Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1089

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1085←Archive 1087Archive 1088Archive 1089Archive 1090Archive 1091→Archive 1095

Editing

If I know something in an article is false or missing content, but I either can’t find a citation or feel it doesn’t need one, and I don’t want to get my work deleted, what do I do? Grnphythn53 (talk) 23:44, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Grnphythn53. You cannot edit an article based on your own personal knowledge. I suggest that you discuss your concerns on the article talk page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
(e/c) Hi Grnphythn53. If something in an article is known to be wrong and is not cited to a reliable source, then you can simply remove it. Upon doing so, the onus of returning that content is on anyone wishing to retain it to provide a reliable source, using an inline citation that directly supports the content – it cannot be returned, within bedrock policy, without doing so. Please see the section of the verifiability policy, known by the shortcut, WP:BURDEN. I strongly recommend that upon any such removal you state essentially as I have here, and specifically link to the policy upon the removal in your edit summary (see e.g., here and here).

On the other hand, if something is cited to, and directly verifiable in, a reliable source, that you "know" anecdotally/on your personal knowledge to be wrong, do not remove it. Instead look for a reliable source that verifies the correct facts, and possibly discuss the contradiction on the talk page, citing the opposing source. If you can't find a source and it's already reliably sourced, that the end of that. See Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth.

As to content that does not need a source, please see Wikipedia:You don't need to cite that the sky is blue. Informing some of the foregoing, please note also that there are only four types of material that require inline citations (though I would change this policy, if I had my druthers): 1) Quotations; 2) Contentious material (whether positive or negative) about living persons; 3) Materially that has been challenged (e.g., through an edit summary like the ones I linked as examples, or through adding a {{Fact}} template in relation); and material that is 4) likely to be challenged. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:39, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Size of navigation popups

make Navigation Popup Pictures Bigger + load faster How does one make Navigation Pop up Pictures bigger? the reference tooltip preview has loads bigger pictures but it cuts offs the Introduction of a new hyperlink Topic

The Navigation Pop up feature can be better if it loads faster pop ups seems to not cut off the intro of a new topic Vibrato3 (talk) 18:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

@Vibrato3: You're probably better off asking at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 18:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
@Vibrato3: Looking at WP:POP#Options, I don't see an option for that exactly. However, adding:
window.popupThumbAction='sizetoggle';
to your personal javascript file changes it so that clicking on the image expands it to fill the width of the popup (I think). There are other options shown there that control the initial and max size of the popup. This may do what you need. Just click on this red link: User:Vibrato3/common.js to create your personal javascript file, add the code shown above (and any other options you might want) to it, and click Publish changes. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:15, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
AlanM1 the javascript code is almost perfect, just if the picture would load larger without Toggling it  — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vibrato3 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Place of Birth guidelines

Where are the place of birth guidelines?

My city's official area is 141 square miles. The city status belongs to that 141 square mile area. Those 141 square miles consist of the main namesake town, and 100's more towns, villages, hamlets and neighbourhoods, the majority of which have been part of the city for 100's or 1000's of years. Some people in those towns, villages neighbourhoods, and hamlets outside of the main namesake town, like to think of themselves as separate entities entirely, when the fact is they aren't. They are part of the city whether they like it or not. I've even seen TV programmes filmed in areas less than a mile or two from the city centre being described as being "near the city," or "just outside the city." Even some of the local councillors (most of which live in those areas), newspaper reporters, and tourism office workers, don't seem to understand that fact. They all refer to those areas as being "near the city" or "just outside the city."

Those towns, villages, hamlets, and neighbourhoods are constantly described on Wikipedia as being "near the city" or "just outside the city," and the same goes for the Wikipedia articles on people born and raised in those areas.

It annoys the hell out of me!

I've tried to correct some of the older ones in the past, with the correct county and the correct city, but they're always reverted, usually by people who aren't from the area, and don't know what a British city is. If that isn't the case, then it's people saying we need to stick with what the county was called before 1974, or claiming that the town/village/hamlet/neighbourhood wasn't part of the city at the time of their birth, which like I said above, I'm 99% sure isn't the case for the majority of them. Although I've yet to research the 100's of neighbourhoods of the city properly, to find references of the years when or more likely if those neighbourhoods were independent, and when they joined the city.

The birth place annoyances are one of the main reasons I've cut down editing on Wikipedia, to focus on editing IMDB instead.

I'm slowly adding, correcting, and updating, 100's of films, TV series, TV episodes, shorts etc of productions which filmed in my city, and adding 1000's of missing episodes, cast/crew members, companies, filming locations, release dates, run times, title images, screenshots, occasional plots etc in those same productions which have nothing to do with the city, especially when I notice there's a lot of episodes missing in a TV series for example. I've corrected/updated most, if not all of the birth places for the people who were already added as being born in the city, and I occasionally add missing credits or information on their profiles too when I stumble across them. I must have added at least 20 missing productions mainly from the 1970's to the 1990's (either filmed in my city, or containing people born in my city), around 500 missing TV episodes, and 1000's of cast/crew members in the last month alone, the majority of which I had no idea about until I stumbled across them on archive websites, and neither do the film office today. Just last week I stumbled across an old national news article for a British sports champion from my city, that hardly anyone in the city, never mind the big names in the sport itself, have heard of, so I've got a few films of him winning his title to add to IMDB now too.

I've also got a small list of around 50 people born in my city (big names, and people you and I had never heard of) who's birth places I've added to IMDB, along with around 5-10 the references each, all of which I've archived on the Wayback Machine, so eventually when I have a few thousand (film, TV, news, music, sport, literature etc) people on my list added to IMDB, I will be going through Wikipedia adding their birth places to their articles if they have one, or creating them if they don't, and I'll have all the references backed up, just in case they go missing. Danstarr69 (talk) 23:55, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

Nothing against your intentions, Danstarr69, but Wikipedia policy prevents us from using IMdB as a source, as it's user-generated. Even your sourced additions to IMdB won't qualify, based on their being subject to revision by anyone at any time. You may want to complete your birthdate project in a different sequence of steps.--Quisqualis (talk) 00:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Danstarr69. When it comes to place of birth, Wikipedia states what reliable sources say, not what individual Wikipedia editors think is right. So, if a reliable source says that Person A was born in Keighley, then that is what their Wikipedia article should say. You cannot conclude that, since Keighley is part of the City of Bradford, the article should say Bradford instead. Your enthusiasm for Bradford is fine, but please remember that Wikipedia is not a place to right great wrongs. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Danstarr69 I have another thought on this, perhaps only peripherally relevant to how things are/should be done in Wikipedia. Is what you're asking really desirable? Do people born in one of these villages or hamlets necessarily think of themselves as born in the big city? Or do they identify--perhaps proudly--that they were born in this or that village or hamlet? My mother was born in Stockport, Cheshire--not a village or hamlet, I grant you, but bear with me here. I first visited there, from America, in 1980--with my mother, who hadn't been there in quite a few years. Driving there, approaching the city, we saw a sign that said (more or less, I think) "Stockport Metropolitan Burough of Greater Manchester." When I read it out loud, my mother said, "You mean, Manchester's eaten it?" The cities of Stockport and Manchester used to border each other in adjacent counties. They had carved Stockport out of Cheshire and Manchester out of Lancashire (all with several other cities, towns, villages and no doubt a hamlet or two) and made them "Greater Manchester." Guess what?? My mother was still born in Stockport, Cheshire. What's more, her family in England--knowing all this full well--still addressed letters that way. And even at that time, my mother's cousin still lived in Staleybridge, and my mother's uncle still lived in Oldham. For the rest of their lives. Uporządnicki (talk) 14:41, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Quisqualis Now where exactly did I say I'm going to use IMDB for references? I didn't.
I said I've saved all the references I used to get that information on IMDB, as IMDB has a policy of using current locations and current location names, no matter where they were located or what they were called in the past.
Whereas Wikipedia apparently has it the other way around, where you have to use locations and location names which are a million years out of date, or simply incorrect.
That's why I'm asking for the guidelines on birth places to see if it's actually true about not using current locations and location names.
Danstarr69, walls of text may confuse some readers. I read where you stated, "eventually when I have a few thousand (film, TV, news, music, sport, literature etc) people on my list added to IMDB, I will be going through Wikipedia adding their birth places to their articles if they have one, or creating them if they don't, and I'll have all the references backed up, just in case they go" and may have misunderstood your plans.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
I've saved the references I used to get them on IMDB in one of my 3 private Blogger blog pages (one for random stuff, and the other two for things about my city, or it's people), which I'll probably publish one day. At the moment I just use Blogger as a place to save information like the links I used, in separate unpublished posts along with the birth places and/or birth dates for each person to stop them from getting mixed up.
Cullen328 what their Wikipedia article should say is Keighley, Bradford, West Yorkshire. The same goes for people born in other City of Bradford neighbourhoods, mini neighbourhoods, estates, squares, landmarks, parks, moors, fields, woods, or wards like
Extended content
Addingham, Addingham High Moor, Addingham Low Moor, Addingham Middle Moor, Addingham Moorside, Airedale, Aireworth, Alder Carr Wood, Allerton, Altar Wood, Apperley Bridge, Ashbourne, Austby Gill, Autherim Bottom, Baildon, Baildon Green, Baildon Hill, Baildon Holmes, Baildon Moor, Baildon Wood Bottom, Bailey Hills, Bank Top, Bankfoot, Barcroft, Barkerend, Barley Cote, Barron's Wood, Beanlands Island, Beck Hill, Beck Wood, Beechcliffe, Beldon Hill, Bell Bank Wood, Bell Dean, Bell Wood, Belle Vue, Belmont Wood, Ben Rhydding, Best Lane Bottom, Bierley, Bierley Hall Wood, Billy Bushes Wood, Bingley, Bingley Moor, Birkey Bank Wood, Birks, Birks Wood, Black Carr, Black Hill, Black Hill Bottom, Black Moor, Black Mountain Millennium Green, Blackhill Plantation, Blakey Wood, Bloomer Hill, Blue Scar Clough, Boggart Wood, Bogthorn, Bolton, Bolton Outlanes, Bolton Woods, Bond Clough, Botany, Bracken Bank, Bracken Hall Green, Bracken Wood, Bradford Moor, Braithwaite, Branshaw Moor, Branshaw Plantation, Briery Wood, Brighton Wood, Broadstone Wood, Brocka Bank Moor, Brook Hill, Broomfields, Brow Bottom, Brow Moor, Brow Wood, Brown Royd, Brownroyd Hill, Brunthwaite, Brunthwaite Crag Wood, Buck Park Wood, Buck Wood, Buckley Green, Bull Coppy Wood, Bull Greave Wood, Burley in Wharfedale, Burley Moor, Burley Woodhead, Buttershaw, Cackleshaw, Canterbury, Carr Bottom, Carr Clough, Carr House Gate, Carr Wood, Cat Clough, Catherine Slack, Catstones Hill, Catstones Moor, Catstones Wood, Catton Wood, Chapel Green, Charlestown, Chellow Dean, Chellow Grange, Chellow Heights, Chip Hill Clough, City Park, Clayton, Clayton Heights, Clews Moor, Cliff Wood, Cocking Wood, Cockshot Dam Green, Coney Wood, Cop Hirst Wood, Coppy Wood, Cornmould Heath, Cottingley, Cottingley Bar, Cottingley Moor, Cottingley Wood Estate, Crag Wood, Cragg Wood, Craven Wood, Crawshaw Moss, Cringles Plantation, Cripple Croft Plantation, Cromwheel, Crosley Wood, Crossflatts, Cross Roads, Crossley Hall, Crow Nest, Cuckoo Nest Wood, Cullingworth, Cullingworth Moor, Currer Wood, Cutler Heights, Cutshaw Moor, Daffels Wood, Daisy Hill, Damems, Dark Wood, Dawson Wood, Dean Fields, Delf Hill, Delph Hill, Delph Wood, Denholme, Denholme Clough, Denholme Gate, Dirk Hill, Doctor Wood, Dowdy Wood, Dry Clough, Dudley Hill, Dungeon Wood, East Bowling, East Bowling, East Buck Stones, East Morton, East Riddlesden, Eastbrook, Eastburn, Eastwood, Eccleshill, Egypt, Eldwick, Eldwick Beck, Elm Wood, Esholt, Ewe Hills, Exley Head, Fagley, Fairbank Wood, Fairweather Green, Far High Field, Fell Wood, Fenny Shaw, Ferncliffe, Field Wood, Five Lane Ends, Flappit Spring, Forster Square, Four Lane Ends, Fourlands, Fowler Hill Plantation, Frizinghall, Gannerthorpe Wood, Geraldine's Wood, Gill Wood, Gilstead, Gingerbread Clough, Girlington, Goitside, Goitstock Wood, Goose Eye, Goose Eye Wood, Goose Hill, Great Clough, Great Gill, Great Horton, Great Peat Moss, Great Ridge Wood, Great Wood, Green Clough, Green End, Green Hill Wood, Green Holes Clough, Green Side, Greengate, Greengates, Greenwood Wood, Griff Wood, Grove House, Guard House, Haigh Fold, Hainworth, Hainworth Shaw, Hainworth Wood, Hanging Fall Wood, Harbour Hole Bottom, Hard Nese Clough, Harden, Harecroft, Hart Rhydding Wood, Hawkcliffe Wood, Hawkstone Wood, Haworth, Haworth Moor, Haycliffe Hill, Hazel Head Wood, Headley Clough, Heaton, Heaton Grove, Heaton Moor, Heber Moss, Heber's Ghyll, Henacre Wood, Hermit Hole, High Brunthwaite, High Carr, High House, High Moor, High Utley, Higher Holme House Wood, Highfield, Hill Green, Hill Top, Hills Wood, Hirst Wood, Hog Hill Flat, Hog Holes Clough, Holling Plantation, Hollin Wood, Hollins Wood, Hollings Wood, Holme, Holme House Wood, Holme Wood, Holy Croft, Horton Bank, Horton Bank Bottom, Horton Bank Top, Horton Grange, Howden Wood, Hudson Wood, Hudson's Wood, Hunger Hill Plantation, Idle, Idle Moor, Ilkley, Ilkley Moor, Inderpendent Quarter, Ingrow, Intake Wood, Ive Stones Clough, Ives Plantation, Jacob's Wood, Jay Tail Wood, Jer Wood, Jerrison Wood, Judy Woods, Keighley Moor, Kirkstall Wood, Kit Wood, Knott Wood, Knowle Park, Laisterdyke, Lane Bottom, Lane End, Lane Head, Lawkholme, Laycock, Leaventhorpe, Lee Lane, Leeming, Lees, Lees Moor, Lidget Green, Lister Hills, Little Clough, Little Germany, Little Horton, Little Horton Green, Little London, Little Ridge Wood, Little Round Plantation, Little Round Wood, Little Wolf Stones, Little Wood, Lodge Hill Wood, Long Lee, Long Ridge End, Longlands, Lousy Wood, Low Ash, Low Baildon, Low Crooks Wood, Low Fold, Low Green, Low Moor, Low Plain, Low Springs, Low Utley, Low Wood, Lower Grange, Lower Holme House Wood, Lower Intake Rough, Lower Kirkstall Wood, Lower Ridge Green, Lower Wood, Lower Woodlands, Lumb Foot, Lumb Gill Wood, Manningham, Marchup Plantation, Marley Brow Wood, Marsh, Marsh Top, Marshfields, Maud Wood, Menston, Mickle Moss, Micklethwaite, Middle Moor, Middle Moor Clough, Middle Moor Flat, Middleton, Middleton Woods, Middleway Meadows, Midgeham Flat, Midgeley Wood, Mill Carr Hill, Mill Wood, Millennium Green, Moor End, Moor Side, Moor Top, Moorhead, Moorhouse Moor, Moorhouse Wood, Moorside, Morton Moor, Mountain, Murgatroyd Wood, Myrtle Grove, Nab Hill, Nab Rough, Nab Scar, Nab Water Rough, Nab Wood, Nailer Rough, Nan Scar, Nell Bank Wood, New Road Side, New Town, Newsholme, Newsholme Dean, Norr, Norr Hill, North Brow Wood, North Plantation, North Wood, Northcliffe Woods, Nun Wood, Oakenshaw, Oakworth, Odsal, Odsal Wood, Old Allen Moor, Old Dolphin, Old Hanna Wood, Old Hills, Old Ibber Flat, Old Snap Bottoms, Old Spring Wood, Old Wood, Oldfield, Owlet, Oxenhope, Oxenhope Moor, Panorama Woods, Paradise Green, Park Fields, Park, Park Wood, Park Wood Bottom, Parkside, Paul Clough, Pawpots Wood, Pellon Wood, Penistone Hill, Pennythorn Hill, Pickles Hill, Pickles Rough, Poggy Wood, Pollard Park, Ponden Clough, Ponden Wood, Poplars Farm, Priestthorpe, Queensbury, Race Course Plantation, Ravens Scar, Ravenscliffe, Red Mires Clough, Red Mires Flat, Redcar Plantation, Redcar Tarn, Redding Wood, Renold Wood, Rhodesway, Riddlesden, Ripleyville, Rivock Edge, Robin Hood Wood, Rocky Valley, Roger Meadow, Rombalds Moor, Rosse Wood, Rough Plantation, Round Hill Wood, Round Plantation, Round Wood, Royd Wood, Royds, Royds Cliff Wood, Royds Hall Great Wood, Ruin Bank Wood, Rye Loaf Wood, Ryecroft, Ryecroft Plantation, Saltaire, Sandy Lane, Sawood, Sawood Moss, Scar Top, Scholemoor, School Green, School Wood, Scotch Fir Plantation, Shackleton Wood, Shearbridge, Shipley, Shipley Glen, Shipley High Moor, Showfield, Silsden, Silsden Moor, Simpson Green, Slack Side, Slatesden Clough, Small Banks, Small Tail Wood, Smallden Clough, Snail Green, Snow Hill Plantation, Spa Flat, Spa Hill Clough, Spring Bank, Spring Crag Wood, Spring Gill Wood, Spring Wood, Springfield, Spy Hill, Square Plantation, St Paul's Wood, Stairs Hill, Stake Hill, Staithgate, Stakehill Plantation, Stanbury, Stanbury Moor, Staygate, Stead, Stead Hall Wood, Steeton, Steeton Moor, Stockbridge, Stone Top Wood, Stoney Ridge Plantation, Stony Hill Clough, Stony Lane, Strong Close, Stubham Wood, Sugden Wood, Sun Hill, Sun Hill Clough, Sun Side, Sun Wood, Sunny Dale, Swain House, Swaine Green, Swartha Wood, Sykes Bottom, Thackley, Thackley End, Thackley West Wood, The Coppice, The Glen, The Green, The Nosegay, The Out Moor, The Roughs, The Shay, The Tarn, Thornbury, Thornton, Thornton Moor, Thorpe, Thorpe Edge, Thwaites, Thwaites Brow, Todley Hill, Toftshaw Bottom, Toller, Tong, Tong Park, Tong Street, Town End, Transfield Wood, Trench Wood, Trough Bottom, Truncliffe, Twist Wood, Tyersal, Tyersal Gate, Undercliffe, Upper Common, Upper Fagley, Upper Green, Upper Marsh, Upper Ridge Green, Upper Wyke, Vicar Wood, Walker Wood, Wapping, Waterloo Clough, Weather Royds Wood, Weecher Flat, West Bowling, West End, West Ing Wood, West Morton, West Park, West Riddlesden, West Royd, West Scholes, Westgate Hill, Westgate Hill Plantation, Westwood Park, Wether Hill Clough, Whetley, Whinny Hill, White Abbey, White Crag Moor, White Crag Moss, White Crag Plantation, White Moor, Whitley Head, Wibsey, Wibsey Slack, Will Clough, Willy Hall's Sprout, Willy Wood, Wilsden, Windhill, Withins Flat, Withins Slack, Wood End, Woodhouse, Woodside, Worlds Hill, Worth Village, Wrose, Wrose Brow Plantation, Wyke, Wyke Common etc (plus more neighbourhoods I know of which I haven't added to the list yet) all of which are "in the City of Bradford," not "near" or "just outside" the city.

Uporządnicki

  1. Bradford is a city with a population of 539,776 and an area of 141.47 square miles.
  2. Manchester is a city with a population of 552,858 and an area of 44.65 square miles
  3. West Yorkshire is a county
  4. Greater Manchester is a county
  5. London is not a city. It doesn't have any real borders. It's just an unspecified area in the county of Greater London which contains 2 cities. Those cities are: The City of Westminster. And the City of London which is the 3rd smallest city in the UK by population and the smallest city in the UK by area.

Bradford as you can see is 3 times bigger than the city of Manchester. Bradford also had a bigger population than Manchester until 2015. 20 years of Manchester focused propaganda, has led to a population increase of over 160,000 people.

You're proving my point that Most people don't know what a British city is.

  • Stockport is not in the city of Manchester.
  • Stockport is in the county of Greater Manchester.
Now is someone going to direct me to the Birth Place Guidelines?

Danstarr69 (talk) 16:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Stockport WAS in the County of Cheshire. Manchester WAS in the County of Lancashire. And there WASN'T a county of Greater Manchester. Until there was. And that was all within my lifetime. The point is, not the details and technicalities of what is a city and what isn't. The point is that villages and hamlets that might now be parts of cities or of Greater This or That at one time or another have had their own identities. And people from these places might still identify as being from these places. Uporządnicki (talk) 02:54, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I am tagged for disruptive editing

Could anyone please explain why my edits are tagged as disruptive? I am not sure who to ask about this. I already started the disruption resolution process but I'm confused on who to talk about this.

Thanks in advance.

Reuse of Image's Content.

