deleted it (thank you in advance!).

I've been recently trying to address issues on pages where children have been victimized - my goal is to help ensure that these pages are accurate, well-written, and properly sourced to respect these children's stories. I have noticed that the "See also" sections of pages detailing child abuse often have a relatively long list of related cases (e.g., the page detailing Nubia Barahona's murder). I thought it might be more expedient/tidy to create a list of incidents of child abuse. I then discovered that a page did formerly exist but was deleted in 2007 November with the admin leaving the comment, "hell no, WP:BLP".

I am a bit confused as to how this violates the biographies of living persons rules as it would be a collection of articles that already exist and (in my inexperienced opinion) appear to be well-sourced. In addition, a category to this effect already exists.

Can someone please help me understand?

Thanks again! A — Preceding unsigned comment added by ApplePiePoliceState (talk • contribs) 01:35, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@ApplePiePoliceState: Welcome to Wikipedia, and thanks for working to make it better. Without seeing the content of the deleted article List_of_child_abuse_incidents, it would only be speculation as to what content was there. If you want to create a new list that only links to existing articles, that may be ok. I suggest using the WP:AFC process to create a draft for review. Alternatively, perhaps an admin will look at the deleted page and comment on what causes it to be deleted. RudolfRed (talk) 02:16, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
It was an unannotated list, mostly, though not exclusively, of names (mostly, perhaps consistently, the names of victims). So if it had been worth retention in anything like its existing form, it would have been more accurately retitled "List of child abuse victims". Some of the entries in the list took the form [[Incident|Name of victim]]. So hell no, WP:BLP1E. -- Hoary (talk) 04:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks to both RudolfRed and Hoary for helping me to understand this! I'm doing my best to wrap my head around all of the different policies/guidelines so this is truly appreciated. :) ApplePiePoliceState (talk) 20:13, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Unconstructive edits at Pandemic article

question about my edits that ‡ Єl Cid of Valencia

‡ Єl Cid of Valencia, why do you not consider my edits at Pandemic constructive? – — ° ′ ″ ≈ ≠ ≤ ≥ ± − × ÷ ← → · § 2604:3D08:D180:4500:F070:7D6:EC27:ABF5 (talk) 17:54, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

I have reviewed your edits and it is not considered constructive because YouTube is not a reliable source and also racism is not considered an infectious disease pandemic , see WP:RS for more info. Trains2050 (talk) 19:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
2604:3D08:D180:4500:F070:7D6:EC27:ABF5, I have left a message on your talk page explaining why your edits were undone. But to summarize here, you added racism to the pandemic article, listing it as a current pandemic in the article's lead. Although some may consider racism a pandemic, the article in question is about infectious diseases, which racism is not. Therefore your edit was undone. Also, in future, if you have an issue with something an editor did please take it up on their talkpage. The Teahouse is a place to ask about editing, not about resolving disuputes. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 19:30, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
FWIW, this issue will likely come up again as various governments and NGOs are declaring racism to be a health problem. Discussion over the appropriate terminology is likely to continue. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:00, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
E.g., "'We are Living in a Racism Pandemic,' Says APA President". American Psychological Association. 29 May 2020. Retrieved 10 July 2020.
—[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:03, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
A psychologist may title an editorial so, to make a point. Does not mean that racism is an infectious disease. David notMD (talk) 21:08, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
To be clear, I'm not taking a stance on the issue (certainly not here), just noting its notability. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:12, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Writing a wikipedia entry for a photographer

Hi I am trying to write a wiki entry for a phootgrapher whose work is not widely known in the fine art world. He was a very respected and well established American commercial/advertising photographer who also took an amazing series of images of some of the POP artists in the early 1960s. This work has been included in many publications. My first draft was rejected and I need to know how best to resubmit including references to books and catalogues his work has been published in. Would this be consdered 'References'? Please help as I am confused about the formatting. Thank you so much, Elizabeth Ecsmith32 (talk) 10:13, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Ecsmith32 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you represent this photographer, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required disclosures you may need to make(your draft mentions representation). Wikipedia articles should summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage state about a subject, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability; in this case, the definition of a notable creative professional. More information has been provided by the reviewer on your draft. Information on citing sources can be found at this introductory page. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Ecsmith32, hello! In general, no. What you need is per WP:BASIC not work he has done, but books and articles that has written about him. Without that, an article will not be accepted. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
See Herb Greene for an article about a photographer working in the same era, with the caveat that while that article exists, it does not have enough references, and is at risk for deletion if not improved. David notMD (talk) 11:10, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Herb Greene is a wretchedly underreferenced article, liberally spattered with promotional language such as "iconic" and "famed". As a model for an article about a photographer, it's terrible. -- Hoary (talk) 21:50, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I've removed some junk from the article on Greene. (David notMD, thank you for preceding me in this effort.) I hope that it has lost much of its promotional odor, though I'm sure that I'll have missed some spammy slivers. But it remains a terrible model for an article about a photographer. ¶ Lopifalko is an unusually energetic producer of informative, referenced, no-nonsense articles about photographers; see his list for inspiration. -- Hoary (talk) 23:14, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
This will be why Herb Greene is such a mess, COI original research. I'm tempted to push the article back to draftspace, as it's an unsourced mess. Joseph2302 (talk) 23:26, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Yes indeed. Though I'm not sure if policy permits such old articles (however defective) to be draftified. An alternative (if much uglier) approach would be (i) to replace the template at the top with "Unreferenced section" templates wherever appropriate plus "Citation needed" templates where needed within those sections that are sketchily sourced, (ii) to invite help at relevant Wikiproject talk pages (pop music, photography, San Francisco? but I haven't looked), (iii) return a year later and delete anything still not sourced. -- Hoary (talk) 23:43, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Let's take a look. I see a lot of material here, and am pretty sure that the man merits an article and that what you have produced could be made into a worthwhile article. However ... after talk at the start about our man's childhood, we start to read of his photography: He began working as a photographic assistant and studio manager for the renowned Vogue fashion photographer Clifford Coffin. After his time with Coffin, Kennedy launched his own commercial career and became a very successful freelance advertising agency photographer. | His work appeared in publications such as LIFE magazine and Sports Illustrated. His advertising work appeared in campaigns for national and international clients including Avon, GE, IBM, RJR Nabisco, American Express and Xerox. (Emphases added.) Rather obviously, you never need to say that anybody (or anything) is renowned: if it's true, it goes without saying. If the renown of the time is now forgotten, it may be suggested in the (currently feeble) article on Clifford Coffin. "Very successful" according to whom, and where does this person say so? This work in Life and Sports Illustrated -- was it advertising or editorial? And either way, we need evidence. And we need independent evidence that work was done for each of those companies. (The article Jill Freedman is, I think, a better model for this kind of thing than the one about Greene.) All the best with it! -- Hoary (talk) 22:12, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Indian Hate Propegenda against SIKHS For JUSTICE

Sikhs for justice page is semi protected and contains all the wrong facts and hate language against this human rights advocacy group that is fighting peaceful and democratic fight for the freedom Punjab according to UN Charter. Please an senior international editor must pay attention to this page. Indian State and its Online propaganda machinery is keeping close eye on this page. PLease HELP!! Openthedoor799 (talk) 00:15, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

You are writing about the article Sikhs for Justice. The place to discuss this is Talk:Sikhs for Justice. I notice that you have already been there and have tampered with another person's signed comment. I have undone this tampering of yours. Do not tamper with other people's comments. If you do so again, you will be prevented from making any edits, anywhere. Now, please return to Talk:Sikhs for Justice and make your suggestions for the article, calmly and persuasively, citing published evidence. -- Hoary (talk) 00:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Toni Morrison and Literature of the American South

I realize that Toni Morrison's origins are in Ohio, but it seems to me that the concerns she raises in her work about the experience of African Americans are deeply rooted in the South and share themes with the canon of Southern Literature. I wonder why she is not mentioned in that article. Camiloraoul (talk) 20:01, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Camiloraoul. I'm afraid I am unable to ascertain what article you might be referring to, as you failed to supply any page link, nor have you previously edited any articles from this account. In any event, we would have suggested that any concerns you might have over bias or lack of content in any article is expressed on the talk page of the relevant article, along with any necessary links to sources for others to check out. Just look for the 'Talk' tab and post your comments there, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:46, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Maybe Southern United States literature. Allows for authors who live/lived in the South or wrote about same. You could consider adding one of her books to the Notable Works list. David notMD (talk) 21:10, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Toni Morrison was born and raised in Lorain, Ohio, a multi-cultural, multi-ethnic industrial city which is in the very northern part of Ohio, on Lake Erie. She was connected with and very fond of Lorain her entire life. Her early novels were set in Northern states such as Ohio, Michigan and Maine. She spent most of her professional life in New York and at Princeton University in New Jersey. Yes, her most successful novel was Beloved, a novel of slavery in the south, but even that book was part of a trilogy, and Harlem was a major setting of that trilogy. She was an African-American woman writer, one of the very best, but in my opinion not really a "Southern writer". Other opinions may vary. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:37, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Beloved (novel) won a Pulitzer and other accolades (and became a movie). My opinion is that it is worthy for addition to that list. David notMD (talk) 01:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Linking

Is linking a person (who doesn’t have a Wikipedia article) to a wikidata page acceptable? My query is regarding actions on Lucas Matthysse and Walter Matthysse; there’s a strange occurrence of multiple new accounts insisting on adding a mention of Walter Matthysse Jr. with a link to a wikidata page in the lead sections of both articles (diff) (I’ve reverted attempts on the grounds that, while he may be their relative, he’s simply not notable so should be mentioned elsewhere). Is the wikidata link an acceptable thing? I haven’t been editing all that long but I have yet to see a person being linked to a wikidata page. It seems unnecessary and quite frankly, rather pointless. – 2.O.Boxing 00:25, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Linking a person's name, or a term, to a WikiData page can be worthwhile. I often do it myself (see for example the article Teikō Shiotani). I do it because the WD page helpfully links to a pages about the linked term in at least one other Wikipedia. I looked in one of the pair of articles you point to. The last sentence of the lead read (in an earlier version) "And his nephew is Walter Matthysse Jr.who is also a professional boxer." If this is necessary anywhere, it's certainly not necessary in the lead. I suggest that it's not necessary anywhere. And the WD page doesn't link to an article about Junior in the Wikipedia of any language. I don't know what the motivation was for creating Q96745630 or mentioning this man within articles that are supposed to be about other people, but the possibility of promotion does occur to me. -- Hoary (talk) 01:16, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
I took a look at the article you linked and can see the advantages it can have. Thank you for making me aware. Slightly off topic but still related, is there any point of this being around? – 2.O.Boxing 01:36, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
It is a (not good) draft about the son. Up to the creator and other editors to improve it before submitting to AfC. David notMD (talk) 01:41, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Okie doke. Thanks. – 2.O.Boxing 01:50, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Category:Treaties of the Kingdom of Italy (1861–1946)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Treaties_of_the_Kingdom_of_Italy_(1861%E2%80%931946)

Hello, I am writing because there appears to be information lacking from the given page. Specifically, there is no mention of the Italian treaty with Hawai'i from July 22, 1863. I would be grateful if someone could look into adding this information, and hearing back. Thanks! 2601:249:1680:F040:387F:492D:6B05:468F (talk) 03:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

A category page will only contain other categories or articles. There are many entries on the List of bilateral treaties signed by the Hawaiian Kingdom, but only one of them has an article.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:43, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

You Guys Are Homophobes

Poophole696 soft-blocked for username violations ~ Amkgp 💬 19:29, 11 July 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.