Hi!!! My client has now granted permission for the usage of his image's content and has uploaded it in Wikimedia commons. But I have a doubt. How to mention that I have the copyright and images for use in the draft?? Please help George Maverick (talk) 02:16, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

As pointed out on your Talk page not six hours ago," Your additions to Draft:Raz Klinghoffer were removed in whole or in part, as they appeared to have added copyrighted content without evidence that the source material was in the public domain or has been released by its owner or legal agent under a suitably-free and compatible copyright license." The problem was not just the image. It appears you have started over again at Draft:George Maverick/Raz Klinghoffer. Even if the subject of the draft has renounced copyright to the content on his website, you still have done nothing to meet Wikipedia's definition of notability, as the first of three refs is an interview and the second, his website. David notMD (talk) 03:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Whoop - as I was writing that an editor deleted it for copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 03:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
George Maverick has created the same draft Draft:George Maverick/Raz Klinghoffer after it was deleted for copyright infringement, in a way that no prior editing history visible. David notMD (talk) 04:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

How to change the name of the article

How to change the title of already created article Shivsa008 (talk) 03:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Shivsa008, see Help:Moving pages. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Musical notability criteria

 Courtesy link: Draft:Yeh Shuhua


Hi, I would like to ask how do I merge a draft article into an existing article? I have tried to make an article for a person but apparently it keeps getting declined and they ask me to merge it into an existing article. This is what they wrote me: "The proposed article does not have sufficient content to require an article of its own, but it could be merged into the existing article at (G)I-dle. Since anyone can edit Wikipedia, you are welcome to add that information yourself. Thank you." I hope that you can guide me since its my frist time editing on wikipedia. Thanks. Justin03 (talk) 07:16, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Interesting situation, as each of the other women in the K-pop band (G)I-dle is the subject of an article, plus the group article, yet your attempt at Draft:Yeh Shuhua has been declined four times. David notMD (talk) 07:38, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

I dont get what you mean, I'm sorry could you explain abit more detailed to me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justin03 (talk • contribs)

@Justin03: If each of the other members of this band have a page, it means that Yeh Shuhua is probably notable, too. To get the article approved, though, you need to demonstrate it. The way you can do that is to read through WP:NMUSIC, and then give us the links to the three sources that you think best fulfill those criteria. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 09:19, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

@Sdkb: Hi, would like to ask if a billboard article talking about their debut release works as a reference for the notable thingy?Justin03 (talk) 12:22, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Justin03, by "billboard article" do you mean an article from billboard.com? Quite possibly, but I can't say for sure without actually seeing it. The sources need to be independent of the band, and they need to have more than just a passing mention of Yeh Shuhua as an individual. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 03:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
@Sdkb: Unfortunately, the article is mentioning them as a group and I dont quite think that is suitable for her individual page. And do you know where can I get help from profesional editors? I'm getting headache trying to edit this alone. Thank you in advance :) Justin03 (talk) 04:02, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Justin03, there are no professional editors on Wikipedia; it's all volunteers except for the folks at the Wikimedia Foundation running the servers, and they have no control over content decisions like approving an article. There are people on the internet who will take your money to try to get a page published, but most are scams and even the ones who aren't can't make a topic notable that's not notable. Some of the Teahouse hosts are among Wikipedia's most experienced editors, so you're in the best place you can be to get help. The only other place I'd suggest that might help would be WT:Korea, where you might find an experienced editor who wants to help search for sources. We or they can only help so much, though, since the problem is sources and sometimes those just don't exist.
For this page, there's a chance they do exist, and it's possible that the reviewers just haven't found them because e.g. they're in Korean. But they're the bottleneck. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 04:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
@Sdkb:, Thanks alot for your help, I will go there and try to ask for help. Hope they can kinda guide me through. If not I will come back here and ask for more help. Hope you guys wont mind. Thanks :) Justin03 (talk) 04:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Sikvs

 50.67.30.223 (talk) 04:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Did you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 04:52, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Disruptive editors who do not assume good faith from other users

Moved from WT:THQ § Disruptive editors who do not assume good faith from other users
 – Marchjuly (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

WP:AGF is a fundamental principle on Wikipedia. What can we do about those self-taught master reverting artists such as this guy, who do not assume good faith from other users and have never stopped questioning the reliability of edits made by other people and virtually asked for sources to be included in every sentence other people wrote instead of trying to improve the articles themselves or stay away from editing those articles which themselves have limited or little knowledge? In my opinion, this type of users have generated more disruptive edits than positive contributions. These users are probably the second worst type of users on Wikipedia, just better than those pure vandals. Is there a direct path we could report them if they are getting out of control? 120.16.155.104 (talk) 03:37, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi IP 120.16.155.104. The editor you referred to above has been blocked, so that appears to have been resolved. As for the other parts of your post, my suggestion is that you keep assuming good faith and try to engage these types of editors until it becomes quite apparent that they aren’t listening to any of the advice they’re being given. If the situation doesn’t improve, you may have no choice than to bring up the editor’s behavior at one of the administrators’ noticeboards; however, before you do that you should at least explore other options first. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

hello can you share my website to all people plz

 Welcome to news (talk) 05:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

No. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 06:33, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Worth a shot, though. But yeah, no. Le Panini [🥪] 07:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Inserting your website into an article is spamming, and resulted in you being indefinitely blocked. You can appeal your block, but if your only intent is to promote your website, you will fail. David notMD (talk) 12:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Need permission to use a picture in my book I am writing on memory improvement

I need permission from wikipedia or the original creator to use this image...in my book. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cc/Arcimboldo_Earth.jpg/800px-Arcimboldo_Earth.jpg

You may plz also tell me about the original creator or copyright holder to contact for his/her permission to use this image. Mukeshhere (talk) 02:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

You need no permission to use this image as it is in the public domain, you can use it for any purpose. The file is at c:File:Arcimboldo Earth.jpg on Wikimedia Commons. Dylsss(talk contribs) 02:53, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Mukeshhere, in addition to Dylsss' answer, please keep in mind that while the image can be used for any purpose, it must be properly attributed (i.e., you must state where you got the image from) per Wikipedia's reuse policies. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 04:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
I don't think so, Tenryuu. The image is public domain, not under any license, so there is no requirement to give attribution (though it would be appreciated if you did so, Mukeshhere). --ColinFine (talk) 13:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

about editing a semi protected article

hey i just edited eminem article i added some more information about him but i cant see it on the main google page only inside wikipedia i mean when i search eminem on google the information i put doesnt appear under his name on the main google webpage Shreyas2710 (talk) 14:47, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Shreyas2710, it takes time for Google to update it. Just be patient. GeraldWL 14:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

hey check ur EMAIL — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shreyas2710 (talk • contribs) 15:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I found 7 sources for an addition I made. Someone keeps deleting them, and my addition.

I edited the Santa Baby article to add a couple of sentences about the Michael Buble version. I found 7 sources, and added 3 more today, for a total of 10. Someone else keeps removing it. I don't know what to do. Please help. Benicio2020 (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Benicio2020, Please read WP:REFBOMB. If the Buble version made numerous "worst" lists, just use 2 or 3 examples, please. We don't want to belabor this version of the song in the article, as that will be WP:UNDUE emphasis, as well as recentism.--Quisqualis (talk) 17:32, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Okay, I understand. However, the person that removed ALL of my additions kept changing his story - first my additions weren't neutral, then the references were bad, etc. Also, it's not recent - the references were from various years. Not just this year. Benicio2020 (talk) 00:37, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
I also want to add that I just looked at the article again. The user took out Sydney Morning Herald and the Houston Chronicle as not being reliable sources. Since when are legitimate newspapers considered not reliable? Benicio2020 (talk) 00:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
The Sydney Morning Herald source was removed as a mistake and I have since added it back. I never removed all of your additions. Also, you never used The Houston Chronicle in the article to begin with. I reverted your edits because you added a large number of unreliable sources to back a claim saying that a song was hated by critics. To me, this screamed of a neutrality problem. I kept the sources you added that were reliable, and removed the ones that weren't. Carbrera (talk) 01:03, 25 December 2020 (UTC).
@Benicio2020: Disagreements such as this are typically best resolved by following WP:DR and discussing things on the article's talk page. Wikipedia wants us to be WP:BOLD, but sometimes others might not agree with our boldness and thus may revert (either partially or completely) or otherwise try and improve upon that edit. When that happens, except when it's obviously a case of WP:VANDAL, it's generally best to follow WP:BRD (not WP:BRDD) and try and resolve things through discussion on the article's talk page. So, that's probably what you should do now so that you can clarify why the changes you made are in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines and see if there's a WP:CONSENSUS to make them. Keep in mind WP:UNDUE because that seems to be relevant to the content you added. In addition, please try to remember that WP:ONUS is upon the person wanting to add content to an article to establish a consensus to do so. Most Wikipedia editors are WP:HERE; so, if your reasons for wanting to add this content are strongly based on relevant policies and guidelines, you'll find that others are more likely going to agree with you than not. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:11, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
So why didn't Carbrera "discuss" "on the article's talk page", which you said is the preferred way "resolve things through discussion"? he just reversed my edits, multiple times. I'm having a hard time understanding why he's treating me like I'm the bad guy, when according to everything you've said, he's been doing the exact same thing I have except worse, because at least I added information to the article (with sources!) and he's just deleting it. Benicio2020 (talk) 14:17, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
​When an editor is bold in making an edit and another editor reverts them because they didn’t think it was an improvement, the next step in WP:BRD is generally for the editor wanting to make the change to discuss things with the other editor and try to figure why; in other words, the WP:ONUS is on the editor wanting to add the content to seek consensus when others are in disagreement. In fairness to you, Carbrera didn’t leave much of an edit summary when they reverted you the first time; it would’ve been much better had they did because it might’ve helped to stop what followed. FWIW, quite a number of editors might have done exactly what you did and reverted the revert and restored the material once again; however, once it was removed a second time, it would’ve been best to slow down and try and resolve things through discussion. There were things that both you and Carbrera probably could’ve done better here. It might have been better for Carbrera to follow up their second revert of the content with a article talk page post explaining why, but hindsight is 20/20. Nobody wins an edit war so at some point somebody needs to be the one to start discussing things because that’s the way things typically get resolved on Wikipedia. When the editing of an article gets a bit heated, there’s a tendency for edit warring to happen and the best way to try and avoid that is to try and remain WP:COOL. You both seem to want to genuinely want to improve the article, but just got off to a rough start. Instead of trying to assign blame for that bumpy beginning, it might be better to put it in the past and figure out whether there’s a way you can work together to make the article better. Does it really matter at this point how you got here now that the you know that the way forward is through article talk page discussion? If you really feel this is a behavior issue that needs to be addressed, then you can seek assistance at WP:ANI. Before you do such a thing, you might want to look at WP:BOOMERANG and Wikipedia:ANI advice if you’re not familiar with how administrators noticeboards like ANI. — Marchjuly (talk) 22:29, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Yeah I'm not reading through a Byzantine melange of links just for this one edit, I started to and it made my head hurt. You have policies contradicting policies at this place, I can see why so many people hate this website. Benicio2020 (talk) 15:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Suicide epidemic issue

[OT redacted]... Christinepittet (talk) 23:48, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

@Christinepittet: I'm sorry, but this is a forum for questions regarding using and editing Wikipedia. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Christinepittet. I see that you wrote Draft:Daniel A. Gair. That is not acceptable for Wikipedia because it is unreferenced and written with a strongly personal point of view. Please read Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for guidance regarding the "Daniel A. Gair" article I appreciate it. I need to formulate the content in a way where that article becomes more relevant to the general public. I guess media/communication is all about formulating the data where it can fit better to the system.If it is not systematized it would be lost in chaos of big data. Kisses, love you. Christinepittet (talk) 09:44, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

It's also about knowing where you're writing, and we have zero interest in glurgy crap or any other sort of promotion, especially if it is unreferenced. We're an encyclopaedia, not Chicken Soup for the Soul. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Need guidance

Hi, I need abit of help with my current draft Draft:Yeh Shuhua as I am new to wikipedia editing. I don't even dare to resubmit now as I'm scared of it being deleted. I've put in alot of hard work in it and I really hope someone will help me out. Thank you in advance. Justin03 (talk) 02:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Appears you have been trying to add references between submissions, but given Declined four times by four different reviewers, strongly suggests that she - of the six women in the K-pop group - has not been written about enough to sustain an article. Reviewers mentioned not meeting musical notability criteria as a weakness. — Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs)
Alright thanks, and do you know where can I get editors to help me edit my errors? Justin03 (talk) 04:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
No, for two reasons: we don't encourage mercenaries, and notability isn't a matter you can write your way out of. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Draft

How do you change a draft into a finished article? Welbinatorr (talk) 16:04, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Submit it for review with {{subst:submit}}. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 16:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
As in type that in at the top. This submits the draft to Articles for Creation (AfC). There are thousands of drafts waiting for a Reviewer, so the wait can be days to several months. Reviewer will accept or decline; if the latter, will provide reasons. David notMD (talk) 17:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Maslingfing

 Maslingfing (talk) 19:14, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Maslingfing, and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't seem to have asked a question about editing Wikipedia, which is what this page is for. However, you have made a number of inappropriate edits to Wasser, which I have reverted, and left a message on your User talk page. If you wish to work on English Wikipedia, I suggest you take The Wikipedia Adventure, to learn how we work here. --ColinFine (talk) 19:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Dating System in articles; CITED REFERENCES

I have an interest in and expertise in history, particularly of Eastern Europe, he Mediterranean basin and the extended Middle East and Central Asia. I have edited a few articles wherein the BCE/CE dating sysatem appears in the article BUT IN THE REFERENCED SOURCE WORK, where the BC/AD system is used. To maintain legitimacy and accuracy between the article and the cited reference, I have edited some of the dates in articles where BCE/CE is NOT in the referenced work. Many times this takes more than a bit of investigation and effort in to accessing the cited reference work , so that I am sure of being accurate. I have been warned by an editor Doug weller who has informed me that I am in danger of a "Block", implied that I have an agenda, and that "Reference sources, Do NOT matter" (Emphasis mine). I cannot believe this is true for any work that seeks to be called an Encyclopedia,and should thus give the highest regard to references about references. I want to continue to edit inaccuracies I notice in WIKI and expand the types of edits I make. correcting inaccuracies between WIKI articles and cited references should NOT precipitate the threat of a "block". Thank you. Please advise on how to proceed. Lookout657 (talk) 07:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Lookout657, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Era style says: "Use either the BC–AD or the BCE–CE notation consistently within the same article. Exception: do not change direct quotations, titles, etc." Apart from that, it doesn't matter how a source writes a year. It's not an inaccuracy to reformulate something in a source if the meaning is the same. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:40, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
To elaborate on it's not an inaccuracy to reformulate something, if a source says that someone wore slacks but the wikipedia page said trousers or pants then that wouldn't be out a lack of deference to the source material - it would be still be faithful to the source but written for the reader. Equally if the source said that the subject were in deutschland geboren but the en.wikipedia page says they were born in Germany. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Lookout657, it is disruptive to change the existing dating system within an article without a good reason, and there is no requirement that Wikipedia's dating system must comply with the source, since 150 BCE is identical to 150 BC. It is especially disruptive to impose a Christian based dating system on articles about China (or other articles with no connection to Christianity), as you have done. Many non-Christian editors very much oppose that type of change. I suggest that you take Doug Weller's advice and abandon this behavior. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:23, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Change Username

How can I change my username? Jack Reynolds(talk) 21:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

JackReynolds05Singer Special:GlobalRenameRequest or WP:CHUS. 331dot (talk) 21:33, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
331dot, thank you!! Jack Reynolds(talk) 21:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Create page

Hello, I would really like to make a page on Noah Beck. Sadly I do not know how to. If anyone can advise I would appreciate it, Many Thanks, Lexi ItsLexiM (talk) 21:09, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

@ItsLexiM: I've added a welcome message to your user talk page that includes various helpful links, including one to WP:YFA. Note that the order of the steps is important, especially that you determine you can demonstrate notability of the subject, and then to gather the WP:reliable sources that you will summarize for the article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:41, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
Find your reliable sources first, as that is your foundation. The article builds from information in those sources. The site List of most-followed TikTok accounts has links to TikTok people who have articles about them. These may be good models. I also checked to see if someone is already working on a draft about Noah Beck and the answer is "No" (as least as a "Draft" but if working in their own Sandbox I would not find it). David notMD (talk) 02:12, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
@ItsLexiM and David notMD: I don't know which Noah Beck this is about, but this search of all namespaces (including User: namespace pages and sub-pages like sandboxes) shows that Joseph.ls.213 appears to have written something about the Youtuber on his user page back in August. There are other mentions that may be relevant or need linking to the article after/if it's created. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:06, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Bigg Boss Tamil Multiple Edits

Hello there :) I am SPEcial EDItor 2020, and I have a question to clarify about the Bigg Boss Tamil Wikipedia Page, if that is ok :)

In sites Bigg Boss Tamil 1, 2, and 3 Nominations Table , an account 2A01:4C8:A8:1542:894A:AFC6:6E77:7A21 has been changing the fontsize multiple times by adding the code "<blockquote style="padding: 0em; overflow:auto;">" . When I reverted the font size to the normal size, the user left a talk page on my User Account saying that I did not follow the rules and that I would be blocked from Wikipedia if I reverted the edit.

Considering that the original font size before the user's edit was similar to my edit, I feel that I didn't do any mistake in editing the Wikipedia page. Incase if I am wrong, I am extremely sorry for my mistake, and I hope you can forgive me :)

So my question is, which font size is supposed to be correct for the Bigg Boss Nomination Table ?, and if user 2A01:4C8:A8:1542:894A:AFC6:6E77:7A21 is wro g, will he be blocked from Wikipedia ? I need to know the correct font size to prevent any disputes happening in my talk page (User (2A01:4C8:A8:1542:894A:AFC6:6E77:7A21) has already left a talk page before this issue), thank you so much for helping me, and I hope that no more confusions will happen in Wikipedia :) SPEcial EDItor 2020 (talk) 13:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

@SPEcial EDItor 2020: <blockquote> does not change the font size. Usually, it's used to signal that a text is a quote by putting extra padding around it, like so:

This text is inside a blockquote.

In the Bigg Boss case, it's padding is set to 0em (no thickness) to put the extra-wide table into it's own "scrollable box" as opposed to running off the page. I haven't seen this formatting trick before, but I see why it's there. With any dispute, you should reach consensus with other editors on the article's talk page. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:55, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Your answer is appreciated :) Thank you so much for clarifying this issue — Preceding unsigned comment added by SPEcial EDItor 2020 (talk • contribs) 14:15, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

SPEcial EDItor 2020 First of all I did not do anything wrong. User:Cyphoidbomb told you and gave you a warning to not put the size to 60 but still you did not listen. When it says in WP:FONTSIZE that it should be at 85%. The second is that I did tell you about why the blockquote was needed is because the table is going off the page. And what the user above has said is completely right so hense don’t remove it. The blockquote is nothing to do with the font size. And last Special Editor I did not say anything about the rules in this [1] it was just about the blockquote. I only told you in the earlier one when you was keep changing the font to 60 last month remember. So don’t lie please as that is not nice — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A01:4C8:A8:1542:E47F:AE97:F1E:42D2 (talk) 18:01, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

  • Note: Please sign your messages on discussion (talk) pages by adding a space and four tildes to the end of the last line of your message, like this:
    This is the last line of the message. ~~~~
    The four tildes will be automatically converted to a signature that contains your linked username and a timestamp, which helps readers understand who said what. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:35, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Why is there no flood flag on enwiki?

I always wondered this, ever since I discovered its existence on Wikidata. So, why does English Wikipedia not have the flood flag? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 21:45, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

For those who, like me, had no idea what JJPMaster was talking about, see d:WD:Flooders. --ColinFine (talk) 22:43, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Notability

I was curious what is considered "Significant Coverage" when discussing WP:GNG. Is one good source enough? Is three or five enough? Is there a concrete threshold or is it super vague and up for interpretation? I've seen articles rejected for not being notable despite have a dozen sources, but maybe the sources weren't considered "Reliable". I'm very unsure when an article meets WP:GNG or not so any clarification will be welcomed. TipsyElephant (talk) 21:00, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, TipsyElephant, and welcome to the Teahouse. Does WP:CSMN help? --ColinFine (talk) 21:03, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
It's a little helpful, but do you know if there's anything concrete concerning the "Significant Coverage" criteria? TipsyElephant (talk) 21:08, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
TipsyElephant, we can't be too concrete, since a sentence in a blog about some subject just doesn't mean the same as a full article in a leading magazine. I think significant discussion in three important publications is enough for most editors. Drmies (talk) 21:28, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
TipsyElephant: you need at least three (maybe two, if they both cover the subject in great breadth and detail) sources each of which is reliable, independent, and has significant coverage of the subject: see WP:SIGCOV. --ColinFine (talk) 22:41, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
(ec) @TipsyElephant: Just to clarify, "significant coverage" is about the content within a given source. The content about the subject must be more than just a passing mention. E.g., an article that talks about a band as a whole, mentioning its members' names only once, would not be considered significant coverage for use in an article about an individual band member. There should generally be at least a paragraph or two about the subject – something you might be able to reasonably summarize and put in the article. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 22:46, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Translate

I was wondering if someone who speaks dutch can translate the title from this link for me? [2] An editor at FAC recommended I asked here. Thanks a lot! The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:22, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

@The Ultimate Boss: Wikipedia unfortunately doesn't have a really good translation hub at the moment; WP:Embassy, which was supposed to be that, is pretty dead. What I've tried is going to e.g. Dutch language, searching for an active recent contributor who indicates they speak Dutch on their user page, and asking them. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 06:27, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Why not look at Category:User nl? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 06:32, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
@Jéské Couriano: since there are 1800 editors in that category, 95% of whom are not experienced or active. Babel is broken. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:57, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
@The Ultimate Boss: Note you can give both the foreign and translated title. See Template:Cite web#Foreign language and translated title. I don't speak Dutch but "Jaaroverzichten" could be translated "Year overviews". PrimeHunter (talk) 08:09, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Random question for other hosts who are familiar in this part of wikipedia (as I am more into part of the vandalism side at the moment), do you need to be bilingual to take part or could you use something to digitally translate and then manually go in and make it readable. (P.S. Sorry if this is wordy I couldn't get my point across very well) SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 18:18, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Bilingualism is preferred; machine translations are rarely, if ever, 100% accurate. Especially so the further you get from the Romance and Germanic languages. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 18:24, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Can confirm; recently had a little problem over content on a page due to the use of a machine translation. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 18:26, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
That's why I had asked, a while ago I worked on some translation for Catherine Vidal (actress) and these two lines alone took me five minutes trying to decipher what it meant, and it's just French! SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 18:30, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The Ultimate Boss, an active Dutch speaking editor is Drmies. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:07, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

The central banks.com website

I wrote an article for this website I admin and i am wondering why you would decline the article. I admin this site and want it indexed in Wikipedia so that others can learn about my website. I have no references for it because this is a website that I made. This is confusing..... Thesireofplebs (talk) 22:31, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Thesireofplebs, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that, like many people, you have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. You "want it indexed in Wikipedia so that others can learn about my website" is the very essence of promotion, and is not permitted anywhere in Wikipedia. If reliable sources, wholly independent of you, have published about your website, so that it meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then we could have an article about your website. You should not be the one to write it, and once it is accepted into Wikipedia, you will not have control over its contents, which should be based not one what you say or want to say, but almost entirely on what those independent sources say about it. --ColinFine (talk) 22:49, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Thesireofplebs, please read the guideline Wikipedia:Notability (web), which should clarify things for you. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:17, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Editing

How do I edit???????? BananatheGreat (talk) 04:18, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello BananatheGreat. Try playing The Wikipedia Adventure. And visit Wikipedia:Community portal. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1087#List_of_South_African_artists/_Nerine_Desmond

FYI
 – Link to previous Discussion added -Maresa63 (talk) 10:00, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Further comments re Nerine Desmond[[ page on ‘List of South African artists’ 1) I realise that I may not have made it clear that I am David, the son of Nerine Desmond. I had left this ambiguous because of all the warnings by Wikipedia editors about Wikipedia's inbuilt prejudice against contributors writing about a family member. 2) I am disclosing this so that I can cite a an actual example of WHY the statement on that page regarding ND painting in [now] Namibia, and in Zanzibar and Kenya, is incorrect. I have already outlined the absurdity of lugging around paints, turps, easel etc; as part of her luggage. But I want to point out that Nerine was too poor to even AFFORD an actual studio! So that our lounge (in whatever rented home we occupied) also served as her studio. SO that six decades later, a mere whiff of artists′ turpentine is redolent (literally) of my teens! 3) I now realise that I used the word 'infers' when I should have written 'implies' (belatedly recalling the dictum 'YOU infer; I imply')… Finally, if I knew HOW to contact the editor 'Rudolf Red', I would like to point out that his comment that 'I am now at Stage D (referring to the nameless person who had made incorrect assumptions (such as in [2] above). Stage D [discuss differences of opinion]. HOW do I 'discuss' with an anonymous 'editor"? ```` DeSoto 383 (talk) 00:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@DeSoto 383: If there is something in an article that you want to change, then start a discussion on that article's talk page. That is what "Discuss" means. RudolfRed (talk) 00:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
DeSoto 383, it appears that you are editing with two accounts, the other being David Desmond. Please use only one account and abandon the other. You have a conflict of interest regarding Nerine Desmond and should limit yourself to making edit requests at Talk: Nerine Desmond. What you call "prejudice" is based on 20 years of experience that shows that close relatives are almost never capable of editing articles about their family members in a neutral, policy-compliant way. The sort of personal anecdote you recounted above is an example. That kind of thing does not belong in this encyclopedia unless previously described in a published reliable source. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:11, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Trouble with an aggressive editor

Made thorough edits to one Wiki article, and have had one editor aggressively undoing my edits demanding a paid disclosure? I’m not being paid for these edits, and have significantly improved the factual accuracy and citations in this article but they are not allowing any space for collaborative discussion. Not sure how to proceed? These edits were objectively amended by others and were up for months. Think this person operates with a bot? Please advise! Elp1108 (talk) 03:12, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Elp1108 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure why you say there has been no space for collaborative discussion; according to your edit history you have not attempted to discuss this issue on the article talk page or any talk page, with the exception of one post on your own user talk page. How did you come to write about Bally Shoe? You don't have to be specifically paid for specific edits to be a paid editor- any paid relationship with a subject you are editing about needs to be disclosed. If you have none, then simply inform the user who brought up the matter. In looking at your edits, I can see why someone might think that you are a paid editor- but again, if you are not, please say so and explain to those involved what the source of your interest in the subject is. 331dot (talk) 08:09, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Confirming that your declaration of not paid is buried on your Talk page. The proper place to declare not paid and no conflict-of-interest is on your User page. Only after doing that should you invite GSS to a discussion on the Talk page of Bally Shoe. None of the reverts were done by a bot. David notMD (talk) 10:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Elp1108: you responded in December to a post from August, made by GSS on your user talk page. It is unlikely that any editor will keep track of all user talk pages they post to, at least not for several months; if you want to get another user's attention in a talk page post you can "ping" them using a template, for instance {{re|USERNAME}} or {{ping|USERNAME}}. The template will create a notification for the user, provided you also sign your post like you did above. More info here. Also remember to post your response below the post you are replying to. Your response to the August post on your user talk page was inserted above the heading for that section, so it was not easy to find even for someone who knew it was there.
As for how GSS noticed that you had reverted their edit, that is also a feature of the software: when you revert another user's edit, they will automatically get a notification. I agree with their revert, FWIW; your edit included very promotional language, for instance this, which does not belong in an encyclopedia. If it had been me, I'd have removed the list of shops as well, because that's also not something an encyclopedia needs, but that's a different matter. [edited to add] As a matter of fact, David notMD did that while I was writing this! Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 11:01, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Film plots greater than 700 words

Are there examples of pages where editors have come to a consensus around a film plot summary greater than 700 words? The filmplot policy explicitly allows for this, but in practice I haven't seen it yet.

Thanks! 66.76.58.10 (talk) 03:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@66.76.58.10: The plot setion in Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows – Part 1 is about 840 Words. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:51, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
In the Tall Grass has 772 words; it can't be compressed further since a forced compression would make the plot confusing. GeraldWL 12:53, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Should I remove all Youtube references for my page to be published?

HI, Do I need to remove all youtube references for my page to get approved? Please advise. Venusorion (talk) 09:43, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Venusorion. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. Few if any of the current sources meet that requirement. Also see WP:CSMN. Merry Christmas. --ColinFine (talk) 11:32, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Venusorion, to simplify Colin's words: Wikipedia is mainly based on WP:RS. Although YouTube videos can be used sometimes, it's not always (see WP:YOUTUBE). GeraldWL 12:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Doubt about chronological order of music albums.

Hi!

Every wikipedia page related to music albums has an infobox. Inside it there is a "Previous Album" field and a "Next Album" field. My doubt is about which album I should put in those two fields. Let me explain a bit more. There are many categories of album that an artist can release: "Studio Albums" and "Live Albums" just to name a couple. The question is: when editing "Previous Album" and "Next Album" fields, should I include only albums of a specific type or every album? In other words: should an artist have one single chronology or one chronology for every type of album he/she released?

I hope I explained my doubt decently enough to be understood.

Thank you very much in advance for your help!

Lapo Furio92 (talk) 14:56, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Furio92, every album. But if the artist has no other albums, you don't have to put it; it's not required. GeraldWL 15:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerald Waldo Luis thank you very much! I'll have to undo some of my previous edits. I'll fix everything in the coming days. Thank you again for the support! Lapo (talk) 15:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Should I list all publications of a short story?

If an entry for a short story lists several books it was published in, should I add additional books it is in that I know of? Is there a limit to how many, since some stories will have been republished dozens of times?

(Is there a policy if style guide I missed that answers this question?) Cptbutton (talk) 12:03, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Cptbutton, hmm, I'm not sure if there's any concreate guidance on that. I'd say use your editorial judgement—if the entries feel useful, add them; if not, go by this rule and don't. If you're still unsure, maybe ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Novels. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 12:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@Cptbutton: My view is that it would be OK to list other publications in which this short story appeared, providing those publications are, themselves, notable, or likely to be notable if someone were to attempt to create an article about it, and if you can give sufficient detail of that carrier publication for the statement to be verified. We try to avoid filling articles with pure lists of trivia, so err on the side of caution, please. I suggest that in Billennium (short story) you don't add such detail to the lead, but create a separate section listing key publications in which such a story has appeared. (PS: I have just changed the article assessment to Start-class from stub, though a few more references would be helpful, if possible.Nick Moyes (talk) 12:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: like the "Publication History" section in The Seed of Earth? Cptbutton (talk) 13:10, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@Cptbutton: yes, that approach makes sense to me, though articles about novels aren't my area. (The page you linked to seems well established, but totally unreferenced. Maybe every work by a major author is deemed notable, but I'm surprised such an article has stood for so long without being dealt with one way or another.) Nick Moyes (talk) 16:50, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Follow-up to Changing font size to print an article for visually impaired?

I have asked this before but all responses regarded BROWSER settings. My brother has no computer. I must print hard copies for him to read.

Changing font size to print an article for visually impaired? My 76 year old brother is visually impaired and is doing physics research. He does NOT have a computer. I must print articles and take to him. I can't seem to copy & paste an article in such a manner that I can then increase the font size so that he can read the article with data loss. In doing this all the equations are lost. One example is an article titled: Calculus of variations. If I download the PDF it keeps the equations but I can't edit the font size on the general text. Is there anything short of having to purchase ADOBE ACROBAT to make this possible? This will be an ongoing issue.

Thank you! 50.82.62.160 (talk) 16:38, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm sorry for your and your brother's problems, but most people who read and answer questions on this page are editors, who have no inside knowledge of the software or other technical details. You are more likely to find somebody who can help at the Technical section of the Village Pump. --ColinFine (talk) 16:48, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Adobe acrobat reader is a free download: just search for it online from get.adobe.com. It has pretty good facilities these days, including the ability to print at a custom scale. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:04, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Your other alternative is to print directly from within Wikipedia. Instead of using "download as .pdf" from the WP menu, try "printable version". This allows a choice of zoom up to 200% and will scale the maths equations correctly. That size font ought to be OK, I would hope. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:13, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Have you read the answers over at Wikipedia:Help desk#Archives/2020 December 13#Changing font size to print an article for visually impaired? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 17:23, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

remove notice of lack of references

I added some references to this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dollikins I was thinking to remove the tag that says the page had "no references" and replacing it with on that says "more references are needed". As now there is some but more are needed or just having no tag there either way works for me. Ty78ejui (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC) Ty78ejui (talk) 22:05, 26 December 2020 (UTC) The notice is still there so if no one objects I will have to remove it myself. Ty78ejui (talk) 23:12, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Ty78ejui, yes, when you add references to a page that was previously unreferenced, you should definitely replace the maintenance tag. Be bold! {{u|Sdkb}} talk 10:20, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

It's removed, Thank you. Ty78ejui (talk) 18:25, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Adding of my Biography

Respected Sir/Mam,

My name is Chirag Jain. I am a notable author from India. And, I would like my biography to be added in the wikipedia. Being of the notable, the media have covered article of me(my book). So, is it possible?

https://www.amazon.in/Search-Another-Life-Chirag-Jain/dp/1636400469/ref=sr_1_1?dchild=1&keywords=Chirag+Jain&qid=1608905023&sr=8-1 https://www.prlog.org/12849923-chirag-jain-debuts-with-his-book-in-search-of-another-life.html 2405:201:3013:7072:B533:17C4:38C1:2259 (talk) 14:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. An Amazon sales listing and a press release are insufficient to establish that an author is notable. Please read WP: AUTOBIOGRAPHY and Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:01, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
An Amazon listing and a press release do not constitute reliable sources and confer zero notability I'm afraid. Theroadislong (talk) 18:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
Assuming you are the same author as asked this yesterday, please read the answers you got there, at #Adding of my Biography. Basically, there is no effectitve service for providing an article on request; and when somebody asks for an article about themselves, they are usually here for promotion which is forbidfden on Wikipedia. --ColinFine (talk) 18:04, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello! If you are really Chirag Jain, then search about yourself at wikipedia. There is already an article for you. It was created on 9 March 2020. I am from West Bengal. Thank you. India Meteorological Department (talk) 5:21, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

Not the same person as Chirag Jain. David notMD (talk) 19:29, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Taking down template message.

I fixed the page Pune Vidhyarthi Griha's College of Engineering and Technology to make it neutral and not promotional. How do I take down the message at the top of the page. It is not showing up in editing. Whimsicalghost (talk) 16:56, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

@Whimsicalghost: You already removed it in this edit: [3]. Or is there something else you are asking about? RudolfRed (talk) 18:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@RudolfRed: I figured it out Thank You!— Preceding unsigned comment added by Whimsicalghost (talk • contribs) 19:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Finding images

How do i find images for articles and make sure they're in the public domain? How are things such as logos allowed to be put in articles? Mekeit (talk) 18:43, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Mekeit. This is sort of hard to answer; there's so much involved given the breadth of your questions. Here's a bunch of point that I hope help. I am going to collapse this, as too intrusively large.
A bunch of Image points
  • For clarification purposes: not all free content images are in the public domain – a large portion are under a suitably free and and compatible copyright license;
  • But when you do find such images, they are usually hosted at the Wikimedia Commons – which allows their use at all Wikimedia projects, rather than just here. Images at the Commons can be displayed here natively – so that's where you should: i) search for existing, and ii) upload – such suitably licensed and public domain images;
  • More rarely, we allow the use of non-free copyrighted images, including for logos, under fair use. they must, however meet the non-free content criteria. See Wikipedia:Non-free content;
  • Since you specifically asked about logos, some are eligible for upload to the Wikimedia Commons as public domain material because they only consist of typefaces, individual words, slogans, or simple geometric shapes, and thus are not eligible for copyright protection. See, e.g., {{pd-textlogo}}.
  • Please note one significant exception to the bullet point above: some such images may still be subject to copyright protection in their home country, if from a country (such as England) that recognizes the sweat of the brow doctrine, and thus must be uploaded to Wikipedia for use here, rather than to the Commons. See, e.g., {{PD-ineligible-USonly}};
  • You can use an advanced Google Images search to try to locate suitably-free images. Once at Google Images, go to Settings → Advanced search → usage rights: → Creative Commons licenses → once a specific image is invoked → License details → compare against the list here;
  • Flickr is also a ripe place to search for free images, but please be aware of "license laundering".
  • You might try the "FIST", Free Image Search Tool;
  • Please note that the starting point for a random image found on the internet is: it is assumed to be fully non-free copyrighted (and there is no need for an image to display © or similar). For free status, we look for affirmative and verifiable evidence of a free copyright status. This excludes a vast cross section of images you find on the Internet, and through a plain old Google images or other non-targeted search;
  • So, you must look for an affirmative release by an image's owner (e.g., the owner so states in relation to the image);
  • However, some images pass into the public domain because of some situational status, such as that the image was not subject to copyright in the first place (e.g., an image created by a U.S. federal employee during the scope of his or her duties), or because of timing, coupled with publication status—which can be summarized as the image being:
  • Created/photographed prior to 1900 (whether published or not) = PD.
  • Published before 1925 = PD — but only in the U.S. Wikimedia Commons images must be suitably-free also in the country of origin, so for foreign images, you must check its source country's copyright rules, and if not PD there, it can be uploaded to Wikipedia, but not to the Commons.
  • Published after 1925 and up to 1977 without a copyright symbol = PD
  • Published between 1978 and March 1, 1989 without a copyright symbol and not registered since = PD
  • Published from 1925 to 1963 with a copyright symbol and copyright not renewed = PD
  • Unpublished and created/taken before 1925 = PD 70 years after author's death (so the author's identity must be known).
  • Unpublished and created/taken after 1925 = too complicated to get into. See more here
Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
I'm surprised by the the occurrences of the date 1925 in the "hidden" content above. I thought the relevant date was 1923, has been so for many years, and does not advance with time. Can you confirm that 1925 is now correct? Maproom (talk) 21:44, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@Maproom: Based on Wikipedia:Public_domain#When_does_copyright_expire? 1925 is correct for the United States. RudolfRed (talk) 22:30, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
On January 1, 2020, all works copyrighted in 1924 entered the public domain in the U.S. In a few days, on January 1, 2021, the same will happen with works copyrighted in 1925. And so on each year into the future, unless the law is changed. This article published a year ago discusses a few of the famous newly copyright free works of 1924. Expect similar articles in days to come about works of 1925. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:47, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Question on closing/archiving a discussion

This discussion has been closed as a demonstration of how a discussion might be closed. Editors with valid comments to make may still wish to add them, and should feel free to do so, despite the apparent conflict. After three days of inactivity, this closed discssion will be archived and must not then be re-edited. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:54, 27 December 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.

Hello Teahouse editors. So recently the Wikipedia:WikiProject Current events had a discussion that has concluded. I am the lead coordinator of the WikiProject and this is the first discussion that the WikiProject dealt with. How do I go about closing the discussion and archiving it. The idea is like how a AFD closes, but I do not know how to actually close it with the fancy ways of "Please don't edit this discussion" and I do not know how to archive.

Any guidance is appreciated. Thanks in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 16:55, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Elijahandskip, the easiest way to close a discussion is to use the XFD Closer gadget in your preferences, which will add a "Close" link that you can click to customise block messages. Alternatively you can use {{archive top}} and {{archive bottom}}, which requires that you type in the parameters instead of having it automated by the aforementioned tool.
For archiving, consider reading WP:ARCHIVE, as there are different methods to manually and automatically archive. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 17:20, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Tenryuu, I saw that WP:Archive is about archiving a talk page. Is there any other procedures I need to follow if it wasn't on a talk page? The discussion was on the actual WikiProject's main page. Also on the archive page, would I use the talk page or the article page. (I highly assume talk page, but I am not sure). Elijahandskip (talk) 19:17, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Elijahandskip, I would consider it as if it were this page: the Teahouse archives questions on here in a Questions subpage before sub-organising it into archives. I'm not aware of any required procedures to follow if it's not a talk page, though you might want to add a link to the archive subpage on your WikiProject's main page so that it can be referred to easily. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 20:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Ok. Thank you! Elijahandskip (talk) 20:23, 27 December 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.

Table in Wikipedia

I want to ask a question. How to remove the empty cell from the table in Wikipedia without affecting any other cell from row or column. Nikunj12387 (talk) 18:14, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Nikunj12387. Please read Help:Table. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:19, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nikunj12387: Without an example of exactly what you mean, I'm going to guess the correct answer is "you don't". A table, by its nature, is a rectangular grid of R rows of C columns. There are R × C cells that must exist, and you can't just remove one. If the value of a cell should be empty, there are various things you can change the value to, including just a space ( ), {{N/a}} or {{Emdash}}, depending on the need. (This generalization ignores rowspans, colspans, and other special formatting tricks that are described in Help:Table.) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:21, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nikunj12387: I think AlanM1's reply makes a lot of sense. If there's something you think we're failing to appreciate, do please follow up with some specific examples or links to pages you'd like to modify. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:34, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

What to do first when there's an article of the same name?

I want to make an article for a village called "Pickersgill". It's red-linked in Settlements of Guyana (the template), and I found sufficient sources for notability (Census, news, etc). However, Pickersgill already exists as a list of folks with that as a last name. I only have a vague idea about dab pages, and I'm not sure if I can assume the page name can be moved easily after I create the article. How should I approach this?

Advice? Estheim (talk) 12:33, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Estheim. It doesn't sound as if the village would be the primary topic, so I would recommend your first option. Don't forget to put a hatnote at the top of your article. --ColinFine (talk) 16:10, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Will do, ColinFine, thank you! Estheim (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Unsourced Material

I need help on whether or not I should be removing unsourced material. Specifically, Florida's 1st through 13th House districts.

Example: "This district features a large military presence, serving as a bedroom community for the various naval bases in Jacksonville, as well as Naval Submarine Base Kings Bay in nearby St. Marys, Georgia. This district contains Naval Station Mayport, located in Mayport, and the Blount Island Command, located on Blount Island. There was a vacancy between November 22, 1988 and January 18, 1989 as the incumbent, Gene Hodges, resigned after being appointed to the Florida Parole Commission. Army veteran Allen Boyd won a special election to fill the seat. There was a vacancy between September 1, 1998 and November 4, 1998 as the incumbent, Randy Mackey, resigned after being convicted of federal tax evasion. The seat remained vacant until the general election a few months later. Donald L. Tucker served as Speaker of the Florida House of Representatives from 1974 to 1978." From Florida's 11th House district.

I'm pretty sure some of this information can stand alone, such as the last sentence about Donald Tucker, but there is a lot of unsourced information. I also went ahead to one of the sources (The People of Lawmaking in Florida) and nothing on page 88 has to do with the district itself.

I'm trying to clean up some of these articles, but I wanted to confirm with other editors before I do anything and delete the information. It should also be noted districts 1 through 13 all use the same second source (The People of Lawmaking in Florida, pg. 88). FredModulars (talk) 06:41, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello FredModulars. The first thing to try to do when encountering unreferenced though plausible content is to search for an acceptable reference. The Almanac of American Politics is a biennial source going back decades that includes detailed prose describing the history, demographics, politics and unique aspects of every single congressional district. The second step is to tag the assertion according to the documentation at Template: Citation needed. I recommend removing the content only if good faith efforts to verify it are unsuccessful, and you truly believe that the content is false or highly dubious. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:57, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you, Cullen328. I should mention that the articles I'm referring to concern the Florida Legislature, not the United States House of Representatives, which is why I believe the almanac won't help (from the Wikipedia article I don't think it delves into state legislatures, but you tell me). I believe the content isn't false and I will try to reverse engineer sources to verify it. Thank you again. FredModulars (talk) 01:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
I've also edited Florida's 13th House district to include citations and removed some information. I'm still unsure if I did it correctly, however, as I believe the content I removed wasn't false, yet couldn't verify it. FredModulars (talk) 01:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

anything and notable wikipedia

wouldn't be better to have two separated wikipedia, one for really notable stuff and one for not really notable stuff? here there are 2 type of authors, those who believe that only very notable article should be kept and those who believe the more articles we have the better it is. Wouldn't be best to have one wikipedia ruled on strict rules about sources and notability and one with softer rules? Now on wikipedia the notable-reliable sourced articles are mixed with hardly notable with not strong sources. Most of the users can't tell a good source from a bad one and they can't tell what/who is really notable and this generates a lot of confusion. there are good things in both the approach (hard/soft approach) so why don't we implement them both but on separated pages?. Having two different web sites we could have one omniscient wikipedia where one can find about everything even though one knows one needs to double check and we would have a reliable enciclopedia where one can find only notable articles with the best sources. just my thought --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 23:22, 27 December 2020 (UTC)&nbsp

@AlejandroLeloirRey: feel free to create a page about any non-notable person at Peoplepedia. I'm sure there are many other sites and free blog pages that allow anyone to write about anything they like. There's also Deletionpedia], too. I suspect others might say that we focus on notable topics, so why worry ourselves about creating a parallel site for non-notable topics when so many other platforms offer that already? Nick Moyes (talk) 23:31, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: because as a metter of fact we have notable bios and articles mixed with not notable bios and articles and it is hard to establish how notable is something only because it is on wikipedia. For example, if I find a magazine or a company on wikipedia does it mean that such a mag/comp is actually notable? can I trust all of its sources? at the moment no, not at all. Especially with niche articles establishing notability can be very important for the reader also. If I am not a gemer but I am doing a research of the most relevant videogames can i consider a videogame irrelevant/relevant for being on wikipedia? at the moment the answer is no... --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 00:21, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
If you find a non-notable article, you can work to improve it, or propose it for deletion. Just because there are some non-notable articles, does not mean we should create a parallel encyclopedia filled with non-notable articles. RudolfRed (talk) 00:36, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Agreed. Wikipedia is a "work in progress". Feel free to help us remove the chaff, and retain the core content Nick Moyes (talk) 00:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes: @RudolfRed: actually I have improved and have nominated for deletion a lot of articles but still, there is a frange of people who wants to keep as much as possible and a frange who wants to get rid of anything that is not not undeniably and universally notable (once again hard with niche articles) therefore you will not always have success in having the not notable articles removed so the result is a bad mix of the two visions. We have an enciclopedia that might have a reasonably notable subject deleted because it met a certain kind of authors when nominated and a totally not notable subject kept for the same reason... using such an enciclopedia could be tricky. plus, I feel we should make a list of reliable sources and anytime once wants to use a source not included into the list he has first to submit it for approval, if approved that source will be added to the list... just a few ideas, not trying to impose anything :-) --AlejandroLeloirRey (talk) 01:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Pre-approving sources as reliable is impossible - the world changes too fast. David notMD (talk) 02:03, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Artical Create

Hello Peace be upon you i have a question 1. why i don't have artical page to create ? and 2. How i can finding and create the the page ? 3. My artical page can publish in internet and can if any person or, me search to subject my artical show that ? Iam.20.O (talk) 18:02, 27 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Iam.20.O. For information about how to write a Wikipedia article, please read Your first article. You seem to have difficulty writing clearly in English. Perhaps you speak another language better. If so, please consider contributing to the version of Wikipedia in that language. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:08, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Blocked as sock. David notMD (talk) 02:18, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Information page about me

Hi, I received my last answer I happy with it. Now I want to know how can I create information about me? like If anyone searches my name "Alizay Sheikh" then my information page shows through Wikipedia. AlizaySheikh (talk) 05:38, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello AlizaySheikh. Wikipedia is not a platform for self-promotion. It is an encyclopedia. If you want people to find you online, create an excellent website. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:46, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Question about the policy on nonpublic information

I have a quick question: why do you need to be identified to the Wikimedia Foundation to become an OTRS member, and why is the age requirement for OTRS membership 16 as opposed to 18, which is the requirement for account creator, CheckUser, and Oversight? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 01:56, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@JJPMaster:
  • WHy you have to be identified? Well, this has to do with privacy. OTRS, as well as Checkuser/Oversight can involve personal data, such as private telephone numbers, person's real adresses, connections between A real Life human identity and his WIkipedia nickname... Basically, WMF wants to know who has access to their queues, so they know who to sue if someone turns out to be evil. WMF can probbably give you some more on this
  • Why is the requirement for OTRS 16? I don't know. As far as I am aware, the requirements for Checkusers and Oversighters are 18 years old. YOu probbably have to ask WMF about this. 07:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

How do I change the name of the article?

Esso Journalism Award is now called ExxonMobil Journalism Award. How do I change it, and make Esso Journalism Award as a redirect? User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 10:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC) User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 10:10, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Tetizeraz, did it there for ya. GeraldWL 10:13, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks Gerald Waldo Luis, I saw the diff and I think I understood what you did. User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 10:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Bias - Racial Bias, Political Bias, National interest etc

How are racial & political biases handled? I guess wikipedia will be a target for various media houses. Mankind has met various wars and still has times of unrest at places. How does wikipedia handle biases?

What is considered an authoritative source here? Suppose there are more editors from XYZ nation at wikipedia, then do they give more priority to their own national interest and consider nations not following them less authoritative? If such happens, how are they addressed?