I put a fun fact on a wikipedia article about tyler the creator’s album “igor” about him being gay, (which that whole album is about) and it got taken down because it “wasn’t constructive” considering he is actually gay isn’t that a little offensive? i don’t understand why my edit got taken down. i’m very upset by this act of homophobia. 2600:100E:B00E:282E:4016:2787:5549:F5CF (talk) 17:01, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, IP user: I presume you are Poophole696. We appreciate your wanting to contribute, but there were several problems with your edit to Igor (album). First, it was in the wrong place - you put it in the infobox. Secondly, while you provided a citation, you didn't format it corrently, so it appeared in the middle of the text; thirdly, the issue is already covered in a whole section in the article Tyler, the Creator. Since the section is called "Controversy", Wikipedia needs to cover the discussion, not just a single view of it. If you think you have something to add, please start a discussion at Talk:Tyler, the Creator. We, or at least I, don't appreciate being called a homophobe because an editor disagreed with your edit on an article I had never heard of. Please see WP:CIVIL. --ColinFine (talk) 17:26, 9 July 2020 (UTC)
Update: Account soft-blocked for username violation, per WP:DISRUPTNAME. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:14, 9 July 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.

Re: Future Events

Wanted to get some inputs on if there are any additional actions that are required from my end when trying to mark an article for deletion.

The article under question is 2020 Super Start Batteries 400. This is about a future event, but sections of the event have been written as though the event has been completed. E.g. the commentators who have called the race. Also, the article has empty tables for the starting grid, ending leaderboard etc.

I initially marked it with a proposed for deletion tag, and left a comment at the author's talk page, and when that was deleted, I placed the AFD tag and added my notes in the page where discussion was supposed to happen.

Is there something else that is required from my end.

I had to do something similar in these pages as well.

2020 Super Start Batteries 400

2020 FireKeepers Casino 500

2020 Consumers Energy 500

Thanks much,

Kaisertalk (talk) 05:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC) Kaisertalk (talk) 05:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Kaisertalk, and welcome to the Teahouse. There were a couple of key steps which were missed, however I have fixed those up for you. There's some simple instructions at WP:AFDHOW on how to properly list articles for deletion; all three steps listed there need to be completed for the article to be properly listed. Alternatively, you can install and use Twinkle which is a semi-automated tool which can do these steps for you. Happy editing, --Jack Frost (talk) 05:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you so much Jack Frost. Just tried Twinkle and it looks great. Thanks. Kaisertalk (talk) 06:03, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Kallars described as theifs

Kallar is holifying name whereas the God Kallalagar was worshiped in southern parts of tamilnadu. There were many people " piraimalar kallar" who has fought for freedom of india , the well-known fight with british by piramalai kallars. They are the descendats of King Raja Raja Chola.Pudukottai thondaiman kings . Kallars are majorly found in southern districts of tamil nadu like Madurai ,theni ,pudukkottai ,thanjavur and Dindigul.

There is a word od difference between Kallar and Kalvar - Theif Raajadheeben (talk) 16:23, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@Raajadheeben: If you have a change you would like to make to an article, please raise the issue on the article's talk page. Note that any substantial change (like the area you are discussing) requires a reliable source (see those blue links for more information). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 18:14, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Convenience link: Kallar (caste).   Maproom (talk) 08:20, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Files across different language Wikipedias

How do non-free files work across different language Wikipedias, provided they are for the same use? WDM10 (talk) 09:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi WDM10. A non-free file may not be uploaded to Wikimedida Commons which is the only way to display a single upload at multiple wikis. It has to be uploaded separately to each wiki where it is used, assuming the wiki allows the use. Rules vary and some wikis don't allow any non-free files. See meta:Non-free content. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:32, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Thanks. Can you please just make sure I've done everything right here? WDM10 (talk) 09:54, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
@WDM10: 500 × 500 pixels breaks Wikipedia:Non-free content#Image resolution. A square image should be at most 316 × 316 pixels to stay below 100,000 pixels. It's displayed smaller in the infobox anyway. I have added {{Non-free reduce}} to the file page. This should fix it soon without further action. I see the Russian Wikipedia also has it at 500 × 500 pixels. I don't know the language or their policies. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:17, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Thanks a lot for your help. WDM10 (talk) 10:19, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Is Wikipedia aware its shyness about using visual images causes people to go to other websites?

First of all, let me say that I love Wikipedia and happily kick you $100 annually. I'm a blogger about Japan and anime and often use it to beef up my research on topics I write about.

I was researching an idea for a blog post based on the history of "hentai" anime, reading the Cream Lemon Wikipedia page. Seeing this page reminded me of a long-standing limitation I have sensed with Wikipedia — not so much with this page specifically, as it's about 18+ anime, but with many topics, such as a more general anime, such as Gundam. That limitation is that there are often no images, or only the bare minimum of images, because (as I perceive) institutional shyness about not wanting to use any copyrighted image that isn't clearly in the public domain, despite it clearly being okay for an educational source such as Wikipedia to use any image of Amuro Ray (for example) that was from the show itself (e.g. not fanart).

One common use case for doing internet searches for me is google the characters of an anime so I don't make a mistake, referring to a character with the wrong name, which would embarrass me. If I needed to hit the List of Mobile Suit Zeta Gundam characters page to check a character's visual image, well I'm not going to be rewarded as there are no images there. And so I have to google "Wikia mobile suit zeta gundam characters" to get actual visuals of the characters I need. Wikia type sites offer a lower quality than Wikipedia to my mind, but they are more useful as they're not "institutionally shy" about showing images.

I honestly don't expect much to change about Wikipedia. You are a big institution and have a certain way of thinking, and I've butted heads with your editors enough to know there would be resistance to making changes. I just wanted to point out what I consider to be the biggest limitation of Wikipedia, the general lack of useful visuals in many cases, which limits the kind of research I can do, and/or causes me to cross-reference research with other websites. Peter Payne (talk) 02:10, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

@Ppayne: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for your thoughts. The standards here are more strict than the legal threshold of fair use. To use a non-free image, it must meet all the criteria at WP:NFCC. RudolfRed (talk) 02:29, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Ppayne. Think of it this way: Wikipedia strives to be a source of free knowledge that can be freely shared as widely as possible, both its text and its images. Non free images should be kept to a bare minimum and limited to low resolution images that indisputably contribute to encyclopedic knowledge. Not for decoration of Wikipedia articles about popular culture, when anyone can use Google Images to find copyrighted images off Wikipedia of their niche interests. Our sister project Wikimedia Commons has roughly 50 million graphic files that can be used for any purpose anywhere. You can help increase that number by freely licensing images that you have created. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Ppayne. Thanks for your thoughts. I notice you say "causes people to go to other websites" as though that were a problem. I don't see it that way. Wikipedia is a resource that is created collaboratively, and I see it as a part of a larger collaborative (not competitive) world. There are many kinds of information that Wikipedia, as a matter of policy, does not hold, but it is fine for it to hold links to that information, within certain limitations. I agree that the limitations on images (and audio and video) are disappointing, and I'm sure that these limitations are there mostly for legal rather than editorial reasons. But if a limitation sends people to another site, I don't see that as a failure. --ColinFine (talk) 11:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Riggy Marz

Stephen Melnick (born late 80s) better known by his stage name Riggy Marz, is an American Rapper from Los Angeles, CA. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monkey Canyon B4 the fires (talk • contribs) 08:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Do you have a question? -- Hoary (talk) 12:00, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

My first article

I am a guest editor, overseeing a group adding theatre articles. I just wrote my first article but this was the message I received: "This is not a Wikipedia article: It is an individual user's work-in-progress page, and may be incomplete and/or unreliable." And it said that it may take 7 weeks to review the article before it's added. Am I following the correct process? Ruth RuthieLawrence (talk) 02:20, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for asking. Virtually everybody is a guest; some stick around for longer than others. You have written a draft, Draft:Newfoundland Travelling Theatre Company. It is indeed not an article. You're following the correct process. (However, I think you have quite a bit more work to do on your draft.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:36, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Reviewed - and declined. The reviewer provided a comment on what is needed before resubmitting. The review process is not a queue, so it can truly be days to months. I put one of the refs in a proper format. You can use that as a model to fix the other refs, as Wikipedia prefers that refs not be 'bare URLs'. David notMD (talk) 10:59, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Minimally, you want three (rarely, two) references that are AT LENGTH about the theater company. Brief mention refs can be cited if those contribute factual information, but a slew of brief mentions is not a substitute for high quality refs. David notMD (talk) 13:44, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Create a page

How I create a page Abhilash2001kar (talk) 11:00, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Abhilash2001kar Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia has articles, not mere "pages". Successfully creating a new Wikipedia article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice, and diving in without at least a basic understanding of some of the process usually results in disappointment and hurt feelings as your work is mercilessly edited and deleted by others. I don't want you to have bad feelings, so it is a good idea for you to first spend time editing existing articles in areas that interest you, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. It's also a good idea for you to use the new user tutorial to learn more about using Wikipedia.
If you still want to attempt to create a new article, you should review Your First Article and then go to Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. This way you find out problems first, instead of afterwards when it will be treated more critically. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Abhilash2001kar You have created Barabatia, Bhadrak by by-passing the review process. At present it has no references. You should add references, if such can be found, or else it is at risk of being nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 13:52, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