Though giving undue priorities to one's own nation brings a bad name to the nation itself making it a laughing stock, I guess in this world today very less understand that. Gub Sub Dub (talk) 09:08, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Gub Sub Dub, hey there. Good Wikipedia editors handle bias by using a source and absorb the neutral elements in it, and are able to know what's Wikipedia-worthy and what's not-- that is, able to detect what's fact and what's not. We mostly cover facts; if we are to talk about opinions (like reception of a film), we will attribute the source. See WP:RS for what's considered a good source. There's no such thing as national interest here, and a nation should not be given more priority of coverage, unless the nation is the only thing covered. If such happens, other editors would bring in more coverage on other nations. It's collaboration. GeraldWL 09:23, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Your questions have merit. Wikipedia articles are supposed to strive toward neutrality, but unconscious (and conscious) bias exists. See Wikipedia:Wikipedians for nature of the editor population. One large problem still is that close to 90% of editors self-identify as male. Also, editors prefer to use references in the language(s) they understand. David notMD (talk) 10:46, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Where can I ask Wikipedians to solve a dispute in an article (regarding neutrality, sources, etc)?

As the title says. I'm having a issue with another editor in an article I just created, and I'd like more input from other editors. User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 10:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 10:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Name of article? (you have created more than one). David notMD (talk) 10:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Pinging Tetizeraz on above question. GeraldWL 10:56, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
David notMD Sérgio Dávila. See Talk. User:Tetizeraz. Send me a ✉️ ! 11:40, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Needs references for the content that is not about his covering the war (for which there are too many refs). For example, is there a ref that confirms he is editor-in-chief? The earlier parts of his career? By the way, the editor dispute is moot, as that editor now blocked for other activities. David notMD (talk) 12:04, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Tetizeraz, there are several options at WP:Dispute resolution requests that may be helpful. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 15:40, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Debate over terminology on United Kingdom talk page

Any suggestions for how to proceed with this issue at Talk:United Kingdom#Sovereign Country would be helpful. Llewee (talk) 14:26, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey Llewee. You could seek a request for comment on the issue. Please note a common mistake to avoid if you do so (that I mention because I've seen it so many times and I think it's really vital): the RfC statement describing the issue should be scrupulously neutral – not advocatory; not suggesting the conclusion you side for in its manner of description; a good test is to read it over while pretending you are a stranger to the issue and see whether you think such an outsider could even tell what "side" the person who wrote it (you) is on. You might "advertise" at the talk page of an appropriate Wikiproject or elsewhere, possibly using {{rfc notice}}. See Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Publicizing an RfC. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:02, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

wikimedia commons

can you use wikimedia commons as a source or place it among the inline citations? thanks SpiritGirl809 (talk) 14:29, 28 December 2020 (UTC) SpiritGirl809 (talk) 14:29, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@SpiritGirl809: In short, no. See the second paragraph of Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not a reliable source. Commons is a self-published sister project. Peter coxhead (talk) 14:32, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi SpiritGirl809. I agree with Peter coxhead above, but just wanted to note one exception to the general rule stated, that could possibly be applicable given that you did not specify what situation prompted your question. Occasionally, a source that you seek to cite may itself be hosted at the Commons, and the courtesy link you provide in the citation to that source can point there. As an example, I did this for a page from the 1910 U.S Census at Kelly pool#cite note-Census-5. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:15, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: yes, that's a good point. Commons is then basically the same as an archived copy of a source. Peter coxhead (talk) 17:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Help? My IP address was used to make edits I did not make or know of... ??

Greetings, experts! An announcement popped up just now saying that my IP address (the correct one, I checked) was used to make edits in a topic I know nothing about and in which I have no interest. I never made any such edits. It lists my IP address on the User Contributions page. (I took screen shots of this message in case it is some kind of security issue to investigate.)

Should I try to correct this? I don't want to be associated with edits I did not make.

Larger question, how can someone use my IP adress? I am the only user in this household on this internet setup. Have I been hacked? I know of no other evidence of that.

Apologies if these are dumb questions; I'm an older person trying to catch up to the late 20th century, um, early 21st century (definitely not a young internet-native).

Thank you for any insights you can provide. Acoldiron (talk) 17:39, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Acoldiron. It is quite likely that your IP address is not static: have you tried switching off your router and then switching it on again? If you do that, your Internet Service Provider may allocate you a new IP address. One of the reasons that Wikipedia prefers editors here to create accounts is because IP addresses are not guaranteed to always refer to the same person. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:48, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you for this quick and helpful answer. Yes, we had several storms and have indeed turned the router off and on a few times. Your answer helps me not feel so paranoid about this. <smiles> A.Coldiron. Acoldiron (talk) 17:54, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Acoldiron: The IP talk page would also have shown the box at the bottom of for example User talk:76.72.9.125. It says: "Many IP addresses change periodically, and are often shared by several users." I think most of a small country shared an IP address not long ago. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:43, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

want to learn Wikipedia

Hi How can I learn to work on Wikipedia faster? Help if you can. Thanks Hogo-2020 (talk) 22:49, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

I added a header to this question RudolfRed (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
@Hogo-2020: Try the WP:ADVENTURE interactive learning game, and/or the WP:TUTORIAL. RudolfRed (talk) 23:13, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

how to edit wiki

Please how can I edit or create a new page Jeremiah mapeo (talk) 23:07, 28 December 2020 (UTC) Jeremiah mapeo (talk) 23:07, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Jeremiah mapeo, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I have put some useful links on your user talk page: please have a look through them. You are welcome to start improving Wikipedia as soon as you feel ready; but I implore you, don't try the exremely difficult task of creating a new article until you have spent a few weeks or months editing some of our six million existing articles (some of which are desparately in need of work) and learnt how Wikipedia works. --ColinFine (talk) 23:17, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
Jeremiah mapeo, there is an interactive tutorial at WP:ADVENTURE that will walk you through the basics. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 23:19, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Donations

I would like to donate however do not trust typing all my card info into the phone. Is there a way to donate via my secure internet banking? 1.144.110.42 (talk) 00:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

See [[4]] for the various ways to donate. RudolfRed (talk) 00:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Fjord Estuary Ecosystem Wiki Page

I stumbled on this article while doing some research. It feels like it deserves a wiki page, but I couldn't find any other ecosystem pages like it.

Is it something I should make a page for? Or is this not a standard Wikipedia topic? JulesAltis (talk) 01:23, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi JulesAltis, and good question! Typically, we add content to existing pages until they become too big on their own, at which point they split off. The existing coverage of the park's ecosystem is at Kenai Fjords National Park#Wildlife and ecology, so I would start by improving that section as much as you can while keeping it a reasonable length. Everglades National Park is a featured article, so that might be a good page to draw inspiration from. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 01:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you!! I'll start there and see how things evolve! JulesAltis (talk) 02:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

"Neutral point of view does not mean no point of view"

I came here to ask if there was ever a Wikipedia policy that read this, as I think that I recall reading it at some point back before I became a constructive contributor. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 02:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Edit: I think I found it in WP:VAND. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 02:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

@JJPMaster: Your link is about vandalism. You may be looking for WP:VALID instead. RudolfRed (talk) 02:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
fix ping for @JJPMaster: RudolfRed (talk) 02:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
RudolfRed, I know, but I found the specific phrase I was looking for in the vandalism policy. JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 02:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Creating an article about fictional hurricanes in 2100

f3eijfuis i want to make a winkipedia site it wont let me 823062Robert (talk) 06:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

(Created a title for this question) The editor has created User:823062Robert/sandbox about fictional hurricanes. Has also created speculative Draft:Hurricanes and the West Coast (not submitted). David notMD (talk) 07:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
823062Robert Wikipedia never publishes arbitrary topics someone just made up. -- Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@823062Robert: this topic is unsiutable for Wikipedia until at least December 2099, when we could start to get reliable sources could start to talk about hurricanes in 2100, based on meterologic data. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Past Wikipedia "financial" contributions credit before I set up Wikipedia account

Took the the time to set up a Wikipedia account, then realized that I had contributed in the past. Is it possible to associate my name/email with those contributions? Flexsoman (talk) 03:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Flexsoman. I don’t think there’s any way to merge two accounts into one since each account needs to be properly attributed for the edits it has made. I think the best you can do is pick the one that you want to use from here on and then add a link to the other account to the user page of the one you keep. You may be able to use the template {{User previous account}} to do that or you can just add a link manually. A better option, however, might be to simply stop using this account if you’re still able to access the older one. You’ve only made one edit with this account and nobody will know or care that you created it as long as you don’t make any more edits with it. — Marchjuly (talk) 03:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Flexsoman: You changed the heading of this thread with this edit after I had already responded which completely changes the context of your question and my response. Please try to avoid doing such a thing in the future. If you want to clarify something, then it’s better to do by simply posting in the thread itself per WP:REDACT. — Marchjuly (talk) 08:00, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Flexsoman in the heading you mention financial contributions, they are completely irrelevant and intentionally not connected to your username. There is a (legally required?) wall between the business activities of the WMF and the content creation process on Wikipedia. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Flexsoman You are welcome to tell people that you have made donations to Wikipedia, and as editors we thank you, but whether you donated or not is not something that you are required to share with us. Donations are collected by the Wikimedia Foundation that operates the computers Wikipedia is on, not us editors. 331dot (talk) 08:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Publish

Hi, I have written my first Wikipedia page in my sandbox. I think I have submitted it for review. I am not sure of the process now. What happens next? Crosbym52 (talk) 10:08, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Crosbym52! User:Crosbym52/sandbox is not yet submitted, use the blue button with the text "Submit your draft for review!". When you do, the template with change to include new info. You may want to take a look at WP:GNG and WP:BAND, I don't think your draft will pass as currently written. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:34, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I can't figure out how to post on Teahouse. Please help me.

I can't find my old conversations. I posted a question on 23rd December 2020, but now that seems to be history. How do I reply to the replies? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 10:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Arctic Gazelle! Threads on pages like this (with a lot of traffic) gets archived a few days after the latest comment. Your Teahouse question is archived at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1088#Is_is_civil_to_imply_that_another_editor_may_not_edit_something?, but we don't continue discussions on the archived pages. If you have more questions, start a new discussion like you just did. You reply by adding new text under the text you're replying to, like I did now. You can see all your edits at [5]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:48, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. Should I just copy and paste my question, or the whole discussion so far? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 12:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
The following is copied from my user contributions page:" 10:06, 29 December 2020 diff hist +321‎ Wikipedia:Teahouse ‎ →‎I can't figure out how to post on Teahouse. Please help me.: new section " and I am wondering what is the meaning of "+321" ? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 13:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC);
Hello, Arctic Gazelle. To answer your last question first: "+321" means that that edit added 321 bytes to the page, that's all. For your first question: don't copy and paste the text from the archived section unless there is a really good reason to do so. Start a new section, and link it (either in the title, or at the beginning of the text) to the archived section. You can use the link that Gråbergs Gråa Sång quoted directly, or it is common to use a piped link, so
Follow up to [[Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1088#Is_is_civil_to_imply_that_another_editor_may_not_edit_something?|Is it civil to imply that another editor may not edit something?]]
appears as
Follow up to Is it civil to imply that another editor may not edit something?
--ColinFine (talk) 13:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Schwarz triangle

I have tried to create a template to produce a Schwarz triangle (Template:Schwarz Triangle), but it does not seem to work—see the documentation. Is anyone able to help? DBoffey (talk) 22:48, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Are you using {{Schwarz Triangle}} which does not exist or {{Schwarz triangle}} which is the correct name? Template names are case sensitive. RudolfRed (talk) 22:51, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
forgot to ping @DBoffey: RudolfRed (talk) 22:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
In Template:Schwarz triangle/doc you say {{Schwarz|...}} which doesn't exist either. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:55, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
There was a further problem with my example, namely, I was using the pipe symbol in the data, which, no doubt, Wikipedia translated as a field separator. DBoffey (talk) 09:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
I have amended the template Template:Schwarz triangle, but I am still having problems trying to get the text overlaid. Also, the image always appears on the right of the page, whereas I would like to control its placement. Any help much appreciated. DBoffey (talk) 13:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@DBoffey: {{Annotated image}} has a float parameter for placement. You can just say |float = {{{float|}}} to pass it on. {{Schwarz triangle/line}} calls the non-existing {{Annotate}}. Maybe you want {{Annotation}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:09, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

When I put in interlaguage links they become red. Why is this and is there any way or necessary to change it? For ex. Laila Mikkelsen [no]. Laila Mikkelsen turns red, the no is blue and links to the Norwegian page about her: https://no.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laila_Mikkelsen

Another question is why these kinds of references "example of reference”[55], lead to the References list and not directly to relevant the website? And is it possible to change this?

Thanks in advance!

- May MaySundAnd (talk) 13:57, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, MaySundAnd. It sounds as if the ILL you are talking about is generated by the template {{ill}}: the direct link is red because the article does not exist in en-wiki, but the "(no)" link is blue because it does exist in no-wiki. If somebody creates the English article Laila Mikkelsen, the template will stop displaying the Norwegian link entirely, and appear as a normal wikilink. It is perfectly possible to write a direct Wikilink to another edition ([[:no:Leila Mikkelson|]] appears as Leila Mikkelson) but it is generally considered a bad idea to link to an article in another language without indicating this, as many readers may not be interested in following such a link.
As to your second question, I suspect the answer is "because the developers decided to do it that way"; but I think it was a good decision. With a properly formatted refernce, you can see a lot about it (title, date, author, where it was published) from the citation, and that may tell you enough about it without going to the trouble of opening it. If you think it would be desirable to have the ability to open the link from where the reference is used, you could suggest it on VPP. --ColinFine (talk) 14:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
To add to that. There are two possible markups to get a foreign language link to work, The simplest is [[:no:Laila_Mikkelsen]] which renders as no:Laila_Mikkelsen so that the language is seen by the reader as part of the link. The alternative is to use a pipe character to hide the language part, so [[:no:Laila_Mikkelsen|Laila_Mikkelsen]] renders as Laila_Mikkelsen. As to your other question, it is an agreed norm that references don't go straight to websites but only to the reflist at the foot of the article. On talk pages you can insert them in single brackets to do that, as here with Google [6] Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
ColinFine's [[:no:Leila Mikkelson|]] uses something called the pipe trick to automatically transform to [[:no:Laila Mikkelsen|Laila Mikkelsen]] when the page is saved. Please use spaces in all wikilinks [[...]] and not underscores like Mike Turnbull, except in rare cases where the subject is normally written with underscores. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, my bad, PrimeHunter which came about because I copy-pasted part of the the OP's link rather than typing in the target page's name! Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:20, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Question

What was the longest an pending AfC submission took to be declined/accepted? 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 (always ping me when replying) 15:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Personally, I have no idea, and don't plan to try to find an exact answer for you, though you might try searching the archives at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Articles for creation to find out for yourself, or ask there if you really feel the need to get an answer. But note that the bottom of the page at WP:AFC currently says there are 242 submissions that are three months old, and none older than that. But there is a category for 'very old' so presumably some awkward articles do rumble on for 6 months or more being finally either being accepted or declined. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:26, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Ok, i was just wondering --🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 (always ping me when replying) 15:48, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Is is civil to imply that another editor may not edit something?

Follow up to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1088#Is_is_civil_to_imply_that_another_editor_may_not_edit_something? So how should I respond to this kind of speech that some call 'a little bit bossy'? Arctic Gazelle (talk) 14:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

There is no blanket answer to that question, and no way of knowing whether it was "bossy" or not when there is no context. Could you let us know what page you refer to? There are a dozen different reasons why the phrase you reacted to would be perfectly fine to use. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict)Hello, Arctic Gazelle, and welcome back to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you question is a bit unclear. If you are asking how you should reply to Cullen328 who replied to you back on 23rd December, it is now too late to edit or respond directly to that thread. Like all threads here at the Teahouse (which is a busy place), it gets archived after 3 days of inactivity/no follow-ups. We should never edit archived discussions. If you have a follow-up question for Cullen, you could do so on their talk page, or you could start a new thread here. (Note: my inclusion of their name in this thread means that they will receive an automatic notification that they have been mentioned. So if you would like to clarify what it is that you're asking, there is a good chance they will see it here. But looking at your contributions, I can't see any other discussion you've had or linked to with with other editors at all, so I assume your original question was a hypothetical one? - but I'm really not sure. My general feeling is that if I see anyone telling another editor that they should not edit something is to assume that the person giving that instruction has both experience and competence on their side, and are perhaps firmly advising another (newish?) editor not to make changes to something asking that they deem to already be in good shape. This might be especially important if the article in question is a Good Article or Featured Article, both of which have gone through a review process and all future changes should always retain high quality content. But if you or anyone else felt that an improvement could still be made, the sensible approach is to engage with that editor, explain what you would like to do, then discuss and gain consensus for such a change. We use article talk pages mostly for that purpose, as other interested editors will also be able to see the suggestions being made and any resistance to it. But nobody has any specific authority over any article - as explained further at WP:OWN. Does this make sense? Maybe next time you could provide a link or WP:DIFF to any given comment so that we can appreciate the context in which it is made and respond accordingly. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
It isn't hypothetical, but it was months or years ago. I think in one case I was being addressed, while in the other more recent case I simply observed it on a talk page. I look at talk pages a lot just to get extra information when reading Wikipedia. I cannot remember what the topics were, only that it seemed very bossy in both cases. I may have seen it more than twice, but I'm not sure. Arctic Gazelle (talk) 15:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
OK. But as Bonadea says above, there's no way we can answer such a vague question without having context. Glad to be of some help, anyway. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:02, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I wanna change my username

Hey! I am 13 Eleven 2004, but I don't like this username anymore I want to change it. Is it possible to change? What I need to do? 13 Eleven 2004 (talk) 16:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Yes it is, 13 Eleven 2004. See Wikipedia:Changing username for your options. Cordless Larry (talk) 16:19, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

creating a profile page of an individual which is linked to a football association

hi, need help to create a new page as a profile of our technical director at the football association CHARLIE JACKSON1 (talk) 13:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, CHARLIE JACKSON1, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you (and probably your technical director) have a (very common) misunderstanding of Wikipedia. It is not a site for people to post profiles: in fact, it does not contain any profiles: not one. What it is is an encyclopaedia: it contains neutrally written articles, based mostly on independent reliable sources.
If your technical director meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - broadly, that several people who have no connection with them have chosen to publish material about them in reliable sources - then we could have an article about them. It will not be a profile, because it will not belong to them, it will not necessarily say what they would want it to say, and they and their associates will have no control over it.
As an associate, you are discouraged from writing the article, but not forbidden. Please be aware that successfully writing a new article is the hardest task there is for an inexperienced editor, and it is made even harder if the editor in question has a conflict of interest. What you would need to do is:
  1. Read about editing conflict of interest, and make a declaration on your user page. If you are in any way employed (even as a volunteer) to do this, you must familiarise yourself with paid editing, and make that declaration.
  2. Read about notability and find at least three reliably published sources where people who have no connection with your TD or with the FA have chosen to write about them, giving significant coverage. Interviews, and articles based on press releases, don't count. If you can't find these, then give up: no article on them will be accepted at present.
  3. If you can find them, read your first article, and use the articles for creation process to create your draft.
  4. Forget every single thing you know about your director, and write a draft article based entirely on what those independent sources say.
Do you see why I say it is hard for you to do this? --ColinFine (talk) 14:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
ColinFine Just FYI volunteers are no longer considered to be paid editors (though interns are). 331dot (talk) 14:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks, 331dot, I didn't realise that. --ColinFine (talk) 14:29, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
hello ColinFine maybe i used the wrong term and its not a profile , but i se other pages with very similar ideas to what i was hoping to create https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Marcos_Falopa as an example please provide further clarification— Preceding unsigned comment added by CHARLIE JACKSON1 (talk • contribs)
@CHARLIE JACKSON1: Please see WP:OSE. We currently have 6,903,967 articles, most of which could need editing. If you have a specific problem with a particular page such as Marcos Falopa, please indicate the problem so we can look into it. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
CHARLIE JACKSON1 Please see other stuff exists. As this is a volunteer project where people do what they can when they can, it is possible for inappropriate content to go undetected, even for years. That does not mean other inappropriate content can be permitted. 331dot (talk) 16:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello again, CHARLIE JACKSON. People can mean different things by "profile", but most people would assume that a profile was written by or for its subject, or at least with the subject's approval. None of those are true for Wikipedia articles - they are occasionally written by the subject (though this is strongly discouraged) but we work hard to get them neutral, and this sometimes means including material that the subject definitely does not want aired, or suppressing material that the subject wants to say. That's why I reacted to your word "profile".
As 331dot's and Victor Schmidt's replies indicate, we often get people wanting to justify submitting substandard work by pointing to existing articles, and this is not a useful argument unless the article in question is a featured article or good article. Those two replies may have given the impression that there is something wrong with our article Marcos Falopa; but it appears to me to be well referenced - nearly every paragraph has a cite, and looking at their titles and sites, it looks as if several of the references are reliable and independent, though I confess I haven't looked at the sources themself to check that. The article has been worked on by at least ten editors, and looks to be neutrally written and not promotional. If you can get a draft to that level, it would be accepted readily. --ColinFine (talk) 16:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

WP:BLP, potentially controversial subject matter

I've started watching an article that has a history of the addition of (in my opinion) unrelated information. These edits are usually small and read like an editorial opinion of the subject.

  1. What kind of controversial activity by a living person warrants inclusion on WP:BLP?
  2. If activity by a subject is included per question 1, what is required of sources on the same? (Specifically, if the source is WP:BLPSPS and WP:YOUTUBE, is this okay?)
  3. For either 1 or 2, is there an existing policy that exactly addresses this kind of scenario that I've missed?

Here's my gut feeling, with no citations of Wikipedia policies or rules that state exactly what I think.

  1. Use your best judgement on if such content is encyclopedic. Obviously, WP:BLP must be met, but what else? Is specific guidance on this question really possible?
  2. If controversial activity by a subject is encyclopedic, then surely a source that isn't WP:SPS must exist. WP:SPS shouldn't be used for the sole source of controversial activity by an article's subject. Jdphenix (talk) 16:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Listing books as sources

How would i add a book as a source? should i just but the title in the citations? Mekeit (talk) 16:33, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Mekeit. The best way is to use the {{cite book}} template, explained at Template:Cite_book. If you use the citation expander (see WP:Citation_expander), all you need is the ISBN and all will be done for you.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:47, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict)@Mekeit: You can use {{cite book}} for that purpose. Please use as many parameters as available. Absolutely required would be title, publisher, page number (Nobody is going to read a 1000 page book yust for verifying a single statement) and, if existing, ISBN. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:48, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Mekeit: If you want to cite different pages of one book in different places in an article, you only need to add the citation once. To reuse a reference you give the reference a name, then on subsequent uses you 'call it up' by that name, without having to reenter all the details again. See WP:REFNAME for a full explanation. You can then use the {{rp}} template to add specific page numbers immediately afterwards, like this:
First fact found on page 29 of a book.[1]: 29  Second fact found on page 114 from the same book.[1]: 114  And so on...

References

  1. ^ a b Willmot, A.; Moyes, N. (2015). The Flora of Derbyshire. Pisces Publications. ISBN 978-1-874357-65-0.
Let us know if you need any further advice. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Mike Turnbull: That Citation Expander tool is really neat. @Mekeit:. One other option. If you find the book through Google Books, I have found the Wikipedia citation tool for Google Books invaluable over the years. Unfortunately, please note that Google Books has made a relatively recent change and the urls for specific page view found in the new interface ("Welcome to the new Google Books") no longer work. You have to go to "Back to classic Google Books" to get a workable url. Once you do, just drop it into the tool, click Load, and it will do its best to fill in other fields. (All these tools' output needs checking by a human though; I almost always add more fields than it provides, and tweak its default output).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:44, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Question by Tech306

Block evasion by promotion-only editor ~ ToBeFree (talk) 18:12, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi there,

I submitted the article below from a different page (which now is deleted since the name North Star Systems Inc. didn’t meet Wikipedia requirements: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:North_Star_Systems_Inc.&action=edit&redlink=1) and it got declined due to these reasons:

"1. This submission appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia. Encyclopedia articles need to be written from a neutral point of view, and should refer to a range of independent, reliable, published sources, not just to materials produced by the creator of the subject being discussed. This is important so that the article can meet Wikipedia's verifiability policy and the notability of the subject can be established. If you still feel that this subject is worthy of inclusion in Wikipedia, please rewrite your submission to comply with these policies. 2. Blatant advertising and copy-pasting of mission statements including trademark symbols"


Please provide any specific feedback you can to improve this article so it hopefully doesn't get declined again. 1. If I don't have to include trademarks, I won't. I just thought I had to since their product is trademarked. 2. I also tried to change a lot of words so its not copy-paste but there are some words I just can't change because it will change the whole sentence and might also misinterpret what this company believes in.. 3. I provided all possible references that exist about this company to back up the information I'd like to contribute to Wikipedia.

Your help is appreciated.

Sincerely, Tech306

@Deedee4465: I have removed the draft's copy from here. Draft:North Star Systems Inc. wasn't deleted for beign an ilegal name, but because the articles content were demed promotional. Note that the definition of promotion is not limited to selling something explicitely. I am not an administrator and therefore cannot give you advice on the draft's content, but there is one thing I can say you: Never, ever copy something from elsewhere onto Wikipedia. Even if we could get the legal stuff resolved, 99% of the texts not written for WIkipedia's purpose is also unsiutable for Wikipedia. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:36, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
As for TM and likewise, Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks covers this at length. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Pinging Tech306 instead, as Deedee4465 didn't ask this question. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 17:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
(e/c twice now!) Hello @Tech306:, and welcome to the teahouse! I'm not an admin so can't see the contents of the deleted page, but it looks like your draft was deleted under G11 of the speedy deletion criteria. This means that an editor believed the sole purpose of the draft was to advertise the company, and an admin agreed. Reason 2 of the decline gives me the impression that this was a pretty blatant case of advertising. Please take time to read our policies on conflict of interest editing and paid editing, as it appears you are affiliated with the company. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 17:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Note that User talk:North Star Systems Inc. was blocked in September for an unacceptable user name, and then User talk:North Star Systems was blocked for promotion as well as an unacceptable user name in October, and their draft deleted. --ColinFine (talk) 17:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Please do not post here and at Help Desk, as that wastes editors' time. David notMD (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Help getting WIkipedia article approved

 Courtesy link: Draft:All Good Things (band)

Can someone help edit the article for the band All Good Things please? This is a band with millions of fans, hundreds of millions of streams and views, and many years of online reviews and articles but still I have issues getting the Wikipedia approved.

Any help is much appreciated. Deedee4465 (talk) 17:10, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

@Deedee4465: neither Spotify nor Youtube are reliable sources. The subject's Youtube Videos/ Spotify Songs aren't independent with respect to WP:GNG. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi @Deedee4465:, as the reviewer previously said on your draft, it does not seem to be written in neutral point of view. Additionally, it does not seem to have many independent and reliable sources (I would recommend reading that link for help on finding better sources). SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 17:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Deedee4465: You need to add more citations to reliable sources. Spotify and YouTube don't count. RudolfRed (talk) 17:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Deedee4465. I have done a quick copyedit to make the tone more neutral. Further on to the above, as far as I can tell, every single source in the article is a primary one, none of which assist with demonstrating notability (see also Wikipedia:Notability (music)), and are not what article content should primarily be based upon. When a proposed article is filled up with such sources, they actually help hide any good reliable, independent, secondary sources from being seen, when they are present in the mix or are later added. Please see also Wikipedia:Common sourcing mistakes (notability). If the right type of sources don't exist (they either do or don't), no article will be possible, so look for those sources to determine whether you wish to spend any more time on this. A quick search didn't turn up much, but I did find this article (in German). which might have some use (of course you might use Google translate or similar if you don't speak German – I do not, and am not very clear on their reliability, but at least it looks at first blush like an independent secondary source). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

No wifi

I dont have wifi. So I can't play the game. What should I do if I was invited to the game? Wtfridge (talk) 13:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I would suggest asking at Wikipedia:Reference desk, possibly the Entertainment or Science sections, describing the game you are trying to access. My immediate reaction would be to suggest that you get wi-fi. Britmax (talk) 13:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Howdy Wtfridge. If you are referring to The_Wikipedia_Adventure ("I can't play the game"), you should be able to access the adventure the same way you posted this question. wherever you were at that time. Note that the instructions there explain that the game is "not supported on tablets and smaller mobile devices." azwaldo (talk) 19:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

How do I find random articles that need tidying?

Hello world, When I first registered as a user, I was given the option to go to a random page that needed spelling/grammar/minor edits. I'm not sure where to find that function or option now... could someone help me with that? Abaloknee (talk) 18:59, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Abaloknee. Wikipedia:Community portal has links to lists of articles that need various kinds of work. Wikipedia:Random explains how to find random articles. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:07, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Abaloknee This page Wikipedia:Task Center has some useful ideas too. Theroadislong (talk) 19:14, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
(e/c) Hey Abaloknee. Of course, the <remove links and text pointing at places already suggested above> and see also User:SuggestBot. Anyway, to access that feature, please copy this code: ?gettingStartedReturn=true Now, navigate to any random article → place your cursor in your browser's address bar after the existing URL → paste the copied code → hit enter. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for the (very) helpful suggestions! Abaloknee (talk) 19:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Abaloknee: See Wikipedia:GettingStarted for more about the feature and a link to try it on Random article. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

George Barwood

Hello, why is George Barwood blocked from Wikipedia? 165.16.173.211 (talk) 10:24, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Are you talking about a WP-editor, an article topic, or something else? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:37, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi! If you're referring to George Barwood, it was speedily deleted back in 2015 because it was not judged to have any meaningful content. This likely indicates that it didn't have proper references or other indications of meeting the biographical notability standard. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 10:39, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
In fact, it had no content whatsoever, except for a "References" heading and a {{reflist}} template. Deor (talk) 20:06, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

GAR

I've been going through the GAR process for Stephen Fry's Podgrams and we've arrived at a disagreement, but we've only had three people comment. We've reached out to WT:GAR and WT:GAN for additional review, but it's been a few days without any responses and I was wondering whether anyone here at the Teahouse would be willing to comment. Thank you in advance. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I'll have a look and chime in tomorrow, TipsyElephant. ImaginesTigers (talk) 20:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Draft

Hello! I wrote an acticle about a Tunisian actor Mohamed Mrad in English Wikipedia and Simple Wikipedia. My article is translated from French Wikipedia I'm just a fan and a writer. I don't know him personally. There are Arabic and French wikipedia and I cited several notable sources like Kapitalis, Mosaïque FM, Africultures, Tuniscope, Assabah News and others. The Draft is declined and an editor has requested deletion of my article in simple English. They believe it is spam or advice . Help --ChrisMat2020 (talk) 05:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC) ChrisMat2020 (talk) 05:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi ChrisMat2020 in my opinion the rejection (not decline) of the draft is not justified. Even with my very limited understanding of French I could pick up that at least some of the sources appear to be mainstream media. I wonder if the reviewer even looked at the sources or has significant knowledge of the languages concerned (French and Arabic). In my (not so humble) opinion a Rejection at AFC must be held to the same standard as a deletion nomination at AFD. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:48, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
ChrisMat2020 I suggest you go to the Talk page of the reviewer who Rejected the draft User:ImprovedWikiImprovment and ask to reconsider. David notMD (talk) 12:57, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@ChrisMat2020, Dodger67, and David notMD: Oh dear. I meant to decline the draft, not reject it. I had read the sources on the article, and deemed them to be insufficient at this time, but I don't think it was correct to reject it entirely. I apologise. I have self-reverted and declined the draft instead. --IWI (talk) 20:43, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Accidentally triggering edit filters

Hi! In the past few days, two of my edits inadvertently triggered an edit filter: one for "persistent sockpuppetry" (Special:Diff/996648441) and one for "Wikipedia:Long-term abuse/Best known for IP" (Special:Diff/995853504). Importantly, these were minor constructive edits that were not disallowed, just flagged, so I'm not super concerned about these. My question is whether I should do anything about these appearing in my edit filter log and see if there's a way to get them unflagged, or if I should just continue on with editing as usual. Thanks! DanCherek (talk) 16:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey DanCherek. I wouldn't worry about it (and yes, continue editing as normal). Someone more sophisticated than me at reading the two edit filters' code could target exactly what conditions resulted in the false-positives, but for reasons that are obvious (e.g. WP:BEANS), revealing exact details of the edit filters would not be prudent. Suffice it to say, these do appear to be false-positives, and what was flagged are only minor circumstantial evidence of the tripped conditions. Accordingly, only someone who actually was a sockpuppet/long term abuser would have to worry, because examining their other edits, and finding real evidence of the flagged conditions, would be required to confirm the weak connection implied by tripping the edit filter. By contrast, examining a constructive editor's edit history would just keep turning up better and better evidence of just how false the false-positives really were. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:11, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@DanCherek: Edit filter logs are permanent and don't have flags to change status but just ignore it. It will not be held against you. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Finding articles without a short description

How can I find all the articles that don't have short descriptions? I normally find them by browsing the random article section but I would like to find a faster way. UnguidedEmperor (talk) 19:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hey UnguidedEmperor. I looked at the project page and the Wikiproject and was surprised to not find suggestions for targeting such pages. Though it's a bit outside of my wheelhouse, I am taking a stab (there's probably a more rigorous/elegant solution). Anyway, it occurs to me that a search for the letter "e" (the most common letter in English), that excludes pages with the short description template, and its redirects, would seem to provide the facility you're looking for, so:

Search of article mainspace for <e NOT "Short description" NOT "Shortdesc" NOT "Short desc" NOT "Brief description">

--Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:40, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Yep, as I expected:-) See below.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:05, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@UnguidedEmperor: Check out the project at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Short_descriptions. If you don't see a "todo" list there, ask at the project's talk page, which seems active. You will probably get some hints and tips for finding pages to work on. RudolfRed (talk) 20:41, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi UnguidedEmperor, welcome to the Teahouse. The search -hastemplate:"short description" finds 3.45 million pages. You can also try it with sort=random. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:45, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Question

How can i create an article using wiki makeup? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thijin William Deng (talk • contribs) 00:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@Thijin William Deng: Its not clear what you are asking. You can follow the steps at WP:YFA to create an article. What do you mean by "wiki makeup"? RudolfRed (talk) 00:16, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Thijin William Deng. Perhaps you mean "wiki markup" also known as wikitext. If so, take a look at Help:Cheatsheet. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Advice

 Courtesy link: Draft:Hector Carlos Lora

Hi! So I wrote a draft to an article recently but the person on whom I the article about was placed as a redirect. So now I am seeking to have the redirect replaced by my draft. Is there any specific advice you could offer me as to how I could achieve this? Anything you are able to tell me will be of immense help. Thank you for your time, LMPAJ (talk) 04:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Can you provide the link to draft and/or the redirect? SnazzyInfinity (chat? • what I've done) 04:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
LMPAJ, welcome to the Teahouse. Before you consider moving it into mainspace, I suggest pinging the reviewers on the talk page to receive input. From what I can tell there has been a problem with promotional language used on both the draft and article before the latter was turned into a redirect. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 05:04, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Thank you both for your prompt reply. The link to the redirect is: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Passaic,_New_Jersey#Government and the link to the draft was pasted above. The promotional language was erased, but then one of the later editors told me that my next step should be to have appeal the draft article to be published instead of the redirect, which is why I am asking for advice on how to do that. I don't know how to convince them properly or what even my next step should be to achieve such a task. Thank you, LMPAJ (talk) 02:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Neologisms & Recognizability

I recently started contributing to the Podcasting Wikiproject and began working on some of the top importance articles. I've most recently been working on Godcasting and I thought the page should be moved to something like "Religion and spirituality podcasts" because "Godcasting" is an old neologism that doesn't appear to really have taken off and because when I started editing the page it was implied that the article was a dictionary entry for the word as opposed to the genre it describes. I was hoping for someone to weigh in on whether the article should be moved to a different name or not on the talk page Talk:Godcasting. Thank you in advance. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:51, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Greetings, TipsyElephant, and welcome to the Teahouse. The best way to solicit other opinions for this would be to formally propose the page move. This will list the discussion at Wikipedia:Requested moves/Current discussions where it will be seen by many active editors. Instructions for doing so are at Wikipedia:Requested moves § Requesting a single page move. CThomas3 (talk) 05:37, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Why are some subjects/topics not on Wikipedia?

Why are some subjects/topics not on Wikipedia? I have noticed that some people might be the central focus of a major book, news story, or movie but not have a wiki page. At the same time, a person might be that person who got their "15 minutes of fame" and there will be an extensive article about them. Can people remove, or pay to have their topic removed? I have heard that to be on Wikipedia, a topic must be multifaceted with the subject having multiple reasons to be on Wikipedia, but come on, when Robert Matthew Van Winkle has a page, who is known for precisely one thing, that argument sort of falls apart. Really just interested in how this works--can't find anything. 2603:8000:6F40:1A00:D461:75BE:DC7:D6F8 (talk) 04:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

The character in question needs to first have someone interested in writing an article about them, and then the reliable sources to support an article about them, usually sources that discuss the character in isolation to establish their notability. Is there a specific character / subject in question? Koncorde (talk) 04:08, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello IP editor. In order to be the subject of a Wikipedia article, the topic must be the subject of significant coverage in several independent, reliable sources. There is no requirement that the topic be multifaceted or have multiple reasons to be on Wikipedia. What are the multiple reasons that a species of butterfly or an asteroid or a mathematical concept deserve an article? One good reason is enough. As for the reasons that Robert Matthew Van Winkle, better known as Vanilla Ice, has a Wikipedia article, there are 146 reasons; namely, the 146 references to reliable sources in that article. You may not like him and I am not a fan, but he is easily notable by Wikipedia's standards. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:28, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

But my point regarding Vanilla Ice is that there are people/topics that have so many more "references" but are just non-existent on Wikipedia. I am not asking about a specific person or topic, just the fact that it exists. Mods don't deny it, but just throw the same excuses at the question. I give up because I know I won't get a straight answer. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2603:8000:6F40:1A00:403D:304F:39CB:4A77 (talk) 04:44, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Everyone here is a volunteer. If you want to write an article, go ahead, but the reason notable topics don't have an article is simply because nobody decided to make them. Zoozaz1 talk 04:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
There's also the WP:VOLUNTEER aspect of the encyclopedia. People writing about subjects that interest them isn't strange. Even if someone is, by Wikipedia's standards, notable, they won't appear on here if no one is bold enough to create or draft an article about them. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 04:54, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, IP editor, there are many notable topics that do not yet have articles, and you can start writing them now. You write "Mods don't deny it, but just throw the same excuses at the question." I am a mod (administrator) and I have written over 100 new articles and expanded many hundreds more. Nobody is making any excuses but instead are pointing out that this is a volunteer project and that you can start writing articles instead of complaining about Vanilla Ice. That's a fact, not an excuse. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:17, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
A subject does not have to be "multifaceted" to get a biography. Maybe you have heard a badly distorted version of Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons#Subjects notable only for one event, or of the requirement for multiple sources in Wikipedia:Notability (people). Vanilla Ice is an odd example. The article has 146 references but there are thousands of other potential references in reliable sources. There must be very few people who are more notable but don't have a Wikipedia biography. References don't have to be in English or online but I doubt you can find a single person with more English online references in reliable sources. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Computer Art

As I am familiar with the work of artist Leonel Moura, a recognized pioneer in the use of robotics and artificial intelligence in art, I believe he should be mention, at least under Robot painting. However, all my contributions have been denied... why? since the approach is totally different from previous artists as his robots build autonomously their own composition Also, his Symbiotic Art Manifesto, published in 2003, which talks for the first time about creative machines and nonhuman art made by machines was refused on the Art Manifesto page Hence, my question is about content Madalena77 (talk) 09:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Appears your issue is not edits to the Moura article, but Declines to your Draft:Nonhuman art. The other issue, additions to the Art manifesto article, is that you attempted to add a manifesto that does not yet have its own article. David notMD (talk) 09:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello, Madalena77. Wikipedia does not, in general, care whether a subject is new, old, groundbreaking, popular, vile, important, trivial, disgusting, wonderful, boring, hackneyed, biassed, saintly, innovative, ingenious, imaginary, criminal, or any other quality: all it cares about is whether several people wholly unconnected with the subject have chosen to publish significant coverage of the subject in reliable sources . If this condition is met, then an article can be written, based almost entirely on those independent sources. If not, then no article will be accepted. Of course, there is sometimes disagreement about whether a subject meets these criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 10:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Becoming a moderator/administrator

How do i become a moderater/administrator and is there a difference Snowycake (talk) 00:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Snowycake. Please read Wikipedia:Miniguide to requests for adminship, and feel free to ask follow-up questions. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Snowycake. Wikipedia does have editors who have been given the user right of "administrator" and you can find out more them at Wikipedia:Administrators or Wikipedia:Guide to requests for adminship. As for "moderators", all editors are "moderators" in a sense because they can add, remove, create, delete content that they feel either is either is or isn't in accordance with one of Wikipedia's policies and guidelines by being WP:BOLD; in other words, the Wikipedia community does, for the most part, try to self-moderate article content through bold editing, or through discussion and consensus when there are disagreements; administrators generally are only asked to step in as a last resort when their are serious problems (e.g. behavioral issues) or perhaps technical matters that require special user rights to resolve. -- Marchjuly (talk) 03:23, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
@Snowycake: To add on that, there are formal requirements for being able to start a Request for Adminship (RfA), mainly having an account for 30 days and having at least 500 edits, however, with yust the basics criteria, it is unlikely that an RfA will be sucessfull. The folks over there will expect that you have gathered experience in all the areas admins might infer into. One skill I often see is required is the ability to act calm when the situation gets hot. Victor Schmidt (talk) 08:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
I think a better question would be how can you avoid it. --Paul ❬talk❭ 11:54, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

SOMEONE CREATED MULTIPLE ACCOUNTS AND TRIED EDITING MY CLIENT’S PAGE RESULTING TO BLOCK IT

Hello, this is Mehek, manager of cine actor Rohit KaduDeshmukh (Pls google his name). It came to our notice that someone has created multiple accounts and tried editing the subject page resulting it in blocking the creation of “Rohit KaduDeshmukh” sir. I wasn’t using Wikipedia ever before, but to bring this to your notice I had to create an account to seek help. Because of this nuisance of some random guy, no one is able to create Rohit sir’s article for Wikipedia. Pls suggest what should we do? Creating Wikipedia page of Rohit sir isn’t priority for us, but the fans who wish to know about Rohit sir or other editors who wish to create page about him aren’t able to create due to this issue. For reference; Pls google “Rohit KaduDeshmukh” also check news about him, he is been flashed in big news channels. Hope we get appropriate help! Thank You! Meheksethi123 (talk) 08:35, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Note: The page Rohit KaduDeshmukh has been WP:SALTed and full-protected.
I suggest asking the blocking admins (TonyBallioni or Bbb23) about unblocking it, but it would be helpful to draft and article and provide reliable, independent sources. As you are associated with KaduDeshmukh, please follow the guidelines outlined at WP:PAID and declare your paid relationship on your user page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 08:42, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Meheksethi123 (ec) Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, if you are representing a client, you must make the required paid editing disclosure on your user page; that's a Terms of Use requirement.
If someone wishes to create a legitimate article about your client, they may use the Articles for Creation process to do so. Your client will need to be shown with significant coverage in independent reliable sources to meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable actor; not every actor merits a Wikipedia article. 331dot (talk) 08:46, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, (TonyBallioni or Bbb23) are showing retired on their page so not able to contact them. Secondly, we personally don’t want to create it. But the fans or other editors who wish to create aren’t able to create. Also, Rohit KaduDeshmukh sir is well published and notable actor. So if googled his name, there are many news articles about him in big newspapers. The whole idea of this is that his fans might be in search of his article on Wikipedia and might get disappointed for not finding it because no editor is able to create the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Meheksethi123 (talk • contribs) 08:54, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

There are ways that people can draft an article about your client, such as Articles for Creation as I noted. 331dot (talk) 08:58, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
And @TonyBallioni: is still active according to his recent contributions --Maresa63 (talk) 13:19, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Oiyaa! I gave in to temptation and Googled (actually, "Ducked") Rohit sir. A good 2⁄3 of the hits on the SERP page are the same copypasta inserted into multiple web sites — "...born in an Elite Marathi Family as his grandmother, Usha Chavan is a prolific Marathi Actress..." Spam on toast, with extra salt. Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:05 Wed 30, AEDT) 12:05, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

updated information and biography

Hello, I am attempting to update the Wikipedia entry for Felicity Abbott Production Designer. I am Felicity Abbott. This page was written by a third party and is 10 years out of date. It contains dead links and outdated information. All attempts at updating this page have been undone by Kemalcan, who has sent me a message saying that I will be blocked the next time I "vandalize Wikipedia". I'm simply trying to update an existing page with current information. How can I go about this? ANTIPODEANFA (talk) 22:44, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, ANTIPODEANFA. Unfortunately we cannot accept updates without reliable published sources, as we have no way of telling who your are. Please see WP:ABOUTYOU for ways to proceed. --ColinFine (talk) 23:12, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
I’m not sure why you would want to delete mention of earlier achievements, ANTIPODEANFA, but if you describe your concerns at Talk:Felicity Abbott then your note will stay on the record associated with the article. Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:36 Wed 30, AEDT) 12:36, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Assistance with a book cover

Hi there! I've been around for a few months now, have a few GAs under my belt, and I've decided to take my first swing at making a new article. But I'm really struggling to find the first edition cover or title page for it. Does anyone have any advice? I'm trawled The British Library site, sales websites, nothing. The book is The Blood of the Vampire (1897) by Florence Marryat, published by Hutchinson & Co.

Any advice would be appreciated. I tried WP:COVERS, but it seems to be defunct, and it told me to check in here. Please ping me if you reply! ImaginesTigers (talk) 11:13, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

ImaginesTigers, found it. GeraldWL 11:15, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerald: Hi! None of those are the first edition cover. There's a modern reprint from 2010 there (introduction by Greta Depledge), but not the original cover that I can see. ImaginesTigers (talk) 11:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
ImaginesTigers, hmm.. does book covers really need to be the first edition? GeraldWL 11:18, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerald Waldo Luis: For a book this old, yeah, a first edition front cover (or, preferably, the title page) is better than one of the—potentially dozens of—modern reprints. They usually look quite bad (that one does!). — ImaginesTigers (talk) 11:20, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
ImaginesTigers, well you can buy the book and scan the cover. It takes time, so you could probably just have the searchable cover up temporarily, then switching it to the first edition as you favor. The temporary cover would later be orphaned and deleted. GeraldWL 11:22, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerald Waldo Luis: While looking up to try and show you that first editions usually cost somewhere between £800-£1300, I found it! So... thank you, hehe! Glad I posted. ImaginesTigers (talk) 11:26, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Ha! GeraldWL 11:28, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@ImaginesTigers: If you want the cover as well as the title page, there's an image at L. W. Currey's site. Deor (talk) 20:01, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Deor: Thanks so much for this! Will be using it. ImaginesTigers (talk) 13:11, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

awards shows

Context here and here.