New conflicts of interest

I know there's a noticeboard specifically for COI issues, but I'm really asking for the community's opinion rather than for some specific action to be taken. I observed the discussions leading up to Bnguyen1114 being banned from enwiki, on account of an arbitration committee opinion which the blocking admin explained as "Being part of someone's campaign team, paid or otherwise, does give rise to a COI." I found this surprising since taken at face value, this would prohibit me from editing articles about Sanders Bernie-san, Newman Marie-san and Bowman Jamaal-san simply because I did some GOTV, and since political opponents were mentioned in the above discussions I would also be unable to edit articles about anyone who ran for President in 2016 or 2020. That's why I thought I'd ask if that's really how the community at large thinks about conflicts of interest. Thanks! 209.166.108.199 (talk) 15:35, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Being a member of a campaign team and doing GOTV especially on a national and presidential level are two entirely different things. Praxidicae (talk) 15:37, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Praxidicae: That seems like common sense and I agree. However, it seems like the blocking admin, in the discussion I linked to, disagrees that there's a meaningful difference between the two things you mentioned. That's why I'm trying to figure out what others think... 209.166.108.199 (talk) 17:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Making articles

Can you make articles? SesameCudy9 (talk) 18:26, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

@SesameCudy9:, yes! Anyone can create an article if it fits our inclusion criteria and follows the content policies. I strongly, strongly suggest reading Your First Article before getting started, though. Creating new articles is actually a difficult process and oftentimes not the best place for new users to start contributing. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 18:55, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
SesameCudy9, Also see Wikipedia: A Primer for newcomers, a hand reference tool. ~ Amkgp 💬 19:11, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Section I placed in around last Aug was removed July 2, 2020, possibly ill-considered. Can you tell me the procedure for disputing?

Regarding this article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act , around last August I had stuck in a section called "Problems", specifically focusing on problems with how the ACA was working.

About a month later, there was a lot of back and forth between myself, and user:Newslinger over the content, resulting in an RFC, and several Teahouse visits. (As part of this, Newslinger had placed, at the initial stage, tags "biased", "original research", and "some unsound references", which have not been removed.)

In the end, no other editor sufficiently knowledgeable on the ACA structure was available to get involved or even made comments, so it was deadlocked between Newslinger and me, it was agreed between he/she and I that I would make removals, and remove less-reliable, redundant references, and also remove some numerical dollar-amount calculations, but the section would stay.

After making those changes, this was the section: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act&oldid=965614011#Problems

(pulled from archive).

The section stayed in since then, until I noticed it was removed July 2, 2020 by user:somedifferentstuff, (removal here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act&type=revision&diff=965614396&oldid=965614011), with the reason note Problems: "Rmv mainly primary sourced section tagged for a year"

My assumption is this likely was sort of an accident by somedifferentstuff. The year old tags "biased", "original research", and "unreliable references" seemed to have caused the removal, without consideration as to the actual content. (In fact, "unreliable references" I should have removed myself, since I did remove those references as identified by Newslinger.) The other two I did not remove, nor did Newslinger. I did not remove them in order to truthfully leave visible to readers the view of one editor, Newslinger, that the content may have had those problems, even though he agreed to keep the section in.

In any case, those unremoved tags seem to have caused user:somedifferentstuff to delete the section. (As far as I can tell.)Though he/she may have had different reasons.

So, I'm trying to get the section restored, within Wikipedia democratic rules and procedures, of course.

I've started by placing a section in the ACA talk: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Patient_Protection_and_Affordable_Care_Act#Removal_of_ACA_Problems_Section_7%2F2%2F20--Questioning_That%2C_especially_pre-election

which, if I understand it, will "ping" user:somedifferentstuff for discussion. Also, other editors knowledgeable about the ACA may chime in.

However, if somedifferentstuff doesn't get back in a few days for discussion, can you tell me the next step? (I see there is an "undo" button on the changes, but I'm certainly not going to click on that without following authorized democratic Wikipedia procedures.

Thanks. NormSpier (talk) 17:26, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

The right place for discussion is the article talk page. If you can't reach a consensus there, see WP:Dispute resolution. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:30, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks David Biddulph for your quick response.
Since I see the question here will be archived in two days, to avoid an anticipated problem (no one got involved on the Talk page last year for over a month when newslinger and I had our conflict and we then had to proceed to "conflict resolution" procedures to break the deadlock), can you or someone else tell me how long to wait (via procedure or common sense) for a response on the Talk page before proceeding with further "dispute resolution" procedures.
Thanks.NormSpier (talk) 19:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Adding just a little more to the question for David Biddulph to try to avoid repeat questions here later, from looking at the "edit-warring", which I of course want to avoid, if I don't get any response from somedifferentstuff in a few days on the "Talk" page, it sounds to me like it would be reasonable to hit "revert" on the history page, a single time (not the limit of 3), which would at least get the ACA "Problems" section placed back until further discussion, from the group editing and/or somedifferentstuff.
Does that sound correct to you?
P.S. (I have not had interaction with user:somedifferentstuff, and information on his own Talk page suggest he is a right, honorable person seeking to get an accurate, standards-complying article on the ACA. I am just clarifying procedure in case he has gone on vacation, or taken a break from editing Wikipedia for a while.)NormSpier (talk) 19:57, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

edit warring from someone using two IP addresses, unsure how to report to Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring

Hi,

I'm a "learner" stage editor, and just manually reverted several edits by someone who is using two IP addresses for ID. I'd only ever reverted vandalism and 1 instance of minor info in a lead, and I wasn't familiar with the 3RR rule and mistakenly edited 4 comments. I won't edit further, but need help dealing with that editor's edits, and s/he's repeatedly putting claims in the lead that aren't in the body / aren't sourced, some of which are also factually mistaken, and some of which I doubt belong in the lead at all. S/he has also reverted the reverts by me and another editor, considerably exceeding 3RR. The page where this is occurring: United_States_v._Flynn. I would have posted this to the WP:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring, but that says to let the other editor know, and I'm not sure how to do that when the person is using IP addresses for ID. This editor introduced a new section on the talk page about something else, and I decided to post a reply there – Talk:United_States_v._Flynn#We_need_to_describe_Turkish_firm_opinion – in an attempt to stop the edit warring and address the issue where there's sufficient space for discussion (s/he seems to want to discuss it in edit summaries). I haven't encountered this problem before and am not sure if I'm responding in the most productive way (e.g., to get the person's attention and shift it to discussion on the talk page), as I don't have a good handle on how people using IP addresses do/don't get alerts. I also don't know if I should have instead started a new section titled something like "edit warring." I'd appreciate some guidance. Thanks! -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

@FactOrOpinion: Step one is to contact the user directly at their Talk pages. You could use template {{uw-ew}} if you wish. I would place them on both user talk pages. A customary section title is == July 2020 == but you can use what you want. If you're quite certain it's the same person behind both IPs, then I would add a note with a link to the other IP's user talk page, in each case, but hedge your bets in case you're wrong, per WP:AGF: "you appear to be the same editor as the one who...", or, "your edits at ARTICLE are very much like those of IPUSER...". Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 19:34, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Mathglot: I just noticed that the edits come from by 3 IP addresses, not 2. None has a talk page created, so do I create talk pages for all 3? I will look at the template, thanks. -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 19:49, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@FactOrOpinion:, in theory, yes. Note that if they are IPv4-style (dotted decimal; like, (123.45.67.89') then it's worth doing. If they are IPv6 (the longer ones with letters and digits) then they are highly dynamic, meaning next time they sign on, it might be a different one. You could still create the User talk pages anyway; it does provide admins someplace to go find a record of what happened; in theory it's available in the history, but could be scattered. Another possible approach, especially if the problem continues/gets aggravated, is open a discussion on the Talk page of the article itself, entitled, "Edit warring by IP users" (or, "by anonymous users" is a synonym), and briefly state what you found, and list all the IPs there, in one place. If that's too burdensome, just give a date range: "from hh:mm on date, to hh2:mm2 on date2" and admins will be able to figure it out if they need to. If it keeps up, then post at the edit warring noticeboard, linking to any previous discussion you've had about the issue. Mathglot (talk) 20:12, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Mathglot: Thanks lots. They're IPv6 addresses. I created a talk page for one of them, referring them to a comment that I'd already posted to the US v Flynn talk page and asking them to join me in resolving it there, and adding the edit war template you pointed out. I decided to create a new section header for the comment I'd already posted to the talk page re: the edit warring, and I'll add a bit more info there re: the timestamps. So hopefully we can resolve it there, and if not, I'll follow up at WP:AN/EW now that I've created a talk page and left a comment about it for one of the IP addresses. Thanks again. -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 20:33, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
Yw; good luck! Mathglot (talk) 20:35, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
So, one of your admins blocked whole IPv6 prefix /33 from our biggest provider that also has IPv6 SLAAC turned on (!) by default. So yes, every device has ipv6 and it is in priority. https://bgp.he.net/AS8359#_prefixes6 I think it is a rather bad idea! And after all, he did not manage to block me. WWG1WGA! 213.87.152.162 (talk) 00:40, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Drmies: regarding your recent blocks of two IPv6's (here, and here), please see the remark immediately above this one (perma). Not sure if 213.87.152.162 is feeling left out, and sorry he wasn't blocked, or what. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 02:54, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
Drmies: please also see the related comment from 213.87.156.221 here: [18], as that comment self-identifies as the same person. Thanks again for your help. -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 07:41, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
FactOrOpinion, I apologize to the Moscow IP for leaving them out. Please see the range 213.87.144.0/20 , and you will find a whole range of disruptive edits, and together they all add up to disruption. Drmies (talk) 20:27, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia Articles

Are Wikipedia articles boring?🤔 SesameCudy9 (talk) 20:38, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Beauty is in the eye of the beholder ;) Kaisertalk (talk) 22:45, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
@SesameCudy9: Wikipedia is a good representative of life in general. Some articles are interesting and some are boring. But for many it's exciting to have a knowledge gap and be able to fill it so easily. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:33, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Making Wikipedia Articles

How can you make articles? I been stuck for 15 minutes. SesameCurdy9 (talk) 23:02, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, SesameCurdy9 and welcome to the Teahouse.
Creating new articles from a blank start is one of the harder tasks on Wikipedia, perhaps the hardest an inexperienced user is likely to face. In future I urge you to use the Article Wizard to create a draft under the Articles for Creation project. There, an experienced editor will review your draft once you think it is ready. Only when a reviewer approves will the draft be moved to the main article space. This avoids the situation where a deletion is requested soon after the initial version of an article is posted.
Also, please read Wikipedia's Golden Rule and Your First Article, if you have not already done so. The advice there can be very helpful, in my view.
Here are soem steps that, when followed, often lead to success in creating articles:
  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our general notability guideline (GNG). Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced editor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.
Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:09, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Comments not in good faith