Hello, I am new to Wikipedia, The question I have, is with ho i should talk to?, to discus an award show credibility to give awards to an artist so that those awards would be considered notible enough by Wikipedia. ITIRIKBP (talk) 22:52, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

ITIRIKBP, you are already talking to two different editors, who have both given you the same answer. Forum shopping is not allowed. --ColinFine (talk) 23:53, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

I am sorry but you did not answer my question, but rather continued the talk on the previous converstation. My question was to whom I should talk to, to discuss an award show credibility? not an award it self or a lack of sources for an award. — Preceding unsigned comment added by ITIRIKBP (talk • contribs) 00:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

...You’re already talking to me as well as Paper9oll. You are talking to both of us, and we have both said that the sources you have provided are not reliable. If you want to talk to someone else, a courtesy notice would have been nice, since I spent a good half hour reading through the sources you gave me. D🎉ggy54321 (happy new year!) 14:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Article about a NGO

Hi, I'm very new here and looking to create an article on an NGO in Malaysia. Would like to request assistance to verify its notability and the references that I found, also regarding COI issues. Thanks in advance! Yingying at MPS (talk) 14:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Yingying at MPS. Please take a look at WP:NORG and WP:NOBLE since they deal with Wikipedia notability as it pertains to organizations like the one you want to create an article about. Please also take a look at WP:COI and WP:PAID since they are related to COI editing. If after reading those pages you still have questions, feel free to ask them and a Teahouse host will try and help you out. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Question

Who was the youngest WP administrator? 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 (always ping me when replying) 21:52, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi LightningComplexFire. We don't know. Wikipedia:Guidance for younger editors advices to not give out age. Administrators are not required to reveal their age or identity. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:02, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
@LightningComplexFire: Noting your signature, I need just to comment to you that it is up to you to add pages to your watchlist if you have posted there and want to be aware of replies. Expecting others to ping you is not always reasonable, and just comes across as laziness to me. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:50, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
Perhaps changing "always" to "please" would soften the tone. Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:40 Wed 30, AEDT) 12:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Oh, hahaha, I forgot to ping @LightningComplexFire ... I swear that wasn’t intentionally pointy! Pelagic ( messages ) – (23:42 Wed 30, AEDT) 12:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
LightningComplexFire, obviously we can't tell IRL, but by account creation date, the youngest active human (not bot) account is GeneralNotability, which was created on November 28th 2018. A list of admins sorted by tenure is available here. Giraffer (Merry·Christmas) 08:17, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nick Moyes and Pelagic: The sig doesn't mean you must ping me it just says I like it better than looking through my contributions --🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 (always ping me when replying) 14:36, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Well, LightningComplexFire: "always/must" is precisely how I read it, and I find it a quite presumptive of you. We all know to ping people when replying, so seeing this in your signature makes me not want to bother (which is why I intentionally didn't bother pinging you when you posted your later question here, and probably won't in future, either, when I see it) . You're welcome to keep it in your signature if you really wish to, but I suggest you do think about altering it so something a little less irritating to other users, as Pelagic suggested above. (But feel free to ignore my advice as being that of a grumpy old curmudgeon. I don't mind either way!) Nick Moyes (talk) 15:01, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

On editing phase

I am working on this one with sufficient citation. SO can you please give more time. Manishthapa1981 (talk) 15:07, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Rajendra Kumar Khetan Giraffer (talk·contribs) 15:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Manishthapa1981. It's not clear from your question what you're referring to, but all of your edits so far have been to Draft:Rajendra Kumar Khetan. You can continue working on that draft at your own pace if you like as long as you don't leave it unedited for six months or more. You can also submit your draft for another WP:AFC review whenever you think it's ready. Perhaps you should take a look at Wikipedia:Notability (people) because that explains the kinds of people generally considered to be good candidates to try and create Wikipedia articles about. -- Marchjuly (talk) 15:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Status: Declined, references added, resubmitted. Question to Manishthapa1981: Given that this is the only article you are editing - one you created - what, if any, is your connection to Rajendra? Is this a person you know personally? Are being paid or otherwise compensated for attempting to create this article? David notMD (talk) 16:31, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

How can I have outdated (factual) information corrected efficiently if am considered with a COI?

Dear Sir/Madam, I had a bit of a bad day :-) To make a long story short, some of my edits were reverted and a new page I created was deleted by one of your administrators because of an undeclared (according to him) COI, even though on my user page I did actually make a declaration.

Who am I? I work in simulation-based engineering for manufacturing industries since 20 years (as a professional engineer). About 8 years ago, Siemens Digital Industries Software became my employer, after acquiring the company I was working for (LMS International). Now (well actually since quite a while), I noticed that in this broader area (all that is related to mechanical engineering and related commercial software packages, finite elements, CFD, Digital Twins etc.) a lot of information is either incomplete, or outdated, or unbalanced. That is of course because this is an area that is currently evolving enormously fast, with the rise of IoT, smart products and more. But especially where Siemens products are mentioned, the current representation no longer reflects the reality. One of the reasons for that is probably that the Siemens offering for those applications is one that originates from numerous acquisitions of smaller companies, that no longer exist, but had (and still have) their own Wikipedia presence (along with their competitors). I am trying to correct that, but then I am perceived a 'paid advocate' who is here for promotional purposes, which is actually not the case.

Do you have any advise for me on how I can initiate such a cleaning operation? We came to a point that e.g. on pages where we are listed between competitors, all our products are mentioned with either an outdated name, or a wrong name, or referring to a page of a company that no longer exists. Even if Siemens is my employer, I don't think I am violating any neutrality principle by applying such kinds of corrections? I am probably even better placed than anyone else...

Also the new page I created, was intended to be a product description page that would include these corrections. I understand that this is in terms of COI more sensitive. But I am a bit disappointed that it has simply been deleted after all the work I have done, and all the effort to take a neutral tone of voice. I refrained from any type of qualitative statement, competitive benefits, or uniqueness claims or whatever, and made sure all the information was well referenced. I was very sure it was way more compliant than many other articles I have been reading (even some in the same field). And on top of that, I disclosed upfront that I potentially had a COI.

So I am a bit puzzled here (and demotivated). Can I get some advise?

Kind regards BartVanLierde (talk) 23:46, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi BartVanLierde. I do not have time right now to respond to you in any depth. I just wanted to clear something up. The page you are referring to, Simcenter, has not been deleted – "deleted" has a special meaning here, referring to removal entirely, including its page history, so it cannot be directly accessed nor easily reanimated. Given what you wrote on your talk page, that is actually what you (appear to) think is what happened. However the page has only been redirected (← read that link) and is entirely accessible Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Fuhghettaboutit, thanks! I already feel (a little bit) better now ;-). I look forward to your more extensive response. Kind regards, Bart — Preceding unsigned comment added by BartVanLierde (talk • contribs) 00:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello BartVanLierde. The best way for an editor with a conflict of interest to improve an article is to make an edit request on the article's talk page. Be sure to back up your proposed changes with references to reliable sources. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:22, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Cullen328 Thanks for your response. But what if you think a serious reorganization of content (in that specific area) is required to reflect today's reality? And what is the violation in terms of neutrality if I am not fundamentally changing descriptions, but rather actualizing names? I could probably source everything with press releases or articles on tech sites. But in the end, I am at the source... It's a bit of an awkward situation BartVanLierde (talk) 01:17, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
BartVanLierde, I do not know what you mean by "actualizing names". That sounds like corporate marketing jargon to me, and we want to keep that type of language out of the encyclopedia. I do not see what the awkward situation is. You have been advised to follow the standard procedures for editors with a COI. Wikipedia does not just reflect "today's reality". Our articles ought to summarize the entire history of the topic. The place for you to propose a serious reorganization of content is the talk page of the article in question. Editors without a COI can then decide whether or not to implement your changes. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:32, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

You tagged your User page with COI, but from your comments, is not WP:PAID the right way to go? David notMD (talk) 02:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi David notMD, well... that is honestly speaking a bit of a stretch, I think... I am having still a bit difficulties to understand the difference between working for an employer, and writing/editing about a related topic, and actually getting paid for making edits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BartVanLierde (talk • contribs) 16:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
BartVanLierde, the main difference is that if there is money involved (paid editing), people may have an incentive to produce more content and write it in a promotional way. However if you have a conflict-of-interest, i.e. being related to the subject of that article, you may write it promotionally, but generally you aren't going to try to. We try to separate the two (PAID vs COI) because it helps us determine whether (hypothetically) a user is indirectly changing the POV, or is being paid to. If you are being paid to edit, WP:PAID is the way. If you have a close connection to the subject, WP:COI is the correct template.
I'm not sure if it's a great explanation, but hopefully it helps. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 17:01, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Giraffer, yes that definitely helps, and also corresponds to my natural understanding. — Preceding unsigned comment added by BartVanLierde (talk • contribs) 17:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Logistics of getting permission to use an image on Wikipedia

Hi there. I'm not new to Wikipedia, but I honestly know nothing about using images beyond just using what's on Commons. I recently expanded the article 50th Wisconsin Infantry Regiment, and the Wisconsin Historical Society has an image of a soldier from this regiment. The 'rights and permissions' for the image reads, in part: "Use of the image requires written permission from the staff of the Collections Division. It may not be sold or redistributed, copied or distributed as a photograph, electronic file, or any other media."

What I'd like to know is if I were to contact them to grant written permission (I feel given the educational, preservationist nature of the society, they'd probably be willing to grant permission for educational purposes, though the wording "copied as an electronic file" makes me a bit hesitant), what would I ask to make sure I actually get the type of permission I need? "Hello, I'm such-and-such from Wikipedia. I would like to use your image of Michael Stutzman in the article '50th Wisconsin Infantry Regiment', and I was hoping I could get your written permission. It would only be used on this specific article unless otherwise permitted and would be attributed to the Wisconsin Historical Society with a link to your page containing the image." Moreover, say I do get adequate written permission: how would I go about using this image and crediting it properly on Wikipedia? Sorry if this isn't the place to ask; like I said, I'm very new to images.

Update: never mind with this particular instance, as there's a "permission fee". However, for future reference, how would I go about this? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 06:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Greetings, TheTechnician27, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you encounter a situation like this in the future, take a look at c:Commons:Email templates over at Wikimedia Commons. The easiest thing to do is to have the copyright holder use the interactive release generator there to upload the image themselves and provide the licensing information. CThomas3 (talk) 07:19, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi TheTechnician27. Wikipedia pretty much follows Wikipedia:Copyrights#Guidelines for images and other media files and c:Commons:Licensing when it comes to image licensing; in other words, the copyright holder's consent is, for the most part, needed for a copyrighted work to be uploaded to either when the file isn't considered to be within the public domain for some reason. So, the only types of "free licenses" that are basically accepted are those in which the copyright holder pretty much agrees to allow anyone anywhere in the world to download the file at any time and use for any purpose. Licenses that place any restrictions on commercial or derivative use, or which are "for educational use only" or "for Wikipedia use only", etc. types of licenses aren't going to be accepted. The big difference between Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons is that the former does allow certain types of copyrighted content to be uploaded as non-free content, while the latter doesn't accept any such content at all.
Regarding the image you've linked to above, you might want to ask about it at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright or at Wikipedia:Media copyright questions because it seems highly unlikely that an image of a Civil War soldier is still protected by copyright and the Wisconsin Historical Society is trying (like many others do) to claim copyright over an image when they can't really do so. (See also c:Commons:License laundering for other ways in which this is sometimes done.) Anyway, The WHS might be be under the misconception that the digitalization of the photo makes it a WP:Derivative work of some kind, but I think this would be a case of c:Commons:2D copying where a new copyright wasn't established because the new version is simply a slavish reproduction. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:25, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Marchjuly – Thanks. That's sort of what I was thinking too with the copyright, but I didn't know before if digitizing an image could constitute some sort of renewed copyright for that digital copy. At any rate, I'll ask over at the village pump and see what they have to say, since I think you're right here about it being public domain. Moreover, I already contacted the MHS to inquire about the image, so I might wait to hear back before trying to do anything with the image, just to see how it pans out. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 07:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
TheTechnician27, You might want to look at COM:PDARTREUSE for your first point. Zoozaz1 talk 17:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Zoozaz1 Thanks for the resource; I took a look through the sections pertaining to US law. As it turns out, Marchjuly was right on the money, as the email I received back states: "You are not able to use this image without permission and payment," meaning they're ostensibly trying to claim works that are in the public domain. With that, I'll head over to the village pump and ask. On the one hand, the image wouldn't have been online had they not uploaded it, and non-profit historical societies provide really valuable resources, so I don't feel great about it, but on the other hand, I'd feel bad sacrificing the quality of the project over what essentially seems like license laundering of a public domain image. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 17:58, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

BLPCRIME?

There's this guy Nithyananda. He's an Indian godman. He fled India last year after accusations of abduction. Was the lead that I wrote justified? Or is the current lead better? Here's the current lead, which is a manual revert of the lead I added: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Nithyananda&diff=997242197&oldid=997239282&diffmode=source. The reason cited for the manual revert was BLPCRIME...

Please ping when replying. Thanks in advance. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI converse | fings wot i hav dun 17:35, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

 102.123.161.246 (talk) 17:55, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

It seems there is extensive discussion of this and similar issues on the talk Page of that article and that's probably the best place to air your concerns. Wilhelm Tell DCCXLVI. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:12, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

adding content

Why doesn't the editing screen view flow as the article is seen on wiki, how am I suppose to know where to add information and where to add source? Wheatandtares (talk) 17:26, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Wheatandtares, WP:TUTORIAL may help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Wheatandtares, if you're not already, you may be interested in using the visual editor (VE). Go to your Preferences, navigate to the Editing tab, and make sure that "Temporarily disable visual editor while it is in beta" is unchecked. That should change the editor to VE when you click "Edit". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 19:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

popples

Can i have a ciatation there ever was a live action popples pilot by Shelly Duvall Please? 2601:1C0:CF01:C720:20BD:FD60:1560:CD94 (talk) 18:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

This page is for how to use or edit Wikipedia. General questions like yours can be asked at WP:RDE. RudolfRed (talk) 19:00, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Referencing query

Two questions:

1. I'm adding references from the 6th and 9th centuries to an article. Should these be referenced as the author, or the translator/editor?

2. One of my sources was organised into numbered sections (in the 9th century), but the only translation I can find doesn't have the section numbers (ie, it just has the translated text, with breaks that don't always correspond to the sections). I've managed to put a number to most of these sections by looking at a commentary from 1980. I'm citing the translation, but if I add the (deduced) section numbers, no-one accessing the source will see these numbers (because they're not there). If this makes any sense, I'd be grateful if someone could advise on the way forward.

ThanksMaryanne Cunningham (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC) Maryanne Cunningham (talk) 15:53, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Maryanne Cunningham, to answer your question best, it'd be helpful to know what type of editor you use (source editor or VisualEditor?) and what reference format you're using in the article (i.e. are you using {{Cite book}} and similar?).
For your first question, there are parameters for listing the translator separate from the author, and ideally you should use those; the documentation (if you're using citation style 1, which you probably are) is at Template:Citation#Authors.
For your second question, you can use |at= to specify an in-source location that is not a page number; see documentation here. But unless you're trying to bring a page to featured status, I wouldn't really worry about it (or the translator/editor distinction) overly much. The most important role of references is to support verifiability by enabling someone who wants to go to the source of a piece of information to do so. So long as your references allow that, getting the formatting perfect is a much more minor concern. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

WikiProject:Games

WP:Games; what is up with it? Hey all! Is WP:Games dead? Education-over-easy (talk) 20:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Education-over-easy, it does appear to be inactive. If you're looking for a similar WikiProject, you may be interested in WP:VIDEOGAMES. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 20:57, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Comment from LauraWilks

 Courtesy link: Gracey (singer)

WHY ALL MY EDITS ON GRACEY (SINGER) HAVE BEEN DELETED??????? LauraWilks (talk) 11:04, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

LauraWilks, welcome to the teahouse! Looking at the page, your edits were reverted here by Victor Schmidt, who added the comment unsourced: What are those 24 attempts meant to be? Victor may be able to explain his rationale further, and you may have more luck getting your edits to stick if you follow the advice at Help:Introduction to referencing with VisualEditor. For now, they are recorded in the page history. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 11:36, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
None of the edits were sourced and then there was this (self-reverted in the next edit. I understand that editing is not easy, however, Wikipedia is not interested in a rerun of the Seigenthaler incident- Please make sure that you cite your sources and use the page preview, if you are not using the visual editor. Also, please dont write IN ALL CAPS. It is considered shouting, is harder to read and will not help your cause.Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:47, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Also worth noting that LauraWilks's, edits removed categories and templates from the article - which is something that you should avoid doing without good cause. Removing anything (without a reason for doing so) is pretty much always considered disruptive. --Paul ❬talk❭ 11:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Laura, don't be discouraged: you’ll get on top of the editing technicalities. Like Victor, I recommend liberal use of Preview while you work.
However, when adding facts about living people, we really need to include supporting references. It might be true, but I couldn’t find a good source saying that her middle name is Elizabeth, for example. Pelagic ( messages ) – (08:30 Thu 31, AEDT) 21:30, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Question from Timofeib

How to get started with Wikipedia code How can I learn the code for wikipedia? Is it already written in something like html, or is different? Is there a page for it? Thank you. As you can see I don't fare well with formatting. Timofeib (talk) 21:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Timofeib, and welcome to the Teahouse. You don't need html for most things, just simple Wikimarkup: there is a CHEATSHEET, but I recommend working through The Wikipedia Adventure to learn not just the mechanics of editing, but how Wikipedia works. --ColinFine (talk) 22:13, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Future copyright/publishing questions for future works re Wikipedia contributions made today

The article about my profession is a mess. If I fix it, and later write a book on the subject, it's inevitable I would repeat myself here and there. Would there be copyright issues or concerns from a future publisher? Dogsgopher (talk) 17:16, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

If you edit Wikipedia, and then use the same content in a book, Wikipedia won't mind, you will have granted the user of the material to anyone for use in any way so long as they acknowledge the source. Your future publisher may mind. I would expect them not to care, as (I assume) what you write for them will contain plenty of new content as well as what you've donated to Wikipedia, and no-one's going to think "I won't buy this book, as I can read a portion of its content for free on Wikipedia". But some companies are unreasonably fussy about IP issues. Maproom (talk) 17:59, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
(ec) Everything published in Wikipedia is subject to a Creative Commons license, (CC BY-SA 3.0) as seen below the edit window when an editor "publishes" their edit. The terms of this license means the material may be used later by anyone, provided that Wikipedia is acknowledged and that the license of the new work is no more restrictive. What that would mean for a book would depend how much had been lifted straight from Wikipedia's articles. Note that there are cases where authors have not attributed their subsequent copying to Wikipedia, as currently being discussed at WT:WikiProject_Chemistry#Plagiarism_in_Elsevier_book. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:06, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, @Dogsgopher, this is a dilemma I’ve had with photography instead of writing. What if I wanted to use the picture elsewhere under my real name? Would I be outing myself? If I put it someplace as NC-ND, but it's already here as BY-SA? Release now pseudonymously under a generous license, or hold on to it "just in case, maybe some day"?
Fiction authors will often change pseudonyms to separate their early work from their more mature work. They may also republish early works under their later, more famous name (Stephen King comes to mind). But you can’t have both a separation and a continuity of credit. Either you say "this other person is also me" or you cite the other as if they are a completely different person. Though when citing Wikipedia, you credit "Wikipedia editors" not "Soandso on Wikipedia".
Perhaps this might be a case where an alternate account could be justified, to separate your edit history on a specific topic from other topics. Wikipedia:VALIDALT doesn’t explicitly mention that use case. If you only write about Music Therapy and never make forays into, say, Pokémon or Middle Eastern politics, then there may be no need.
— Pelagic ( messages ) – (10:39 Thu 31, AEDT) 23:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Before it gets archived

Can someone reply here Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards#New topic barnstar before it gets archived? I don't have a good editing software to make my own barnstar. --🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 22:17, 30 December 2020 (UTC) 🔥LightningComplexFire🔥 22:17, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@LightningComplexFire: Because you took on board my earlier suggestion about your signature, I've replied there with a rough suggestion for you to develop. And I note that a helpful IP editor has further improved it for you. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:15, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Text Layer on svg images being changed by wikipedia

Text on svg images I have created are being edited once shown on the page. I see the font hs changed, and that seems to be it. Not sure why, and is there anything I can do to stop this? I wasn't expecting it, and due to this, once I uploaded the file, it looked all messed up. I'll show the file if you need it, but I bet this has happened to a lot of people, so there's probably an easy explanation Xiphactinus A (talk) 03:44, 28 December 2020 (UTC)

@Xiphactinus A: Please provide an example. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:58, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
@Xiphactinus A: there are some issues around fonts used in SVG images, and it depends on how the file was saved – with fonts set to use the system default, with just the name of the font and the font expected to be present elsewhere, with full outlines (but some fonts are copyright and should not be exported in this way), etc. So as AlanM1 says we need to see an example. It's not specifically due to Wikipedia. Peter coxhead (talk) 07:18, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
@Peter coxhead: this vs. this — Preceding unsigned comment added by Xiphactinus A (talk • contribs) 19:56, 28 December 2020 (UTC)
@Xiphactinus A: I took a look at the raw .svg file after download from Commons. It uses "font family = Serif" for the text, so I guess that means that it gets rendered with some arbitrary Serif font that may be different when seen in your browser and via Wikipedia. You could probably redo the file with a specific font supported by Wikipedia. You can seek out more specialist help at WP:SVG_help. They have helped me in the past. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:33, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
@Michael D. Turnball: well thanks for that. Xiphactinus A (talk) 18:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
(Pinging Michael D. Turnbull) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Writing an article about myself

 Dr Prasun Chatterjee (talk) 06:49, 29 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Dr Prasun Chatterjee please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for some valuable advice. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 07:56, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Dr Prasun Chatterjee: Please see your talk page (User talk:Dr Prasun Chatterjee), where messages have been left about your draft being declined three times, primarily for the same reason – that the references you have provided are not sufficient to demonstrate notability, which is required in order for there to be a Wikipedia article about you. Of the many billions of people that have existed in the history of the world, a very small percentage are notable enough to have an article in this encyclopedia. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:27, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@AlanM1: Apparently about 107 Billion!--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:30, 29 December 2020 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: Thanks for that. Interesting read. So if we have a million bio articles, that's 0.001% (10 notable people per million). —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 00:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

wss directory

The question has been asked elsewhete and the user knows that this is not the place for it. --bonadea contributions talk 00:20, 31 December 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.

Does anyone know what wss means in the url https://www.apple.com/wss/fonts?families=SF+Pro,v3%7CSF+Pro+Icons,v3 ? 88.130.61.101 (talk) 23:52, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

You also asked this at WP:RDC, which is the right place for it. RudolfRed (talk) 00:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
yes but I'm not patient 88.130.61.101 (talk) 00:15, 31 December 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.

(ec) Much as I am loath to reward impatience, I answered at the reference desk. At least IP is open about their motivation! Pelagic ( messages ) – (11:34 Thu 31, AEDT) 00:34, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Photo displayed below references

For Madison-Ridgeland_Academy, the photo is part of the Facilities section, but is displayed below the References section? Is this due to a syntax error? — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 23:20, 30 December 2020 (UTC)  — BillHPike (talk, contribs) 23:20, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

BillHPike, it seems to insist of displaying the picture below the end of the rather long infobox. I can't figure out why it does that or how to tell it not to. I've moved the picture to inside the infobox, but I'm aware that that's not what you asked for, so please undo my edit if you don't think it's an improvement. Maproom (talk) 23:42, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Comment: using Timeless skin on a tablet, the article looks fine in portrait orientation (all boxes and images are forced to full-width), but turn the tablet sideways to landscape and there is all kinds of weird stuff happening with the references overlapping the Athletics table. Suggest removing the float:right from that table. In "legacy Vector", refs overlap the infobox also. Anyone know how to put a clear:all type element before a section heading? Not sure why the campus photo, when floated left, wants to clear the infobox but not the table. Pelagic ( messages ) – (11:04 Thu 31, AEDT) 00:04, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Found {{clear}} per help:Pictures#Forcing a break. That still doesn’t fix the image being pushed below the bottom of the infobox, though. Pelagic ( messages ) – (11:17 Thu 31, AEDT) 00:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Pelagic and BillHPike, it looks like the photos have been removed as WP:COPYVIOs, but to answer your question, the template you were looking for is likely {{stack}}, which can help resolve the WP:MFOP issue you were facing.
Regarding the images, courtesy pinging TuckerTVG, the original uploader: you probably can't do anything to get the aerial photo back unless you can establish that it has a free license, but you can restore the seal and wordmark by uploading them as fair use. Go to WP:File Upload Wizard, and actually follow the instructions this time instead of just adding an incorrect license and hoping we won't delete. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:57, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

revive old conversation?