I gave someone some comments on a photo which they posted in the 2020 United States House of Representatives elections and told them on their talk page to look at my comments on why I was removing it. I was very friendly about it, but the photo just didn’t fit in. Then, the person gave me a false quote saying that I only didn’t want it there because I disliked it. They also said to stop lecturing them. On top of that, they added the photo again. I tried explaining that I was not lecturing, but instead explaining my reasoning. Also I told them it was irrelevant (the photo) and that it was not just because I didn’t like it. I finally explained what edit warring was and how they should not add it again until a consensus has been reached. Then I got this message on my talk page, with the title ‘what is wrong with you’: “Are you somehow a bit out of your mind? I requested you to stop lecturing me, yet now you come back to my Talk page to lecture me again, while in the meanwhile somebody already removed the photograph and I, like I said, would and did not complain about it. What is wrong with you? Please stop your personal freak show and stop harassing me, or I will have measures taken against you. Who the hell do you think you are?” My question is if this person should be reported and if they broke any policy. Also, am I somehow in the wrong? I know that I didn’t do anything to get blocked, but maybe I didn’t follow procedure correctly. Personally I think this person is not editing in good faith and doesn’t want to work with other editors. Yes, the photo is gone, but this comment is too unnerving for me to just let it go. If anyone has any input, please let me know. Sorry for being so long, I wanted to make sure I told the entire story. Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:04, 11 July 2020 (UTC) Lima Bean Farmer (talk) 19:04, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

@Lima Bean Farmer:, I don't see that your comments either at Talk:2020_United_States_House_of_Representatives_elections#Early_voting_photo or at Eissink's user talk (diff 1, diff 2) were in any way uncivil or otherwise policy-violating. I have dropped a civility warning to Eissink's talk because their post on your talk was certainly an unacceptable personal attack. Maybe that will help. If it doesn't, then there are other options which Eissink is already aware of. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 19:24, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
The quote I gave was by heart and I made a mistake there, but it wasn't even far off, but more important: the point was that I find it rather presumptuous to point someone else to a Talk page, when you were the one who did the first revert. I find it rather arrogant that someone comes to my Talk page to more or less summon me to go to another Talk page to explain myself. But I did: I said if there are more voices than just one, concerning that nice image that I added there in total good faith, that than I would not revert again. It happened that someone didn't find the picture appropriate there too, and removed it. So that was it – I thought. But no, here comes Lima Bean Farmer to my Talk page again, telling me what edit warring is (as if I wouldn't know, with many years of experience on many projects), and that I should read his message on the other Talk page again – this all while everything was already over and done! I am sorry, but the above "Sorry for being so long" is perhaps indicative for the total misunderstanding here, but don't blame it all on me. If you want to stalk me over something already past and done, something that even turned out in your favor, than I wonder who is the one lacking good faith here. Greetings, and I really hope this was it. Eissink (talk) 20:56, 11 July 2020 (UTC).
@Eissink:, not to belabor the discussion, but you might want to review the generally-accepted editing cycle. You made a bold change and LBF reverted. At that point, discussion of the change on the talk page is a normal step for getting agreement. As an experienced editor, none of this should be a surprise. I hope this helps. Eggishorn (talk) (contrib) 22:23, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
@Eggishorn: I appreciate your answer, but as you know, I hope, WP:BRD is not policy, nor is it an accepted guideline, and it might be no surprise that I do not agree with a proposal that discourages Be bold in favor of "I'm bolder, sorry you lose". Please contact me again if you somehow experience trouble in relation to my edits, but I hope we can end this discussion now – let's keep seeing things in their right proportions. Thanks, Eissink (talk) 23:00, 11 July 2020 (UTC).
@Eissink: Keeping things in proportion is very sensible. Keeping things polite is a requirement. Do please remember that in your engagement with other editors, no matter how put out you may feel. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:12, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
I guess I must misunderstand you, Nick Moyes, or are you really saying that I have given you the impression that I felt "put out"? I'm not sure if I like where this is going. Eissink (talk) 23:32, 11 July 2020 (UTC).
@Eissink: No, you don't misunderstand me. One of your edits did give me the impression that you were 'put out' (i.e. upset) by another editor interacting with you. Otherwise I can see no rational explanation at all for this not very pleasant edit you made, in which you said "What is wrong with you? Please stop your personal freak show and stop harassing me, or I will have measures taken against you. Who the hell do you think you are?". Because anyone can see that you and the other editor have had very little interaction, your immediate accusation of harassment and your threat to take 'measures' was extremely uncivil and unreasonable. Hence my observation that keeping thing WP:CIVIL is a policy requirement. I hope I have clarified things for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:32, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Taxoboxes for dummies

I had planned to create a new page from scratch for a recently-described genus of linyphiid spider, but I could not figure out how to properly code in a taxobox. I tried referencing the code from another page to see how the taxobox was structured and then implement it on the new page, but my efforts were for naught.

I might be missing the mark as far as troubleshooting goes, but it seemed that since the genus itself didn't have a linkable page yet, I couldn't get the taxobox for that same genus to work.

Anyone out there who can lend a hand to a novice wiki editor like me in regards to this issue? Teal Reverie (talk) 06:16, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Teal Reverie, and welcome to the Teahouse. I am really sorry you had to wait so long for a reply. I started this reply earlier today, but got rather distracted IRL, though your issue now looks to have been resolved since then. The article you are referring to is Draft:Yuelushannus, and the problem was that you've deployed the automatic taxobox which will - as the name suggests- automatically prefill it with existing data.
If you look at another Genus of spiders in the Linyphiidae, such as Savignia you'll see, it too, uses an automatox taxobox. If you click the red pencil icon at the top of its taxobox, you'll be taken to the template which populates it: Template:Taxonomy/Savignia. The problem was that this is a newly-described taxon, so until that entry for the Genus is created, the taxobox won't function as it should. Luckily, Umimmak has now just created that template, so your taxobox seems to work fine now. For more information, see Wikipedia:Automated taxobox system/intro.
By the way, you might like to make sure your draft includes a url directly to the actual pdf describing the two species, and not just to the abstract. It's at https://europeanjournaloftaxonomy.eu/index.php/ejt/article/download/931/2237 All the best, and keep up the good work! Nick Moyes (talk) 00:55, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Question about rejection

Hi! I tried adding an article about the musician Davy Nathan and got rejected twice. The second time the reason was that 'This draft has been resubmitted without any visible improvement, or with very little improvement.' I did however added footnotes and references as asked by the first rejection. The second rejection also said 'This draft does not appear to indicate which of the musical notability criteria is satisfied.' I included 3 articles of note about the subject, however they are in Hebrew. I also included credits and discography links from various respected websites.

Thank you! any help would be appreciated. Mybrighteyes28 (talk) 00:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Mybrighteyes28: You need more sources like 13news.co.il and Isreallycool, but even those don't really provide any in-depth coverage beyond "Davy Nathan is an Israeli musician who competed on the X Factor and played for the RNC." Discogs is not a reliable source and directory listings like Broadwayworld don't establish notability or really provide any information besides "he exists." Ideally, you should write articles by finding in-depth reliable sources first and then just summarizing those (for more on that, see "How to write articles that won't be rejected or deleted" in this guide I wrote). Ian.thomson (talk) 00:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Mybrighteyes28. The draft article is heavy on name-dropping which is a negative, and very light on references to independent, reliable sources that devote significant coverage to Nathan. The two sources that look independent are both brief. The Hebrew language source quotes Nathan himself, so is more of an interview than a truly independent source, and is only four short paragraphs long. The draft article is full of unreferenced assertions which must be removed if references to reliable sources cannot be provided. A minor point is that the draft refers to Nathan by his first name, which is a violation of the Manual of Style, which says we refer to people by their surnames after first mention. I suggest that you read and study Your first article. Based on the current state of your draft, I do not believe that Nathan is notable at this time. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

QUIERO SUBIR LA BIOGRAFÍA DE UNA PERSONALIDAD VIVA A WIKIPEDIA

Hola! soy nuevo editor ¿como hago para subir / hacer una nueva biografía de una personalidad viva a wikipedia? Sil Gamarra (talk) 00:55, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Sil Gamarra: Welcome to the English wikipedia. If you are not comfortable with writing in English, try the Spanish Wikipedia. The help desk is here: [19] RudolfRed (talk) 01:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Notabillity

I'm considering to make a article about Dunbar Theatre(In Vancouver, BC). The only issue is that I'm not sure if it would meet the notability guidelines. There are articles about it from Straight.com a media in Vancouver and sections from CBC and CTV. The creeper2007Talk! Be well, stay safe 20:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello again The creeper2007
Is Straight.com a reliable source? Does the article in Straight.com and the CCC and CTV sections each offer significant coverage? Can one or two additional good sources be found? if yes to all three go right ahead. If no, think a bit. That is my advice. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 23:17, 11 July 2020 (UTC)
@DESiegel: The thing is that I can't determine wether if straight.com is a reliable source. The creeper2007Talk! Be well, stay safe 00:59, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment I would say The Georgia Straight is reliable, but it’s a Vancouver-specific paper so I’m not sure how useful it is for demonstrating general notability for Wikipedia. If a national source like the CBC has provided significant coverage then that’s a good sign though. Umimmak (talk) 01:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
You could always post a query at WP:RSN but I tend to agree with Umimmak here. Or youy could look for one more national or good regional source, The creeper2007. If there is none at all that is not a good sign. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:18, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Sachin Pilot

Hi! Please anyone how to stop people misusing wiki ? Someone is playing with Sachin Pilot and making unnecessary changes. He is being depicted as

the new Chief Minister out of context. People in India are taking snapshots & it's #2 trend on Twitter India.

Do we have a mechanism to monitor who is using this platform for wrong reasons ?

Thanks Shekhar in (talk) 01:17, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Shekhar in, and welcome to the Teahouse. If someone is editing to make the article incorrect or unclear, the place to discuss this is Talk:Sachin Pilot. Please cite reliable sources for your view there. Please follow the Bold, revert, discuss cycle, but you can start the discuss phase early. Please indicate on the talk page as exactly as you can what you think is wrong with the edits or the state of the article.
Wikipedia does not normally reveal any information it has as to the identity of editors, even if they violate Wikipedia policies. People who engasge in seriously improper activities may be blocked or banned but this is usually done only in serious matters and usually only after warnings. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 01:26, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for guidance. I will follow as guided. Shekhar in (talk) 01:33, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

I want to know why I can't create a page biography

 Cornelius pam (comedian) (talk) 07:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Cornelius pam (comedian): Have you seen the messages on your talk page (User talk:Cornelius pam (comedian)#Your submission at Articles for creation: AKA Comedy (July 12)) and read the linked material? The reason given by the reviewer, Calliopejen1, was that the article did not contain sources that properly demonstrate notability. I've pinged them here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 08:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

How can I create a page biography here on Wikipedia

I want to create a page biography here on Wikipedia and I'm a user here so I think I have the right to upen a biography of someone. So please don't stop me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cornelius pam (comedian) (talk • contribs) 07:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Cornelius pam (comedian) and welcome to the Teahouse! On Wikipedia, we have guidelines for creating articles. One of them is notability. Basically, it means that in order for a subject to have a Wikipedia article, there must be multiple reliable, independent sources of information about them. Additionally, they (the sources) must be about your subject, not just mentioning them. Your draft was declined because you didn't have enough of these types of sources. If there are more reliable, independent sources of information, feel free to add them to your draft and re-submit it. If there are not any more sources, your subject is not suitable for an article on Wikipedia. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 08:03, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Also see WP:Autobiography. People are dissuaded from trying to create an article about themselves. Being a User does not mean that a person has a 'right' to create an article. Keep in mind that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not social media. David notMD (talk) 08:10, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Am I ready to create a page biography

 AKA Comedy (skit) (talk) 12:29, 12 July 2020 (UTC) --> can I create a page biography here on Wikipedia

@AKA Comedy (skit):, from your user name, it looks like you are the same person who posted above as User:Cornelius pam (comedian). Please only use one account to edit Wikipedia, and please do not create articles about yourself. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 12:39, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi everyone, I noticed that the page about steam cracking Steam cracking exists in French fr:Vapocraquage, German de:Steamcracken and Arabic ar:تكسير_بخاري but you cannot see it. These articles do not appear on the languages section of the English article. How do you add them? Thanks and kind regards, Matbla1 (talk) 08:25, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

(ec) Matbla1, Hello! This is annoyingly difficult. I think it involves that someone on Wikidata has to merge Steam cracking (Q3972201) and steam cracking (Q2335334), but I am not at all familiar with Wikidata. I ran into a similar thing recently, Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Plants#Kale_in_Scandinavia. Perhaps someone else here can be of more help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:52, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
I asked at [20]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:01, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Matbla1: Interlanguage link data is stored at Wikidata; however, it seems like there's two instances of the same object: Q3972201 and Q2335334. If you're certain that the two objects are actually identical (having the exact same scope, not one wider than the other), you can merge the two objects. Instructions to do so are here. ◢   Ganbaruby!   (Say hi!) 08:48, 10 July 2020 (UTC)
@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: @Ganbaruby:Thank you very much for the quick reaction and the friendly help. Merging with the available tool mentioned in the instructions worked fine. Matbla1 (talk) 15:12, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Expressed gender vs. assigned gender

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dave_Carter Page has been altered and undone a few times in relation to Carter's pronouns. Current edit states that expressed gender overrides assigned gender. I would appreciate clarification as to what Wiki is calling "expressed gender."

I was partnered with Carter professionally from 1996 until his death by heart attack in 2002, and personally from 1997- early 2002. Carter had not come out at the time of his death. He intended to release one more album of what he called "Lonesome Dave" songs (as male), then send me out on a solo tour while he focused on the transition. When s/he was ready to introduce the new identity, we would shift our musical configuration to an all-girl psychedelic country band.

The transition process was not public knowledge at the time of his death. His immediate family was completely unaware of his intention to transition. Only select friends, his healers/therapists, and our management team were in the loop. He did not have a name chosen.

Carter's death at the start of the transition process puts him and his transgendered identity in an unusual position -- a bardo. It is impossible to say where s/he would've landed. Possibly she; possibly non-binary. None of us can know. Up to the date of his death, Dave did not ask us to refer to him as anything other than Dave.

The section on Transgendered Identity on Dave's page is critical for the incredible depth and light it sheds on the work. Still, if "expressed gender" refers to how a person introduces themselves to the world, then it seems inappropriate to "express" Dave Carter as "she" because Dave did not do that. Had Dave survived, that was still a couple years off, based on my knowledge of his professional and personal goals.

Thank you for addressing this question. I look forward to the discussion. -tg Tracygrammer (talk) 14:48, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Tracygrammer and welcome to the Teahouse. In general, Wikipedia identifies people by their self-chosen gender, based on the person's statements as reported by reliable sources. We came to this position relatively recently, after some dispute. There is still dispute as to how to describe significant events or accomplishments that occurred and were reported prior to any transition, both as to name used and as to pronouns used. (There is little current support for use on non-traditional pronouns such as "Xi" in Wikipedia's voice, but much support for singular they.)
A case such as that of Dave Carter is fortunately comparatively rare, and Wikipedia has no clearly determined policy for how to handle it in the article Dave Carter or in mentions in other articles, if such are appropriate.
It seems to me that this discussion is really better on Talk:Dave Carter where i see that you have posted also. There it will stay with the article, whereas Teahouse discussions are generally archived after a few days, and most people fo not see them after that. The more general point might be discussed on the talk page of a Wikipedia policy page, such as WT:BLP, where it will be about such situations in general, with Carter only an example. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:13, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Oh, I should mention, Tracygrammer, you have an obvious Conflict of interest with regard to the Dave Carter articel, and should not edit it except to correct obvious vandalism or plain factual errors easily confirmed. For other matters, please use {{request edit}} on the article's talk page. Thank you. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 15:16, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Contacting another wiki editor regarding a revision to a page

A change was made to a page I follow, which seems like a mistake to me. The other editor deleted 1 category which is perfectly correct and exchanged it for another. [revision page]. How do I contact him/her concerning this revision? Kiki 14:22, 12 July 2020 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kikiha (talk • contribs)

Hello, Kikiha. When you disagree with an edit another editor has made, you should start a discussion on the article's talk page (in this case Talk:Max Nivelli, and make sure you ping the other editor, (who appears to be Rathfelder) so they know you've started the discussion. (I've pinged them here, so they'll know you were asking, but it doesn't do any harm to ping them when you post to the talk page as well). --ColinFine (talk) 14:40, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi, thanks ColinFine, this was quick. Rathfelder already responded. I tend to get confused as to how to exchange words with other editors, maybe because I don't do it often enough... I once wrote to someone on their talk page and was reprimanded (-: I'll print your reply for future reference. Thanks again! Kiki — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kikiha (talk • contribs) 15:49, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Subject - Wikipedia page has moved for revision

I got the message that the Wikipedia page: "Ultrasonic algae control" has been moved on 11 July 2020 by XXX, see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Ultrasonic_algae_control for the current revision. Editor's summary: Quarantine SEO spam

A friend made me the page and I would like to have it online again, with the removed SEO spam, but what exactly it caused I do not know. As a newbie I have really no clue what's going on and how to restore the page. Help is kindly appreciated :) SB2BC (talk) 07:13, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

SB2BC Your friend has been blocked as a sockpuppet, and if you are coordinating edits off wiki that would make you a meatpuppet. If you have any association with the subject of the article, you need to disclose that per the conflict of interest policy. If you are an employee or otherwise paid, you are required by the Terms of Use to comply with the paid editing policy and formally declare that. 331dot (talk) 07:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The article itself is now at Draft:Ultrasonic algae control. Per what 331dot wrote, you should explain your connections to the topic on your User page. The draft can then be submitted to the Articles for Creation review process. See Wikipedia:Articles for creation for instructions on how to submit. David notMD (talk) 07:43, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I fixed refs. SB2BC has resubmitted the draft without addressing COI or PAID. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
SB2BC has since declared on User page being a private user of the technology. David notMD (talk) 17:44, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Mandarin (Jacksonville) article

Hi folks. After help from a couple of people, I think I got everything right. Can the message on the top of this page be removed? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandarin_(Jacksonville)#Harriet_Beecher_Stowe Thank you. Lekarren (talk) 17:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC) Lekarren (talk) 17:51, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hewllo, Lekarren, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have removed the "more citations" tag. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:03, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
thank you! Lekarren (talk) 18:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Is there a process to address when another editor frequently insults you personally? I have had multiple encounters where I have tried to ask that we stay on the issues and propose consensus-based solutions to editing disagreements, but the editor usually just attacks me. SeminarianJohn (talk) 07:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

You and Snooganssnoogans appear to be having a civil (albeit wordy) discussion at Talk:Susan Collins. I do not read it as insulting you personally. If this worsens, there are venues to bring a complaint. David notMD (talk) 08:01, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, David. I appreciate the response and the affirmation. Because of length perhaps it is not immediately visible (or maybe he kindly retracted and edited his remarks now) referred to me in very negative terms. I am, however, very happy to hear that you read it and found it to be civil. That makes me glad as that was my primary concern was to make sure it was civil. I will reach out if things do 'worsen' though it appears that they will not for the time being.SeminarianJohn (talk) 18:45, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

DIANA FEA

Can someone take a look at DIANA FEA, this article is too techincial, plus it appears to be advertising, set up by a single purpose account.--Devokewater (talk) 10:27, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Devokewater, Responded at the appropriate venue. Discussed at Talk:DIANA FEA ~ Amkgp 💬 18:49, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Edit Question

I have a question regarding a review that was added to this article:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Call_of_the_Wild:_Dog_of_the_Yukon

The Call of the Wild: Dog of the Yukon

The TVGUIDE.Com review for this title was published on May 10th, 2020. The film was released in 1997. The reviewer did not even get the release date of the film correct (they said 1996, but it was actually 1997). The reviewer took a line from the original New York Post review and poked fun at the film and the NYP review - more than 23 years later. I don't see why a review of a film - made 23 years after its original release - should be included in this article. Film tastes and styles change over the years, as do audience tastes and styles. It has been my experience that Wikipedia includes pertinent reviews of a film made just prior to - or shortly after - the film's original release, not more than 23 years later. This seems irregular, unfair to the original filmmakers and mean-spirited. I tried to remove the additional reference, which was reversed by user Marchjuly. I'd sincerely like to know why. RandySWT1 (talk) 06:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