What is the best way to revive an "old" conversation (ie, from last week)?

Some people replied to my original question, but I did not have a chance to respond. Now that I go to respond, I see that I cannot. Dw861 (talk) 05:07, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Dw861, I'm assuming that by you being unable to respond, you mean that the conversation has since been archived. You can start a new conversation and reference the old one by wikilinking to it. If there is anything you want to quote in particular, there are templates like {{tq}} to facilitate doing that. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 05:45, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
@Dw861: In this case, you'll want to create a new section entitled something like "Followup to new article pointers" and start with something like "At [[Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1088#new article pointers]], I asked blah and {{U|SomeUser}} replied {{Tq|something SomeUser wrote}}. I think blah.". By using the {{U}} template to refer to the user, they will receive a notification pointing to the new section. I found that link to the archived section by using the archive search box below the table of contents starting near the top of the right side of this page. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you to both Tenryuu 🐲 and AlanM1. This is such a complicated system, I've been finding it exhausting trying to get anything accomplished. One small step at a time... Dw861 (talk) 03:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Deletion

How do I nominate a draft article for deletion? Cwater1 (talk) 03:37, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, Cwater1. Please read Wikipedia:Deletion policy for all the details. It is always a good idea to provide some details for context. Which draft? For what reason? If you are the only substantive contributor to the draft, then WP:G7 is the process that results in deletion very quickly. If it is someone else's draft, the process is a bit more complex. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Followup to "new article pointers"

Courtesy link: Terry A. Simmons

At Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1088#new article pointers, I asked the speedy deletion of my draft and Tenryuu suggested that I use a draftspace to begin composing new articles. I just wanted to thank you for this tip.

Victor Schmidt also provided some pointers. Thank you. I'm not sure that I understood all aspects, but I will go back to them in time.

Cullen328 wrote that they have been creating and expanding biographies of Sierra Club leaders and have done quite a bit of work on these articles over the years. I joined the Sierra Club in 1976. After reading this article, I am unsure this person is notable. The references are very poorly formatted and it is difficult for me to zero in on the sources that devote the type of significant biographical coverage that would clearly establish notability..

Sorry about the poor reference formatting. Those initial references were done by somebody else. The same user who marked the article for instant deletion. In any event, I don't know what the wikipedia defn of "notable" is, but Terry A. Simmons founded the local BC instance of the Sierra Club. Perhaps he was more notable as participating in the early days of Greenpeace.

For both Sdkb and Cullen328, who asked for three references, here are a few:

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/book-sierra-club-history-1.5287779

Simmons is listed here as being on the first voyage of the "Phyllis Cormack", or "Greenpeace". You will have to press "more" to see this content, partway down the page. https://www.cbc.ca/archives/entry/the-birth-of-greenpeace

Finally, here is a Greenpeace photo of Simmons on that voyage. https://media.greenpeace.org/asset-management/27MZIFLBTOGB?FR_=1&W=1280&H=868

Dw861 (talk) 05:42, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Dw861, it looks like after our comments on the 23rd, a reviewer marked the page as patrolled (you would've gotten a notification), so your original concern about the page appearing on Google should be remedied.
Regarding notability, our general standard is at WP:GNG. Of those three sources, I'm not sure any of those would count, since the first two are just passing mentions, not significant coverage, and the last one is not a secondary source since it comes from Greenpeace. From the first article, though, I'd assume that the book Passion and Persistence: Fifty Years of the Sierra Club in British Columbia would count, and the reviewer must have found a second qualifying source since they marked the page as patrolled.
Feel free to let us know if you have any further questions, and best of luck with your editing! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 05:56, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Dw861. The first CBC coverage mentions Simmons only briefly without detail about Simmons. The second CBC source is a passing mention of Simmons in a list. What is needed is significant coverage of Simmons, such as detailed articles describing where and when be was born, his education, his other employment, why he became an activist, his personal life such as a spouse or children and so on. Not all these boxes need to be checked but I am trying to indicate the type of coverage that counts as "significant". As for "Passion and Persistence: Fifty Years of the Sierra Club in British Columbia", that is a book written by a longtime Sierra Club activist. It may be useful in some ways but is not independent for the purposes of establishing the notability of Sierra Club leaders. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:24, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
As for how Wikipedia determines the notability of a person, please read and study Wikipedia:Notability (people). Read all of it. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Also worth noting is that the article Greenpeace has a lot of content about the very early days of that group's early history about 50 years ago in British Columbia. Many founders and early activists are mentioned, but not Simmons. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 06:37, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Improve Submission

I would like help improving my submission. I am not sure how to write my biography in a way that meets the expectations for Wikipedia. I had a professional writer write my first draft which was declined. Tips would be helpful. Thanks. Juliuskissinger (talk) 21:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Juliuskissinger Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Please keep in mind that while not forbidden, writing an autobiography is strongly discouraged on Wikipedia per the autobiography policy. This is in part because people naturally write favorably about themselves. It is also hard for people to write in an encyclopedic style about themselves. To succeed in writing a Wikipedia article about yourself, you in essence need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about you, showing how you meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. This is extremely difficult to do; I have never seen it done in my years here, though it is technically possible. If you truly meet the definition of a notable person and have the sources to support it, eventually an independent editor will take note of your life and choose to write about you. That's how most articles are written.
Please keep in mind that Wikipedia is not like social media, and as such a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable; any article about you would not be under your exclusive control; you could not prevent others from editing it, or lock the text to what you might want to say about yourself. Any information about you, good or bad, can be in an article about you as long as it appears in an independent reliable sources and is not defamatory. See this page for more information. 331dot (talk) 21:21, 30 December 2020 (UTC)


Are there tips to getting a biography approved with notable published sources? Juliuskissinger (talk) 21:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Please don't start a new section, Julius Kissinger, but edit the existing section to add more comments or questions. I have removed the new header. You basically had your answer just above, but to spell it out: Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. You need to find sources of that nature, then forget everything you know about yourself, and write a draft entirely based on what those sources say. --ColinFine (talk) 22:09, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Repinging Juliuskissinger. --ColinFine (talk) 22:10, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi, Juliuskissinger, you would need published sources to support statements about Julius Kissinger's medical conditions, sexual orientation, etc. You might know first-hand, but imagine if someone rocked up here pretending to be you and wrote a hatchet-piece? Pelagic ( messages ) – (09:31 Thu 31, AEDT) 22:31, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Restored two AfC Declines and AfC Comments that JK had removed from Draft:Julius Kissinger. Even if an editor believes the reasons for a Decline have been addressed, the Decline must remain as part of the history of the draft. David notMD (talk) 10:03, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Refrences and editing

So for sometime I am having problems with articles I mean about references. I change or remove an incorrect line from an article with providing the source but it gets removes eventually. What is my mistake? Jeanvaljean039 (talk) 08:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Jeanvaljean039: Welcome to the Teahouse. Are you saying that you're removing what you believe to be incorrect information from a cited sentence or that you're removing the information and have a source to back up that removal? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 08:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

At Rixos Hotels, which appears to be the article in question, you are in an edit war. Wikipedia advises "BRD," meaning be Bold in making changes, but if Reverted, go to the Talk page to discuss. The proper step is to start a discussion on the Talk page, providing supporting references there rather than in your Edit summaries. You can invite the editors who reverted you to the discussion. Ideally, a consensus can be reached, and the article amended without further debate. David notMD (talk) 10:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

I'm blocked? Seemingly not

Hey all, hope a Teahouse host asking on Teahouse isn't weird! Anyways, I was tryna archive references at an article, but it failed because "you were blocked from editing." I tried editing an article to see if I am, but it is publishable. There's also no notifs on my Talk. Is this a common error or what? GeraldWL 16:15, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

@Gerald Waldo Luis: - Nothing on your block log, nothing on filter log. Probably just an isolated incident? Pahunkat (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Pahunkat, I tried the auto-archive again, and it still claims I'm blocked. Maybe it's just an error, or an isolated incident like you said. But gosh, so f*king scary to got a block news. GeraldWL 16:29, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerald Waldo Luis, wait a sec - check the URL you were trying to add. Can you add it elsewhere? Maybe on this thread? I just remembered that yesterday I was trying to add an external link for an article idea but my edit was disallowed by a filter, but there's also nothing in my log about it. Pahunkat (talk) 16:39, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Pahunkat, sure: I was tryna archive https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/See_You_in_the_Cosmos using https://iabot.toolforge.org/index.php?page=runbotsingle GeraldWL 16:40, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
@Gerald Waldo Luis: I've been startled by 'you're blocked' messages whilst using an anonymising browser like Puffin Browser or Opera, but this sounds like a matter to query at WP:VPT, as sounds like a specific toolforge issue. There's nothing very recent in your abuse log, though you do appear to been trying to add quite a few YouTube links which got caught. But I've done that kind of thing, too. So nothing to worry about on that score. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:02, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerald Waldo Luis, I've had this issue before. Don't worry, it fixes itself and you should be able to archive again eventually. Le Panini [🥪] 18:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Gerald Waldo Luis, this is very likely an issue with the Toolforge application. My guess would be that it tried to do some action as part of the archiving, encountered an error and failed, and wrongly concluded from the fact that it failed that you must be blocked. I'd contact the developers if you can find where to do so, or open a VPT thread to let the folks there sleuth it out if not. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Sdkb, Le Panini, Nick Moyes, thanks all! I'll start a VPT thread if I have the time to. Happy New Year for y'all! GeraldWL 07:11, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
I just got the same message... Definitely something going on here. Pahunkat (talk) 11:12, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Improper AfD

Not something I've done myself, but looking at Yayuan Liu the process for nominating an article for AfD doesn't seem to have been followed, and I wasn't sure what should be done about it. Kj cheetham (talk) 11:43, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Kj cheetham, I've fixed the AfD page. Best. ─ The Aafī (talk) 11:47, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
TheAafi Thank you! -Kj cheetham (talk) 11:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Changing username

I wanna change my username to Aidb, but I dont know how to do it.Can any of you suggest me? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Actina (talk • contribs) 08:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Actina, welcome to the Teahouse. Special:CentralAuth/Aidb shows the name is taken but has no edits. You can try requesting a usurpation at meta:Steward requests/Username changes. It may take a while. meta:Steward requests/Username changes#Requests involving merges, usurps or other complications says: "Per standard procedure, accounts with valid edits are not usurped, and the target account must be notified by renamer at least one month before usurpation". PrimeHunter (talk) 08:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Actina Consider Aidb-1 or Aidb-X, etc. David notMD (talk) 13:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@Actina: Assuming that you are not dead set on trying to 'usurp' the name Aidb as explained above, I would advise you simply to just abandon your account and create a new one, never editing with the old name again. You have only made 2 edits under this account name, and it's simply not worth asking an admin making the necessary changes. Just create a new account of your choice. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

I recently found an article that was listed at WP:CP whose problems hadn't been resolved in almost two months, and whose entire content was a copyvio notice, and I tagged it for G12 speedy deletion. I came here to ask if I should've done that (the article was Report on the Holy See’s institutional knowledge and decision-making process related to former Cardinal Theodore Edgar McCarrick (from 1930 to 2017)). JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 01:03, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

JJPMaster, when you see a copyvio notice like that it means that there was come copyvio in the article however some parts of it may be salvageable. As a result, I think G12 will probably be declined. Pahunkat (talk) 15:47, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Two articles

There are two articles about the same person, Draft:Ishu yadav and Draft:Shivam Yadav. Is this allowed? Happy New Year! Vamsi20 (talk) 15:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Vamsi20, given that these are drafts rather than articles it isn't too much of an issue. Both have been tagged for G11 anyway. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 15:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Yes, but will this result in a block for the person who did this?

Vamsi20 (talk) 16:00, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Maybe a warning. Both created by same person, one months ago, one recently. Now, both declined and both up for Speedy. A look at the User page of the creating editor suggests writing about self. In the best of possible worlds, the editor may decide to become a useful contributor by editing existing articles. However, the more common path for thwarted autobiographers is that they abandon their accounts. David notMD (talk) 16:07, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@Vamsi20: it is not unusual for new users to create several drafts about the same topic, because they don't know that a title can redirect (so they think they have to make sure that the topic can be found under several relevant headings). That is not a blocking offense as long as it is done in good faith, and probably not even if it isn't. If a user systematically creates lots of identical draft pages after they have been asked to stop, it might become disruptive, but one isolated incident is not that. --bonadea contributions talk 16:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Google indexing

How do you index an article on Wikipedia or how long does it take for Google to index them? I've noticed on some new articles, they do not show up in Google right away. I was going to ask on my main account but I'm in the process of recovering my email address. Thank you! 2600:1702:D70:19F0:213A:D1C9:6C6A:484B (talk) 00:16, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi! All new pages go through a review process; see WP:NPP. It can sometimes take a few weeks or longer, and during that the time, the page will not be indexed by Google. I hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello IP editor. In most cases, new articles are automatically given a Noindex tag, which is hidden and cannot be removed by ordinary editors. In due time, the article is reviewed by the New Pages Patrol as described above, and if there are no glaring errors, the noindex tag is removed and Google quickly indexes the article and adds it to relevant search results. Some trusted editors with a long record of creating good, problem-free articles have a user right called Autopatrolled, and their newly created articles do not get the noindex tag. I have this user right and have often seen the impact. I add a new article to the encyclopedia, continue Google searching to inprove the article, and see my own new article show up as the #1 or #2 Google search result within a minute or two. That indicates how powerful the Google search engine really is, and the high value that Google assigns to well written Wikipedia articles. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 03:16, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@Sdkb and Cullen328: thank you so much for the information! This makes sense. 2600:1702:D70:19F0:213A:D1C9:6C6A:484B (talk) 17:04, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

uploading images to wiki commons

It has been awhile since I've uploaded an image to Wikimedia Commons. I received permission by email from the copyright holder of the photograph. When I try to upload using the "Upload Wizard" it asks for the proper copyright code. Not sure what this is in this case...

NEVER MIND! RESOLVED ISSUE! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Elladeer (talk • contribs) 17:34, 31 December 2020 (UTC) thanks! Ella Dawn 17:25, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Modifying tables

Hi everybody, i've some problems in modifying tables layout Fogna23 (talk) 16:22, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Fogna23: See Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup or Help:Introduction to tables with VisualEditor, depending on which you use. For simple tables, VisualEditor is often a lot easier. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 17:50, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Thegooduser

User:Thegooduser is a nonexistent user, but the Teahouse still lists him as a host. Is Thegooduser a real user, or nonexistent, or did he have an account and remove everything? Vamsi20 (talk) 16:05, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Vamsi20: Looks like they've been renamed. Either Oshwah (see where edit notice leads) or つがる. I'll have to follow up on this one, unless an older host knows who this is. Pahunkat (talk) 16:13, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@Pahunkat: he got renamed to User:つがる. Probbably someone needs to update the host list... 16:16, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@Vamsi20: fix ping. Victor Schmidt (talk) 16:17, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
It's his page notice template that's causing the confusion. He copied mine, but forgot to update the wikilink where you click to send a message. It's pointing to my user talk page, not his. :-) ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 17:53, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Unrelated to about Wikipedia editing, but...

Unfortunately I can only photograph a crap, but sharing it to you anyways. Time to come-true my dream in 2019 which I made firm of in 2018 which I started making in 2017 which I planned in 2016 which I had an idea of in 2015. GeraldWL 17:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Adding Notable graduates

How to link an existing person’s page to “notable Graduates” of a school Nolegaleagle (talk) 17:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Nolegaleagle Hello and welcome. If this refers to the edit you attempted to make at Sir Francis Drake High School, it appeared that the individual did not have a Wikipedia article yet. If they do, perhaps you typed the article title incorrectly. If they don't, the article needs to be created first, to ensure that the person meets notability standards, in this case, those of a notable soccer player. 331dot (talk) 17:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Nolegaleagle: There are two ways you can do that. You can add [[Category: Alumni of Hogwarts]] to their page, which will add them to the category, and you can edit List of Hogwarts alumni to add them to the list there. As anywhere, a reference is preferred. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 17:47, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@Nolegaleagle: You used a right single quotation mark in "Fiona O’Sullivan" so your link didn't work and was reverted. It's Fiona O'Sullivan with an apostrophe per Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Apostrophes. I have added her in [7]. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:05, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Expand template

Is there another template to use for requesting an article expansion aside from that small expand template? Mejorasi723 (talk) 18:22, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Mejorasi723: {{missing information}}, {{content}}, {{expand language}}, all of which are for specific expansions. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

What does "arbitrary section break" mean?

I often see that, in long discussions, there is always an "arbitrary section break", but I wanted to ask why do these exist and what do they do? JJP...MASTER![talk to] JJP... master? 18:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

It is to make long discussions more readable. RudolfRed (talk) 18:54, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@JJPMaster: See more at WP:arbitrary section break. You can often find information about Wikipedia by adding WP: in front of a search. This searches the Wikipedia:Project namespace. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:06, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Ebuka innocent

Ebuka innocent Lawrence known by his stage Name Clevee. clevee is born in Port Harcourt on May 12. he is a comedian and a singer he attend his secondary school in the village in abia state aba his also a business man he learn how to blog from his elder brother chinagorom bright A.K.A Nagornet.

 Clevee (talk) 19:28, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Clevee, did you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 19:31, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Censorship.

You removed Chris Martensons page. I will frame this as a question... If you engage in this kind of censorship,why should I ever give money to Wikipedia again. No really, answer me! 72.19.63.59 (talk) 19:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

(Non-administrator comment) I shall do my best. First of all, just who the hell is Chris Martenson and why would he or she be notable?   Aloha27  talk  19:52, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Donations do not determine content. The reasons for deletion are shown at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Christopher_Martenson. If you want to create an article on this person, you can follow the guidance at WP:YFA, but you will need to show the person is notable as explained at WP:N RudolfRed (talk) 20:14, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for apparently donating in the past. I'm not going to tell you how to spend your money. There are six million articles in the English Wikipedia, there are around 300 other language editions of Wikipedia, and donations go to the Wikimedia Foundation which also runs many other wikis. Everybody can find things they like and dislike. Chris Martenson was a redirect to Christopher Martenson which was deleted after discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Christopher Martenson. Wikipedia discussions can sound cryptic but editors didn't think he satisfied WP:GNG, WP:NPROF, WP:SIGCOV or WP:AUTHOR. Click the links to learn more. A smaller recreation with fewer references was deleted later. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Nailea Devora

Hi there! I'm pretty familiar with Wikipedia's notability guidelines but I wasn't sure about this creator - Nailea Devora. She has over 5M followers across platforms and collaborates frequently with creators such as Larray, Charli D'Amelio, and James Charles. The only press she's really gotten to date though has been a quote in the NY Times. I assume she's not notable enough for an article, but just figured I'd check in since WP:GNG's requirements are updated sometimes and can also be a bit broad for interpretation. Thank you. Grimothy29 (talk) 17:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC) Grimothy29 (talk) 17:33, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi Grimothy29, I tend to agree with your presumption. My search also turned up little besides that quote, and I don't see any specific notability guideline that she meets. Alyo (chat·edits) 20:51, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Concern

Hello guys, I think this article Draft:AB & David Africa is notable enough. 154.160.20.185 (talk) 21:36, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

If you think it's notable enough, insert {{subst:submit}} at the top of the draft to let reviewers know it's ready to be reviewed. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 21:49, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
I recommend deleting the list of "Notable" employees, as the reference is the law firm's website. David notMD (talk) 22:48, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

learning

Hi How can I learn the right way to work on Wikipedia? Hogo-2020 (talk) 21:55, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Hogo-2020, and welcome to the Teahouse! Whilst you could read all our guidelines individually, a better place to start is the wikipedia adventure. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 21:58, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
There isn't really a right or a wrong way! No-one knows everything here, and everyone learns things in a different order. But I agree with the above in that, I would reccomend The Wikipedia Adventure as a good place to learn some basics on how Wikipedia works. Regards, Giraffer (talk·contribs) 22:48, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Kelly Loeleffler Wikipedia page info

Her present add on TV (12/30/20) shows her with a leg brace and than with an eye patch. Her Wikipedia page under early childhood does not list anything about these "problems". Do you have any varifiable info on this? 2601:100:817F:2A70:2DB2:3EA9:E6AB:A0A2 (talk) 23:18, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

There is no article for Kelly Loeleffler, but there is one on Kelly Loeffler. Maybe no one's found any reliable sources that talk about her childhood in respect to those incidents? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 23:31, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
I found an 8 year old article in Atlanta magazine about Loeffler as a WNBA team owner. The article mentions the leg braces and eye patch. Here it is. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

How can i create wiki group or join some others group?

Please im new here and iam very eager to learn how to create an articles , how to create wiki group as well as how to join some group . Your help will make a great change — Preceding unsigned comment added by Thijin William Deng (talk • contribs) 00:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@Thijin William Deng: Welcome to Wikipedia. Since you are new, I suggest not trying to create a new project, but instead find existing projects that fit with your interests. Usually to join a project, you need to only add your name to the member's list. For example if you are interested in grammar fixes, then you can add your name to Wikipedia:WikiProject_Grammar, and then look at that project's task or todo list to find things to work on. RudolfRed (talk) 00:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) @Thijin William Deng: Welcome to the Teahouse. "Wiki groups" are referred to as WikiProjects, and they cover subjects of interest, such as video games, the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, or even copyediting articles. There are generally pages on those groups where you can add your name to let people know you are a member. If you're thinking about starting a WikiProject, you will want to read this link.
As a new editor, I strongly recommend you take some time to learn how Wikipedia works (The Wikipedia Adventure is a nice tutorial) before creating your first article, as it's one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia; more information can be found at WP:YFA. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 00:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Editing

I am trying to edit but my device keep saying that there is an error what must I do Alisha rains (talk) 23:19, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Alisha rains, welcome to the Teahouse. What kind of error are you getting? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 23:27, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Alisha rains. The best place for this question is Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). Please provide much more complete information about your device and the error message you received. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
@Alisha rains: Please just post the details here to start with. Then we can say whether it belongs elsewhere. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:49, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

It say that I can't edit the article because some one has already edited itAlisha rains (talk) 00:04, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Review my Draft.