MarchJuly provided an explanation in the Edit summary. With the TVGuide review, the Reception section has a positive and a negative review. There is no valid reason to remove the negative one. David notMD (talk) 07:38, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
@RandySWT1: Since you posted the same thing on my user talk page see my response there. One thing is that you seem to be confusing WP:ACCESSDATE with the original date of publication. May 10, 2020 was the date that Nick Moyes added that particular bit of content to the article and most likely was the date he verified the TV Guide review online; it's not necessarily the date the review was originally published. I was able to find an archived version of the same webpage from February 2018, but it's quite possible the review was originally published many years earlier (perhaps even in the magazine version of TV Guide). -- Marchjuly (talk) 09:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
@RandySWT1: We're not here to praise films and other notable things, but to reflect how the world at large views them, then and now. To suggest that we only include reviews of films or plays immediately after they are released is utterly perverse, to say the least. Consider Shakespeare's Hamlet as an extreme example, or that 'classic' film, The Third Man, which we were showing to our kids over lunch not half an hour ago. I included the review that you removed in order to give a degree of balance to the article because one editor - who can only assume is a dedicated fan - was filling up the page with far too much trivial detail and WP:OR whilst ignoring the bigger picture. I'm pleased that Marchjuly put it back. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:16, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Well Nick Moyes, you are entitled to your perception. I don't have to agree with it. So you don't even know when the TV Guide.com review was written... interesting. So your research into using this reference is actually incomplete. And I think your Shakespeare example is ridiculous. The performance of Shakespeare's plays has been adjusted over time... to keep them accessible to the masses. A film typically exists as a reflection of a moment in time. The performances cannot be adjusted. If I decided that the Mona Lisa was a worthless waste of paint and canvas and wrote a review about it tomorrow, no doubt you would include it as a reflection of how the world at large views it? One review from one reviewer is hardly that. And that does not make the article fair and balanced.RandySWT1 (talk) 17:42, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Also, could we please add THE back to The Call of the Wild: Dog of the Yukon? That is the title of the film:

>ref>https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118811/</ref> RandySWT1 (talk) 17:52, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

I added the 'The' back in hours before you posted here. I don't feel the need to respond to your other comments, except to say that we strive for balance, and nor do I see why you're making such a fuss over quite an innocuous review comment. Nick Moyes (talk) 20:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Mapping issues

Hello, I do not intend to tamper with this article 2019–20 Zambian Super League but I do not understand why the location positioning is not working. Josedimaria237 (talk) 20:27, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Josedimaria237: Southern latitudes are negative (i.e., lat=-12.xxx, not lat=12.xxx). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 20:46, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Met Foods Wiki Page -- How To Make Revisions

Hi, I'd like to upload revisions to the Met Foods Wiki page that reflect the company's complete history, who founded it, business progression, etc. I have documents to support this. I am not affiliated with Met Foods, I am not being compensated and I am just interested in having the full story told. I tried to update the page, but revisions were overwritten. Suggestions appreciated. Editor12603 Editor12603 (talk) 21:02, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Editor12603: I recommend you look for online sources to use for your updates. Personal/offline documents are hard to validate for authenticity. If in doubt, you can start a discussion on the talk page. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 21:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
@Editor12603: Sources do not need to be online(it helps, but it's not required); but they do need to be publicly available; documents in private hands only are not acceptable. In addition, annual reports are considered to be primary sources. Wikipedia is not interested in what the company says about itself, but in what independent reliable sources say about it. Other Wikipedia articles cannot be used as sources, either(see WP:CIRCULAR). I am curious as to how you obtained these documents and for what reason. 331dot (talk) 21:15, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello, Editor12603. Have the documents been published by a reliable publisher? If they have not been published, then anything based on them is original research, and not permitted in a Wikipedia article. I see that you asked on the Help Desk about uploading PDFs, but you haven't answered Orangemike's question about what those PDFs were. It is almost never appropriate to upload a PDF: as well as often being a copyright violation, it is usually pointless: if the material has been reliably published, then cite its publication; if it hasn't, then it is a document of unknown provenance, and not acceptable as a reference. --ColinFine (talk) 21:19, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Comment: I'm seeing many of their notes cited the periodical Modern Grocer (presumably ISSN 0026-7805), which I would imagine is an acceptable source. Umimmak (talk) 21:31, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
The problem with trade journals in general is that they have a tendency to run press releases with little or no exercise of editorial judgement. Some of the best ones actually do some journalism, but that's not necessarily the case here. --Orange Mike | Talk 21:39, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

In the Wiki for CP-violation, I changed the fourth word in the section P-symmetry to be parity which produced the word parity as a link OK but it was not in the colour blue as are other links. How does one get such a link to be in blue and hence more noticeable? Bunkerpr (talk) 20:04, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Bunkerpr: Welcome to Wikipedia. Please remember to link to articles you are asking about, in this case CP_violation. The word parity in the lede is a blue link. Please clarify what you are asking about? RudolfRed (talk) 20:22, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
@Bunkerpr: If you have viewed the target article in your current browser then the parity link both here and at CP violation#P-symmetry may be purple for you instead of blue to indicate a visited link. It is blue for readers who haven't seen the article. The purple form is still clearly separate from black text to me but it may depend on your screen, light conditions and eyesight. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:42, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Tochnog professional

I'm having a mini edit war on Tochnog professional, the other editor seems to own the business being edited, hence there is a conflict of interest. Could a senior editor have a look at this. Regards. Devokewater (talk) 18:11, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Actually, it is a maxi-edit war, which should result in temp blocking, but the article in question is also at AfD (where the two of you are continuing to disagree). One hopes the AfD process will end this. David notMD (talk) 23:27, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Need help to review

Hello! I've created a Biography which happens to be my 1st AfC. I consider myself new as everytime I read about AfC I get to know something new. Though I've read all topics related to AfC, still I know I would have made many mistakes. Before final review can someone please have a look at my Draft and help me with my mistakes if any. I don't wish that my 1st AfC gets declined due to any major or minor mistake I've made. Please help me with this , though I understand the work load so I'm requesting to just a look , Not a final review & comment on the same. My draft is Draft:K. C. Pandey. I will really be obliged for the help. Thanks Shekhar in (talk) 19:05, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Shekhar in, You should remove things like As a Researcher[15][16][17] he made various visits to other countries in conferences / seminars to present his research papers, few of them being International Symposium on Monogenea, France (1993). Invited lecture International Symposium on Monogenea, Brno, Czechoslovakia (1991). International Symposium on Monogenea, Brisbane, Australia (2001). International Symposium on Fish Parasites, Bloemfontein South Africa(2003). International Symposium on Monogenea, Guangzhou, China (2005). International Symposium on Monogenea, Cape Town, South Africa ( 3-7 Aug 2009 )[18] Besides being to Japan , Thailand, USA , Malta etc. as Wikipedia is not a resume. Unsourced information in the infobox like Spouse(s) Meera Pandey Children:Piyush , Shekhar , Rashi should be removed. As your username suggest you are closely connected with the article subject (son of the person), WP:COI should be declared. External links should be reduced. ~ Amkgp 💬 19:36, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Also Born as 4th son of Ram Vilas Pandey (ADM(J)) and Ram Yashi Pandey in Ballia District of State Uttar Pradesh should be removed as they are unsourced. ~ Amkgp 💬 19:47, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the quick review & guidance! I've deleted the parts as mentioned. Yes I do have the same name as one of his son but I am related to the subject as a student. I will keep working on my draft to further improve it. Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shekhar in (talk • contribs) 20:28, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
I recommend deleted the section See also and all the content in External links. Look at articles of other academics in India to see what might go in External links. David notMD (talk) 23:34, 12 July 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Shekhar in: It's nice to see biologists being represented in new articles! I'm confident Pandey meets our notability criteria for academics, but do please continue working to improve the article whilst review is waiting, In particular, please provide a citation to support each and every award/honour you state he received, and please remove anything that you 'just happen to know about him' which you cannot find in any published source. Here are some further thoughts, on top of a few edits I've made myself:
You have too many External Links! Some like this one only serve to support any statement saying that Pandey was general president of the Indian Science Congress Association around 2010. So it should be used as an inline citation, or be removed completely. I think you should remove the 'general references' subsection, and use those sources as inline citations, or not at all. The 'See also' sections contains at least two links to articles which have already been used in the main text, so there's no need for them to be repeated there. the 2002 story about the 'Muhnochwa' grasshopper seems irrelevant and should be removed. Did you check where the wikilink from Muhnochwa actually goes to? It made no sense to me at all. All in all - a nice job. As you knew him as a studnet, please pop a WP:COI notice on your userpage to avoid any issues. (I must declare I forgot to do that when I wrote about one of my botany lecturers and my botany professor some years ago...but by then it had been 40 years since I last encountered them! If you look at those pages, you'll see they're quite short. There's nothing wrong with that.) Stick to the verifiable facts and cut out anything unsupported or trivial, and it'll sail through review. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:44, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Can I edit my page that has been deleted?

The first page I ever created on wikipedia brought me a great sense of accomplishment, I was surprised to see that it has sense been deleted. Having not logged on for a couple of weeks, is there any way for me to access the since deleted page to make the edits requested? or is it gone forever? I want to improve the page to ensure it meets the requested standards of my editor and it would make me quite sad to know the hours I spent are gone forever. Ybrik22 (talk) 00:18, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Ybrik22. It is disappointing to see something that you worked hours on deleted. If you have attached an email address to your account and enabled others to email you(in your preferences) the text can be sent to you. The article you wrote was deleted because Mr. Avalos does not appear to meet the Wikipedia definition of a notable football coach(asst. coaches or coordinators are not inherently notable) nor does he seem to meet the more general general notability guideline. This may be because your sources appear to be university bios, and not significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia, and most people fail a few times before getting one through. I would suggest reading Your First Article and then using Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft; this way you find out any problems before what you write is formally part of the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 00:27, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Since Andy Avalos was deleted by the Proposed deletion mechanism, Ybrik22 it can be restored on request. This is udually done via WP:REFUND, but here or on my talk page will do. I recommend (if you ask) having it restored as a draft for further improvements to avoid it being nominated for deletion by discussion. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 00:33, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Suggestion of addition to "England youth international footballers"

An additional member of this esteemed group should be Dorryl Proffitt , who played at Wigan against Italy U-17, and scored in the 2-1 defeat. I paraphrase from his page when he was associated with Hednesford Town: (redacted copyvio)[1] 22Sandhurst (talk) 20:55, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ http://www.pitmenweb.com/playerprofileproffitt.htm
@22Sandhurst: The content you posted above was not paraphrased – it was copied directly from the source. This is a copyright violation and is not allowed on Wikipedia. If there is material you would like added to an article, please suggest it on the article's talk page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Can I get some help editing three pages about recent Trump events/rallies?

Can I get some help editing three pages about recent Trump events/rallies? I created the pages South Dakota's Mount Rushmore Fireworks Celebration 2020, 2020 Salute to America and Donald Trump's Portsmouth Rally (July 2020). These are all articles about a recent event or campaign that Trump hosted, spoke at or promoted, or in the case of the Portsmouth Rally page, got posponed due to weather but Trump was originally expected to speak at. Presently I have made a vast majority of all the edits on each of the pages, of which there aren't a whole lot, and was wondering if anyone could help me edit them a bit more, especially since they are all articles about recent events or rallies (recent at the time of asking this question) Trump was involved in, in some way, that have gotten quite a lot of media attention. Thanks to anyone who helps edit any of the mentioned articles.

Note: I do not support the presidency of Donald Trump. I created the articles only to put information about the events/rallies they are about onto Wikipedia. Greshthegreat (talk) 00:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello Greshthegreat. In my view, those three articles you have created directly into mainspace suffer from WP:recentism, in that they only have interest within a narrow period of the recent past and the present moment. In time, you can expect them to be nominated for deletion or merger into other articles. When you choose a topic for an article, it should have lasting notability if you expect it to remain in Wikipedia's mainspace.--Quisqualis (talk) 01:21, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Greshthegreat. I have to agree with Quisqualis; but I would hate to see all your efforts go to waste. Might you consider WP:MERGE with other WP articles? The topics are mere mentions of events that would better serve in more notable longer lasting articles. Just a thought. Maineartists (talk) 02:47, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Are product reviews reliable sources?

I was editing Spectacles (product) and it didn’t have the exact release date for the Spectacles 3. I couldn’t find any news article that had the release date, and the official page didn’t have the release date. The only page I could find the release date on was a review published by TechCrunch. Is this a reliable source? Maka Albarns Left Glove (talk) 06:05, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Maka Albarns Left Glove and welcome to the Teahouse! TechCrunch is seen as a reliable source, but only if the article being cited is from staff and not it's blog. For a list of reliable sources, see WP:RSP. Regards, Giraffer (munch) 07:20, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Adam007 complaint

Hello Please can you sack Adam007 or whatever his name is #makingacomplaint SmallishBeans (talk) 08:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@SmallishBeans: So far, every one of your edits has been reverted, including the two vandalism edits at Death Eaters reverted by Adam007, who went on to put a standard warning on your Talk page. So briefly, it's not Adam, it's you. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. David notMD (talk) 09:52, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Also, Wikipedia is a network of volunteers, so we can't sack anyone. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
However, Wikipedia can indefinitely block vandals, and that has happened to the OP. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:49, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Francis Robert Kelly / Francis P Kelly - mixup?

Hello - I recently had an article accepted, on the American artist Francis Robert Kelly. I then went on to draft an article on an architectural historian and inspector for English Heritage, Francis P Kelly, which I've submitted for review. I'm a little confused because when I go to the draft link for Francis P Kelly, and then click on the Talk tab, I get a redirect to Francis Robert Kelly, and when I click back on the article tab I get the published article for Francis Robert Kelly. Could someone advise/reassure me, please, as I'm fairly new to Wikipedia and get confused by sandbox pages, redirects, etc. Thank you in advance! CourtauldGill (talk) 09:48, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I've removed the mistaken redirect from Draft talk:Francis P Kelly. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:42, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Thank you so much - really appreciate your help  :-) CourtauldGill (talk) 11:47, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

wikiprojects

I would like to become more involved in a wikiproject, but I'm still learning how to contribute to wikipedia correctly. I joined the podcasting wikiproject and did some really simple stuff like adding the wikiprojects banner to some podcast article talk pages, but I want to try and improve the project itself. There doesn't seem to be any standard for podcast articles and there aren't many active members. I posted a list of questions on the talk page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Podcasting), but I haven't gotten any responses. I was wondering whether anyone had any recommendations on learning more about wikiprojects, how to improve them, and generally what I should do to help the project progress. &nbspTipsyElephant (talk) 14:00, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello TipsyElephant! I would suggest asking one question at a time, and if possible, asking questions that have specific answers, especially in places other than the Teahouse. Here we are dedicated to trying to help everyone, whereas, at the talk page of that WikiProject, no one is obligated to respond if they don't want to. Still, if you'd asked one simple question, someone might have. A WikiProject is a place for editors interested in a topic to come together and work together to organise, prioritise and improve all articles related to that topic. Adding WikiProject banners to articles that come under the WikiProject is a good start. If there are not many active editors, it becomes difficult to "collaborate" with them to improve the project. Some WikiProjects go completely inactive. To answer your first question at the talk page, the article TMRO has a split tag in one of the sections. The article will be removed from article alerts when that tag is gone. There seems to have been no discussion on it. So, as the only interested person in helping with that particular alert, you will have to evaluate whether the IP is right about the need to split the article, if you decide no, just remove the tag. If you decide yes, split the article and then remove the tag. Thus, you successfully perform one function of the WikiProject. Then, move on to the next. Try to organise all articles in the WikiProject together with proper WP:Categories tree/s, and WikiProject banners on talk pages. Keep an eye on the article alerts and respond to them. When and if people come asking some questions on the WikiProject's talk page, answer them. And so on. Yes, I have not answered the rest of your questions. You'll have to figure out a way to ask them one at a time at the appropriate venues. If you can't decide where, you can ask here. Good luck! Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:52, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

not enough Sources to Cite

Hi. I'm editing a Wikipedia page and most articles I can find about the personality are not from big publishing houses. What do I do? Fiona Njaggi (talk) 11:48, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@Fiona Njaggi: They don't need to be big publishing houses, just professionally published, otherwise reliable, and provide in-depth coverage about the subject. Ian.thomson (talk) 11:50, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
@Fiona Njaggi: Before doing any more editing, you have been asked on your Talk page to clarify whether your involvement with the article in question is WP:PAID David notMD (talk) 14:32, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Header added by ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

How to make a drop down? Flowerina.M (talk) 13:31, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

I am trying to make a page about evermore forest funko and don't know how to make a dropdown I have done it before in random places I don't want it. Flowerina.M (talk) 13:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, FLowerina.M, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please explain what you mean by a dropdown. To me that means a kind of menu, but we don't put menus in Wikipedia articles. --ColinFine (talk) 14:02, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Flowerina.M, if you're trying the very difficult task of creating a new article, I suggest you read your first article if you haven't yet done so. --ColinFine (talk) 14:06, 13 July 2020 (UTC)


Exactly this is a dropdown do you have to put == blank==???? ColinFine

Hello, Flowerina.M. Do you mean a header? Yes, you put the text on a line by itself, preceded and followed by an equal number of = signs - the more signs, the lower down the hierarchy. I suggest you have a look at The Wikipedia Adventure to learn how to edit here. --ColinFine (talk) 14:56, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Use of the pronoun "we" on Wikipedia

Greetings! I was reading a Wikipedia article and noticed use of the pronoun "we". Blitzchung_controversy#Initial_Reaction Specifically this portion: "Here we list some of them:" This sounds like a personal voice that shouldn't be on Wikipedia. Should I edit this? Thank you. Stapmoshun (talk) 14:37, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Stapmoshun. That is a usage which is quite common in academic papers, and some people have argued that it is also appropriate in Wikipedia; but I would say no, edit it. See MOS:WE for more on the discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 14:53, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Thank you ColinFine :) Stapmoshun (talk) 15:03, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Use of bot

Dear fellow Wikipedians, What is a bot ? Who can use them ? By going through the help page, I understand that a bot is a software program designated to simply an editor's job. After that everything is too much complicated... Can you suggest 3 or 4 bots and how to use them .... Thanks in advance.... Cheers Anupam Dutta (talk) 18:58, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello,Anupamdutta73 and welcome to the Teahouse. Most "bots" run on their own (either on a periodic schedule or much ofm the tiem) and perform certian tasks automatically. Others are run more or less regularly by their creators or maintainers -- editors who wrote the script or keep it up to date. Other users generally do not need to worry about selecting or using bots -- they will simply notice that some sorts of edits are performed by bots, such as adding dates to maintenance tags, or signing unsigned talk page comments, or reverting certain kinds of edits likely to be vandalism. See WP:BAG for more information on bots. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 21:54, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Just want it add that boat also clear the Wikipedia sandbox. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Flowerina.M (talk • contribs) 15:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Different standards for similar wiki project? AfC (Biography)

Hi! I wish to know that do we follow different standards for Biography of similar subject from same field , Country , posts held? What makes me ask this is I am being asked to furnish citations, clarification for my draft and similar subject being published. My draft was based on Biography of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ranbir_Chander_Sobti who happens to be from the same field, posts held & details. Unfortunately from my study ( subject ) for AfC there are many points for which I cannot provide citation like subjects place of Birth, Schooling. Subjects details or how a point is of significance ( When for people related to subject it makes quite significant ). All my citations are from 3rd party reliable source but for someone's schooling decades back, I cant provide source. Yes my user name is same as 1 of the subject's son, but it's a very common Name in India so there's no point of conflict of Interest. I know both the subject's 1 published & the one I'm working on, as I am a Researcher from same field i.e. Zoology ( Fish ) ( Fish Parasite's ).I am also a member of Indian National Science Congress too. Though I have worked on most of the issue raised by deleting many Important & significant points, Still I feel It's Important for the subject. The credentials are easy to find by just Google the points on the subjects. It would be very kind if any experienced Reviewer guides me on the points mentioned. My work Draft:K. C. Pandey I am thankful for all the reviewer who are helping me. Thanks in Advance. Shekhar in (talk) 11:14, 13 July 2020 (UTC) —————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Depending on how closely you know K.C. Pandey, you may want to consider declaring a conflict of interest on your User page. This can be as simple as stating that you knew him personally. Or perhaps more than that if you have ever collaborated on something. Wikipedia does require verification. The references do not have to be in English, or available on-line, as long as published in some form, for example university website. David notMD (talk) 14:10, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

——————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Thanks a lot David notMD Kind guidance is highly appreciable. Please guide me on the other points I've raised to make my AfC more relevant ———————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————————

Hi David! @ David notMD I have written on your talk page too but feel i should continue here as well ( else will be archived ). I have made all the changes as suggested, It would be kind enough if you give a look at the draft now & suggest if its finally ok to be published or still needs any changes. Since you are following the draft & suggesting what all needs to be done, It would be kind enough that the sequence continues.

Thanks again in advance Shekhar in (talk) 17:44, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Not sure what to do

I came across this page while working on pages with issues. The page is Head of the diocese csi. The editor is relatively new, however, the article is very poorly written and has many issues. What I saw as problem is in the page history when you look at the edit summaries.

History -https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Head_of_the_diocese_csi&action=history
Thanks - Bakertheacre Chat/What I Baked 17:29, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

The page is largely an unattributed copy of Church of South India, and probably can be deleted as a duplicate under WP:A10. Any additions are garbled and incoherent. A draft at Draft:Head of the diocese was declined but has been resubmitted without any improvement. --David Biddulph (talk) 17:57, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Starting a New Wiki Page

Hi: I'm working on a new Wiki page for friend. I have written out her information alread and she has a website.

1. How do I upload the information on Wiki? 2. How long will it take for the page to be made public? 2601:8C:C200:4130:A594:3C08:937B:C4AD (talk) 15:44, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, unregistered user and welcome to the teahouse. Hre are some steps to follow which often lead to cuss in the tricky task of creating a new article.
  • First, review our guideline on notability, our policy on Verifiability, and our specific guideline on the notability of people. Consider whether your subject clearly meets the standards listed there. Also, check if the topic is already covered, perhaps under a different spelling or in a section of an article about a wider topic. You will waste a lot of time, if you create a new article, and then find that the encyclopedia already has an article about that.
  • Second, read how to create Your First Article and referencing for beginners and again consider if you want to go ahead.
  • Third, If you have any connection or affiliation with the subject, disclose it in accordance with our guideline on Conflict of interest. If you have been or expect to be paid for making edits, or are making them as part of your job, disclose this according to the strict rules of the Paid-contribution disclosure. This is absolutely required; omitting it can result in you being blocked from further editing.
  • Fourth, gather sources. You want independent, professionally published, reliable sources with each discussing the subject in some detail. If you can't find several such sources, stop; an article will not be created! Sources do NOT need to be online, or in English, although it is helpful if at least some are. The "independent" part is vital. Wikipedia does not consider as independent sources such as press releases, or news stories based on press releases, or anything published by the subject itself or an affiliate of the subject. Strictly local coverage is also not preferred. Regional or national newspapers or magazines, books published by mainstream publishers (not self-published), or scholarly journals are usually good. So are online equivalents of these. (Additional sources may verify particular statements but not discuss the subject in detail. But those significant detailed sources are needed first.)
  • Fifth, use the article wizard to create a draft under the articles for creation project. This is always a good idea for an inexperienced ed itor, but in the case of an editor with a conflict of interest it is essential.
  • Sixth, use the sources gathered before (and other sources you may find along the way) to write the article. Cite all significant statements to sources. Do not express opinions or judgements, unless they are explicitly attributed to named people or entities, preferably in a direct quotation, and cited to a source. Do not use puffery or marketing-speak. Provide page numbers, dates, authors and titles for sources to the extent these are available. A title is always needed. Submit the draft when you think it is ready for review. Be prepared to wait a while for a review (several weeks or more).
  • Seventh, when (well perhaps if) your draft is declined, pay attention to the comments of the reviewer, and correct the draft and resubmit it. During this whole process, if you face any unresolvable editing hurdles, or cannot comprehend any editing issue, feel free to post a request at the Teahouse or the help desk and ask the regulars. Repeat this until the draft passes review.
Congratulations, you have now created a valid Wikipedia article. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:44, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
As to time, there is no rush. Once you submit a draft for review, it can take from a few hours to a couple of months or more for it to be reviewed, and there may be several cycles of review/improve before it is accepted. After that it is moved to the main article space, and is visible to Wikipedia readers, but it may not be indexed by search engines for up to 90- days more. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:48, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Hello, IP user. Please bear in mind that Wikipedia is basically uninterested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves: it is only interested in what independent commentators have chosen to publish (in reliable, edited places) about the subject. This has two important consequences. First, if such independent, reliably published sources don't exist, or don't have enough material about her to ground an article, then no article will be possible, and any work you have done by that point will be wasted (this is the criterion of "notability" that DES mentioned). Secondly, when you come to write the article, you will need to forget everything you know about her, and write only from what the independent sources say. --ColinFine (talk) 18:31, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

How can I be an administrator?

How can i be an administrator Quazeem Adejobi (talk) 17:06, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Quazee, Adejobi, and welcome to the Teahouse. In order to become an administrator, you will need to persuade a nuber of experienced editors that you are intending to do some work in Wikipedia that requires the administrator tools, and that you are a responsible person who has wide knowledge and experience of Wikipedia's policies and procedures. It is unlikely that anybody will be successful who has not made several thousand edits in a wide range of activities. I have been an editor for 15 years and have made around 17000 edits, but I have never asked to be an administrator, because there's nothing I want to do herer that requires those tools. Please see RFA for more information. --ColinFine (talk) 18:40, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

When WP:CWW but further editing the copied content, do I need to use different edits for CWW vs. further editing

Yesterday, I edited United States v. Flynn, copying content from two other articles in this edit: [21], but also further editing some of the content that I'd copied in order to integrate it with the existing text on the destination page. I noted in my edit summary which pages I'd copied the content from, but I'm wondering now whether I should have copied the content and then further edited that copied content in separate edits, or if it's OK to copy and further edit in the same edit. I'm going to be doing some additional CWW with further editing, and before I do that, I figured that it would be good to double-check. On the one hand, for WP's copyright purposes, my guess is that it's OK to edit the copied content in the same edit that brought the copied content over; on the other hand, if someone is actually trying to figure out the editor(s) who originally introduced the material on the source page, that might be more straightforward if the copying and further editing occur in different edits. This isn't addressed on the CWW page, and I searched the Teahouse archives to see whether it had been addressed, but didn't find anything (no guarantee that I used effective search terms, though). Thanks. -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 15:42, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hello, FactOrOpinion. There is no requirement to first copy exactly and then revise in a separate edit, you can do it all in one if you so choose, as long as you properly acknowledge the sources. I would advise also using {{copied}} on the talk page of both the source and the destination articles. This makes the copy apparent on a longer term basis, while an edit summery is quickly buried in the edit history. It is not required, but is a good practice. It also warns that the sopurce article is needed as part of the history of the destination. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 16:41, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
DESiegel - Thanks for your response, and I'm glad that my edit yesterday was OK. I'd posted info to the talk pages for Michael Flynn and United States v. Flynn when we created the latter as a split from a section of the former, but I hadn't done that with yesterday's CWW and appreciate the reminder that this is good to do more generally. BTW, I think we might have met at the NGA edit-a-thon last November. It took several months before I really started editing here more regularly, but I'm slowly learning thanks to mentoring from more experienced editors. -- FactOrOpinion (talk) 18:23, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
I am glad to have been of help, FactOrOpinion, both now and then. I do recall that edit-a-THON. Feel free to ask further questions either here or at my user talk page. DES (talk)DESiegel Contribs 18:54, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

adding references so my page doesn't get deleted

Working on a page called [The Brew Happy Show], it is my first attempt at a full page. I wanted to start with something I was familiar with. So I picked a local podcast. My page gets deleted, I think it is because I am not inserting references. How do I validate the page I'm creating so it doesn't get deleted? Damian592 (talk) 22:04, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Damian592, It's my opinion that someone with 18 edits doesn't have enough experience to be starting a new article from scratch. The rules do permit you to do so but a brief glance at your attempt shows that doesn't really have any independent references. Please try getting more experience before trying again although maybe some others will offer more supportive advice. S Philbrick(Talk) 22:10, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Damian592 - I Googled the podcast and can't find any third party media coverage that would suggest it is notable enough for an article. See Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies). Also, your user name suggests you might have a conflict of interest - see WP:COI. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 22:15, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

AfD and canvassing

Hi; I feel like I should know the answer to this having been around a little while, so I feel a bit silly posting at the WP:Help desk. Hope it's okay to post here even though I'm not that new any more.

I created an AfD that was admittedly borderline (deliberately not linking it), and all four !votes have been to keep, but also don't really reference policy (indeed, one is straight out of WP:ATA). I can see that there is a case to be made for keeping the article, and I'd like to hear it, but the comments on the nomination definitely aren't it.

Is it appropriate to post it on, say, a relevant WikiProject talk page to gain further opinions? (It's already on all the relevant delsort pages.) I don't want to fall foul of WP:CANVASS, but I think comments from a few more-experienced people might be handy. YorkshireLad  ✿  (talk) 18:19, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Hi YorkshireLad, welcome to the Teahouse. I would say it is probably okay to provide a neutrally worded notification at the WikiProject talk page—and then to be transparent about it, you should leave a note at the AfD saying that you have done so. In general, this is not improper per Wikipedia:Canvassing#Appropriate notification. Relevant considerations are explained at that guideline page, including The audience must not be selected on the basis of their opinions—for example, if notices are sent to editors who previously supported deleting an article, then identical notices should be sent to those who supported keeping it. Do not send notices to too many users, and do not send messages to users who have asked not to receive them. I hope this information is helpful. Mz7 (talk) 21:07, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
As an addendum to my comment: the key here is neutrally worded—make sure you do not mention WP:ATA or your own personal views in your message to the talk page. There is a template that can help: {{subst:Please see|AfD link}}. Mz7 (talk) 21:11, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
Mz7, Thanks! Of course would keep it neutral. Will look at doing that tomorrow (nearly midnight local time). YorkshireLad  ✿  (talk) 22:55, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Numero sign

Hello again. I am wondering when and if it is appropriate to be using the № on English Wikipedia? Per the article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Numero_sign it is not used in standard English or most European countries. The reason I am asking is yesterday I did a cleanup of Asia (1799 ship) in which one of the edits was converting the symbol to No. as it is commonly used in English. Another editor reverted my edit (which also included other edits to fix broken links and such) and has not fixed the article. I just wanted to find out before I go back to the article if I should change that back to No. or leave the glyph in place? Bakertheacre Chat/What I Baked 22:22, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

@Bakertheacre: Another editor has removed the glyph. Per the edit summary, this is covered in the Manual of Style at Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Abbreviations#Unicode_abbreviation_ligature RudolfRed (talk) 23:34, 13 July 2020 (UTC)
RudolfRed, ahah! Thank you! So I should maybe go back and just do the reverts to my original updates and just explain to the second editor why I did it so not to upset them? Bakertheacre Chat/What I Baked 23:38, 13 July 2020 (UTC) - I retract, looks like it is all good now. Thanks again!
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1068&oldid=1142565395"