Hi there!!! I have created a draft in my sandbox. Please do view that and suggest me if anything needs to be done to get it reviewed.It has not been submitted for review, but please do check if it qualifies for a Wikipedia article. George Maverick (talk) 02:21, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

George Maverick You have created User:George Maverick/sandbox about a company in Israel. Although you were blocked for copyright infringement based on an earlier attempt (paid) to create an article, and were only unblocked after a commitment to avoid copyright infringement in the future, much of the content in this draft is copied or closely paraphrased from one of your references. The other references are to existing Wikipedia articles, a practice not allowed. I strongly recommend you delete everything, then either start over, in your own words, or else ask that the content-deleted draft be itself deleted. David notMD (talk) 03:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Sir... I will do the same. — Preceding unsigned comment added by George Maverick (talk • contribs) 03:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Prurigo nodularis

Edditing. Im trying to get a message out about a "Disease" called Nodular Prurigo. Someone keeps telling me I'm wrong and deleting it...can you help? Nicklinnear (talk) 02:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

No. You have been attempting for more than two months to add unsourced claims that contradict the cited sources in the article. Unless you have reliable sources to support your claims (see WP:RS) it will not go in, regardless of who adds it. Meters (talk) 02:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
No. The content you want to add about salt can only be added if you can at the same time provide reliable references to support that statement. Without that, what you add will always be reverted, and as warned on your Talk page, you will be blocked. David notMD (talk) 02:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Additionally, get a message out about a "Disease" is not what Wikipedia is here for. Please see WP:NOT. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:06, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
What you are doing is rather dangerous. Although people should not be using Wikipedia for medical advice, misinformation like that in medical articles can at times cause those foolish enough to use Wikipedia directly for it to follow such anecdotal claims. Nonsense home remedies like you've been trying to add may actively harm if followed, and at other times, cause someone to opt to do something with no medical efficacy instead of following evidence-based medical treatments that do have medical efficacy. I considered blocking your account immediately for that reason, but I see you have a final warning on the issue. Anyway, don't do this again.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:34, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Help with sandbox article

 Courtesy link: User:Blacephalon/sandbox

I want to do an article on Sirfetch'd, but I don't know what i'm doing. Can someone help? UB Blacephalon (talk) 21:51, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Hi, @Blacephalon. The long-standing convention here is that only some Pokémon (e.g. Pikachu) are notable enough for their own articles. There was probably some intense debate about that, way back when. Sirfetch'd currently redirects to List of generation VIII Pokémon. You could treat writing up Sirfetch'd as a good practice exercise, but promoting it to main article space is unlikely to get support. Pelagic ( messages ) – (09:41 Thu 31, AEDT) 22:41, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Pelagic and Blacephalon, there was indeed a big debate about that question, so much so that there's now an essay named after it. See Wikipedia:Pokémon test. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:59, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Well after reading that, I do have to say while I do agree with that, Sirfetch'd has had some hype in the past. I could see if there was nothing worth writing about but a lot of people have written articles about sirfetch'd before and I want to include that. The problem is I don't know wikitext. That's why I would like someone to help me with this. UB Blacephalon (talk) 06:08, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Declined the Draft

I had created a draft Draft:Kedrick Brown (actor) few days back, but it was declined later. As according to the Reviewer, the subject is not notable, as it is not having a reliable references. So here is my question: Aren't the references from these Houston Chronicle, KMID (TV), Houston Forward Times, KMJQ, KPRC-TV, KRIV (TV) sources are reliable? If these sources are reliable, then why the page was declined? Oliveoilx (talk) 20:30, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Oliveoilx, the decline template, which starts "This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources", is misleading. It's not enough that the sources cited be reliable. They must be reliable, and published, and independent of the subject, and must contain in-depth discussion of the subject. I haven't checked all the sources cited in Draft:Kedrick Brown (actor); but the first one, being based on what Brown said, does not qualify as independent. Maproom (talk) 08:06, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Resubmissions of draft articles

I've recently had my first draft article 'declined' by the editor who reviewed it (via the AfC process). Can you tell me whether it is generally the same editor who assesses any resubmissions of the same basic article (with relevant 'improvements'). Also, during a 'Help' chat session, another editor suggested that I contact the reviewer and ask for more specific info about why the article was 'declined'. I did that yesterday, but I'd like to know whether such requests for further feedback are usually answered (this reviewer's 'Talk' page has a lot of similar requests). As you can imagine, I'd like to get the resubmission ready as soon as possible.Pomegranate Rose (talk) 01:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Pomegranate Rose, it's normally a different reviewer. However, all reviewers are working off of the same criteria, so if you submit without addressing the issues the first reviewer identified, it will likely be declined again. You are certainly welcome to ping the reviewer to ask for more feedback if you are unsure what their concern was. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Sdkb, thanks for the reply. It helps to know that I don't necessarily have to wait for an answer to my pinging of the original reviewer before making changes to the draft. Pomegranate Rose (talk) 12:57, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Colin Macpherson David notMD (talk) 02:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Article moved to Draft - now I can not submit?

I created the article Draft:Accountable Care Collaborative. At first, it was fine but then moved to draft space. Now I don't see a Submit for Review option. Can anyone point me to instructions? TIA Fergyman (talk) 21:10, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello Fergyman, and welcome to the Teahouse! I've added the AfC banner at the top of the article now. In future, insert {{subst:submit}} at the top of the draft to submit it. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 21:45, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank You very much! I was unaware of the ability to tag - much appreciated. Fergyman (talk) 13:28, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

san francisco bay discovery site

Re: STAMP

Three U.S. Postage stamps (Scott nos. 400, 400A, & 404: 10ct. yellow/orange) show the discovery of SF Bay from Sweeny Ridge by the Portola Expedition. 2601:647:CA00:8570:818A:8953:F982:3D8F (talk) 10:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. You do not make clear what is your question about editing Wikipedia. Are you proposing something to be added to an article, perhaps postage stamp? If so, the best thing is to make a suggestion at the talk page Talk:postage stamp, specifying exactly what you think should be added to the article (and where), and citing a reliable published source for the information. --ColinFine (talk) 11:36, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Presumably, the OP is suggesting that the information be added to San Francisco Bay Discovery Site. The OP is certainly welcome to add it himself or herself. Deor (talk) 16:14, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

wiki page doubt

what is the reason? my bad genius tamilan page is not available if search the google Bad genius tamilan (talk) 16:16, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

We don't let search engines index userpages. Also, Wikipedia is not a web host so I've tagged it for deletion. Pahunkat (talk) 16:23, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Bad genius tamilan Pinging. Pahunkat (talk) 16:24, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Portrait of spouse in biographical article?

For about 12 years now, I have been under the impression that as a general rule we do not add a solo portrait photo of somebody's husband or wife to a biographical article, yet I see more and more exceptions being made. Is there policy on this anywhere? In case of multiple marriages, how many portraits can we add? Does the lack or existence of independent notability of a spouse enter into it? I need to find out if I'm right or wrong in continuing to remove such portraits. Happy New Year! --SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC) SergeWoodzing (talk) 15:35, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse SergeWoodzing. Here's my take, but it's not one based on any policy that I can cite (I looked, but couldn't find see anything), though modern BLPs aren't really my thing:
Images should only ever be added if they add to the encyclopaedic content of an article. An article about a notable person that states their spouse is also a notable person (with citations to verify this) would be OK to contain an image of that person, providing it does not add unduly to the content. i.e. a long article with a balance of other images might merit one being added of that person's spouse if their relationship is itself significant. e.g. it's ongoing and the article goes into some detail of their relationship/collaboration etc. A short article about person A probably ought not to have an image of person B as their spouse, but would only merit a plain wikilink. For older articles about women, it might well be that we don't have any images of them, so one of a notable male spouse might help add content - especially if, as was often the case over 100 years ago the man received most of the credit for the woman's work. As always, it's a careful balance, based upon consensus. You didn't link to any examples you've seen, though I see you've had a disagreement over the inclusion of Robbie Williams' wife on his page. Personally, I think there's no imbalance created by adding that image, so would have kept it as adding to the encyclopaedic nature of the article. (If you do find there's a policy on this, please come back and tell us, or ping me, as it would be a helpful thing for me to be aware of, too). Nick Moyes (talk) 16:34, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you! There is a free image of the Williams couple together. I think that will solve the problem there. In any case, since his wife has an article of her own, it seemed to me that the same portrait of her in his article was too much. I definitely do not agree with you about substituting an unaccessible or non-existent the photo of a woman with one of her husband in an article about her, regardless of how much credit he may or may not have stolen from her. --SergeWoodzing (talk) 16:41, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Stub template location

Hello. What is the exact place of a stub template in an article? (Specifically an association football biography.) I know that if there is an external links section, it goes underneath the links there somewhere... and if there is no external links section, then it goes under the references. But basicaly on Germain Sanou my edit was reverted about stub template location and I would like clarification of where the correct spot for that template on that page should be. Plus, is there a required number of spaces betweeen something above the stub template? Because I remember being told by an editor that stub templates need two extra spaces above. Paul Vaurie (talk) 14:47, 1 January 2021 (UTC) Paul Vaurie (talk) 14:47, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Paul Vaurie. MOS:ORDER says stub templates at the end after categories. WP:STUBSPACING says "Leave two blank lines between the first stub template and whatever precedes it. "PrimeHunter (talk) 14:59, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Alright. So that means it goes after the categories and two space between the categories and the stub template? Paul Vaurie (talk) 15:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
@Paul Vaurie: Yes. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:54, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Adding content to lists on "Today's Date"

My experience is, that everything I add to the English Wikipedia is immediately removed. Anyway, perhaps someone can add the actor Colin Morgan and the musician Grandmaster Flash to the Today's List of Births on 1 January. It seems citations etc. are required to be on that list. Sadly, I have no confidence in my own abilities to do that correctly. But, maybe others have better luck. Cheers and Happy New Year to you all :) Kmilling (talk) 12:40, 31 December 2020 (UTC)

@Kmilling:, Grandmaster Flash is already there and I don't see why you shouldn't be able to add another person. The page is Pending-Changes Protected but that just means you've got to wait a few minutes for an addition to be waved through. --Paul ❬talk❭ 13:41, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
@Kmilling: Colin Morgan already had a reference I have copied.[8] PrimeHunter (talk) 14:03, 31 December 2020 (UTC)
  • --- Thanks PrimeHunter. Sadly, years of experience tells me, that everything I add, is quickly deleted. And I don't hold the technical code skills to modify or create entries to the English Wikipedia. Just the way it is :) Cheers, Kmilling. — Preceding undated comment added 17:21, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I need help

I am writing an article on Country Belgium but have little information on it. I have not been to Country Belgium, nor has anyone I've met. If anyone has information on Country Belgium that belong in an article, please tell me it and I will happily add it. HowDoIPikcAName (talk) 05:15, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello HowDoIPikcAName. We already have a very well developed article Belgium, and you should not to try to write a new article when we already have an existing article about the topic. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:27, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I sincerely apologize for my error. Thank you for letting me know about this. HowDoIPikcAName (talk) 17:33, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the invite

I’m new and grateful for your invite. My background is studies of religion and I’d love tips on articles that need improving. Wikipedia seems like a beacon of hope in an age of internet giants that have lost their soul. Thank you. BuckyRodgers (talk) 10:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, BuckyRodgers: welcome to the Teahouse, and Happy New Year. Thank you for your hopeful words about Wikipedia: I think many editors here share your view. I suggest you get involved with WikiProject Religion. --ColinFine (talk) 11:38, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
ColinFine, *holy choir*, my halo. GeraldWL 17:37, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

List of Inorganic compounds

Happy New Year!

I wanted to look at al the compounds in the world and noticed that a lot of the super heavy compounds we've found aren't there. Can someone help with this. I'd love to help! UB Blacephalon (talk) 06:34, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Blacephalon, and Happy New Year to you too. I doubt whether all those compounds are notable, but I'm sure some of them will be. WikiProject Chemistry might be a good place to discuss this. --ColinFine (talk) 13:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
So do I just do this over there? UB Blacephalon (talk) 19:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

What to do if I think that a person is insisting in unfairly editing his own Wikipedia page?

Hi there. Some time ago I stumbled upon Alexander Amini's page and I found it quite self-promoting. I thus added some templates and wrote in the talk page. A new user, Mstewart94 reverted my edits (see again the talk page). He/she supported his/her action by pointing to similar Wikipedia pages, such as Aisling_Judge and Abdusalam Abubakar.

Frankly, I only felt more concerned by looking at the latter pages: they start by claiming that the person is a scientist, but the page fails to provide evidence for that statement besides the fact that the person won some school students' competition and attended university. Firstly, I can't restrain from voicing my opinion that not even a PhD appears sufficient to claim the title of "scientist"; instead, a certain impact on the scientific community should be required, and such impact should be testified by specific discoveries or a number of scientific publications in respected venues. Secondly, the above school students' competition (which seems to be the main support for the above persons' notability), namely the Young_Scientist_and_Technology_Exhibition, is also flagged with the Template:More_citations_needed.

To conclude, I fear that the above pages are exaggerating the relevance of the above persons as scientists, and accepting those pages as they are allows any professional scientist to have the right to its own Wikipedia page. My question is, if there is anything I can do about it besides stating my opinion in the respective talk pages. Natematic (talk) 13:12, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

This looks like a good call. I've restored the templates. "Mstewart94" is a new, inexperienced, single-topic editor (except for an edit to a closely-related topic), and is probably the subject themselves (which is pretty close to forbidden on Wikipedia: WP:COI) or someone closely related. We can let others decide the outcome. Feline Hymnic (talk) 15:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
@Natematic: I'll also mention that the idea of ... any professional scientist to have the right to its own Wikipedia page is fundamentally flawed. Nobody has a right to their own Wikipedia page. Articles are not for the benefit of their subjects at all. These are encyclopedia articles, for the benefit of the encyclopedia itself as a body of knowledge, and its readers. Justifying the existence of a page by pointing to other pages that exist (perhaps incorrectly) is generally not a valid argument (see WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS). General notability guidelines are at WP:GNG and there are type-specific guidelines, too (e.g. WP:NSCIENTIST). If improper articles exist, it's only because editors were not always as good at keeping out sub-standard content and haven't gotten around to either improving or removing those articles yet. Tagging the deficiencies is a good starting point. WP:DELETION describes the deletion policy and procedures. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:25, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I've been working at the WikiProject Podcasting and was recently introduced to Navigation Boxes, but I was a little unclear on which articles should be given which Navigation Boxes. At the WikiProject main page we have a "Podcasting" template that redirects to Web syndication and another template called Aggregators. I was mostly confused on whether "Web Syndication" should really be added to any and all podcast articles when it appears that there was some intention for a separate template to be made specifically for podcasts (perhaps using the redirect is okay), and if I'm not putting "Web Syndication" at the bottom of every podcast article then where should I put it? I assume that the "Aggregators" template should be placed at the bottom of all podcasting apps or websites, but I find it strange that the title at the top says "News Aggregators" instead of just "Aggregators" or more specifically "Podcast Aggregators". While looking around I also found Template:Podcast distribution platforms, which wasn't even listed at the WikiProject.

I guess my question is: "What is the appropriate usage of these nav boxes?", but any answers that point me in the right direction are welcome.

I asked a similar question with some examples a few days ago at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Podcasting#Authority_Control_&_Navigation_Boxes. TipsyElephant (talk) 20:17, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

article stuck in the sand box

I have a NEW page for Wikipedia and I'm a first-timer so I put all the info in my sandbox. I'm trying to have it 'reviewed for publication' or just publish it. When I click on either, it returns me to a 'create' page and not a submitted for review or published. Ant help is welcome! Doo271 (talk) 20:01, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Doo271, and welcome to the Teahouse! If you click on the 'submit this draft for review' button, it will be reviewed by experienced editors for inclusion on Wikipedia. However, I would strongly suggest you add some references to the draft in your sandbox before submitting, as you need to show that the subject qualifies for an article and meets WP:GNG by demonstrating it has received significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 20:56, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Help in my sandbox

I copied an entire article into my sandbox2 to see if I could insert a tall, skinny image to the right of an array of I Ching hexagrams. If you go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Charles_Juvon/sandbox2#Dual_hexagrams , my new image is on top of the hexagrams. I would appreciate some help in depreciating the white space. Charles Juvon (talk) 00:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC) Charles Juvon (talk) 00:14, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

This looks like it has been resolved; please let us know if not or if there is any further trouble. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 07:34, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Charles Juvon. It's generally not a good idea to copy entire articles into your user sandbox, but if you do you probably should follow WP:ATTREQ and at least provide the name of the source article as an edit summary when you do. Wikipedia's licensing allows its article to be freely re-used, but proper attribution is necessary in most cases. There are also other problems in copying entire articles into sandboxes that in that any images in the article might be fine for the article namespace, but they might not be fine for the user namespace. Categories reserved for articles shouldn't also be used in the user namespace per WP:USERNOCAT. Finally, another problems is that people who tend to copy-and-paste entire articles into their sandboxes also seem to try to do the reverse when they've finished fixing whatever they've been fixing. This can cause problems because the version they copied might not be the same version their pasting over when they re-add the content (other editors might've edited the article in the meantime), which in turn can be an unintentional revert of other editors. So, you need to be very careful when you do this type of thing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:46, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for those points on copying articles. Someone did try to insert the image, but the hexagrams are now split. Could someone try again? You might need to revert the last change to see how the hexagrams were originally laid out. Charles Juvon (talk) 17:49, 30 December 2020 (UTC)
Is this a template that precludes placing a figure to the side? <div><ul> <li style="display: inline-table;"> {| style="width:47em; float:left;line-height:1.75em;" Charles Juvon (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

New User Editing

A new user posted a jibberish message on my user talk page. Is this a common problem and what should I do? I assume I can undo their edit. The username is Samuel James Ossa Vanterpool. TipsyElephant (talk) 22:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Yes, you can undo it. You can leave a message on that user's talk page asking them to use the sandbox for test edits. RudolfRed (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
TipsyElephant You mean you've never heard of a "Jgjghvhvjvjbjhb"? Shame on you.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Copyright violation

Can I modify an article to make it copyright-free if it contains copyrighted information? 1 January 2021 (UTC) SpinnerLaserzthe2nd (talk) 22:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@SpinnerLaserzthe2nd: Welcome to Wikpedia. You are welcome to edit any article to make it better. If someone disagrees, they will undo your edit and then you can discuss it to get consensus. See WP:BRD about that. For guidance on copyright issues, see WP:COPYVIO. RudolfRed (talk) 23:03, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

EU does allow zero VAT rates, contrary to article on tampon tax

I object to this article on "Tampon tax".

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

It says, wrongly, "is the lowest rate possible under the European Union's value added tax law, which as of 2015 does not allow zero rates".

What about this?

https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/sites/taxation/files/resources/documents/taxation/vat/how_vat_works/rates/vat_rates_en.pdf

Published by the European Commission, it begins,

"Cases where the zero rate is applied to consumption in the legislation of the Member States (Title VIII, Chapter 4 of the VAT directive 2006/112/EC)

BELGIUM 1. Certain recuperation substances and recuperation products. 2. Raw furskins of rabbits and hares.

DENMARK Newspapers, including newspapers delivered electronically, which are usually published at least once a month" Philjones573 (talk) 23:29, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Philjones573, and welcome to the Teahouse. Asking specific questions about individual articles here at the Teahouse is not usually very productive: it's better to ask (or discuss) on the Talk page of the relevant article. Secondly, what you are doing is making an argument yourself: you may be right (I haven't looked), but what you are doing is original research, which is not allowed in Wikipedia. If the statement you are objecting to does not cite a reliable source, then you can simply remove it (make sure you explain in the edit summary, so this won't look like a random deletion). If it is supported by a reliable source, then it's more difficult. If you can find a reliablie secondary source that supports your view, then probably the article should mention both interpretations, unless a consensus of editors decides that the weight lies with one or other view. But I'm afraid that if the only secondary sources you can find disagree with your interpretation, then there's nothing you can do here, because Wikipedia works with verifiability, not truth|. --ColinFine (talk) 23:44, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I insert templates in articles or to be specific how do you put user boxes on your user page?

How do you insert userboxes? I am sorry I am new to Wikipedia so I don't understand well.


ValeAliz (talk) 23:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC)ValeAliz ValeAliz (talk) 23:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello, ValeAliz, and welcome to the Teahouse. Generally, templates are inserted by putting the name of the template between double curly brackets, with their jparameters separate by pipes ('|'). If you look at User:ColinFine, you'll see at the top {{Babel|en|fr-2|cy-1|de-1|sv-1|jbo-1}}, which is an invocation of the userbox Template:Babel. At the end there's an invocation of a general purpose Template:userbox. If you go to those template pages I've just linked, you'll see the documentation for using them. --ColinFine (talk) 23:49, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
@ValeAliz: Welcome to Wikipedia. When you find a userbox that you want to use, just copy the code onto your user page. For example, Wikipedia:Userboxes/Automobiles. If you wanted to put the Gearhead box on your user page, you would open your user page for editing, and then copy/paste {{User:Nefariousopus/Userboxes/Gearhead}} onto your user page and then save it using the "Publish" button. Hope this helps! RudolfRed (talk) 23:52, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!This helped me a lot!ValeAliz (talk) 23:57, 1 January 2021 (UTC)ValeAliz

New User Article

Hello My Wikipedia Family 🤗 I hope all is well, could anyone assist me by reviewing my simple non promotional article about a musician I'm writing?

Please don't mark my article for deletion instead give me constructive criticism that could help me better the article as a whole.

I'm here to learn and contribute to the community not to break down, pleade help me help everyone 🙂 MasterKP19 (talk) 00:25, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@MasterKP19: Welcome to Wikipeida. First, it would be a big help to tell us which article you are referring to. Is it Bjorn_Martin? If so, then the next step you need to do is add referrences, as currently there are none. Check out WP:REFB for how to do this. RudolfRed (talk) 00:35, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Another editor has moved the article to Draft:Bjorn_Martin, to avoid it getting deleted. RudolfRed (talk) 00:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Could you explain where the references should be added exactly? (MasterKP19 (talk) 00:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC))

MasterKP19, the link RudolfRed provided, WP:REFB, explains where references need to be added. WP:NMUSIC explains what you need to establish with them in order for the page to deemed notable and accepted. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 01:25, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
I just cleaned up the article a little bit but it probably should be prodded. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 02:38, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
As this new editor has asked for help, perhaps give some time rather than Speedy deletion or Proposed deletion so fast. David notMD (talk) 04:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Youtube and Apple music are not reliable source references. David notMD (talk) 04:23, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@MasterKP19: Please read WP:YFA. The order of the steps is particularly important, especially gathering your references before writing anything, first those that demonstrate notability, and then additionally any references that you will summarize to form the article.
As it stands now, you have provided three references that are not usable, so you have "built a house with no foundation". Find three published, independent, reliable sources (e.g., newspaper or magazine articles) that discuss the subject (Bjorn Martin) at length – at least a paragraph or two about him, not just passing mentions. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 05:16, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi MasterKP19. I have moved the page back to the draft namespace once again. Please take in my edit summary:

"Moving this back once again as a favor to creator (for a second & last time). No Indication of importance or significance. If this stays in the mainspace it will simply be deleted under CSD A7. If this is a notable subject you need to demonstrate that, by citing reliable, secondary, independent sources".

If those sources exist, cite them and then move it back. If they don't, sorry, there's nothing that can be done and this will be deleted sooner or later. But I am trying to give you the breathing space to fix the issue, if it can be fixed, before it's deleted out of hand. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Citation for lecture

Hiya,

I have been trying to clear up the references in Nicanor Austriaco, and am wondering how to find a reference for the claim that the subject of the article discussed certain topics in a lecture. There was a citation to a YouTube video of the subject giving a lecture, but this seems like a primary source and thus original research.

I am struggling to find documentation for the lecture series - does anyone have any tips on how to deal with this statement? Should it be removed altogether? Currently I have tagged it "citation needed". Thanks, Ainlina(box)? 23:51, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ain. Use of Primary sources is not ipso facto original research. Primary sources must be used carefully, are limited in use, and do nothing to demonstrate the notability of the topic. One aspect of their use we need to be careful of—where original research often gets involved in the area—is when someone is interpreting a primary source's meaning, or attempting to use a primary source's interpretation, but one thing they are quite perfect for is verifying that a subject said what they are quoted or said to have said, which your post above indicates was the type of use. That is directly in the realm of a "straightforward, descriptive statement of fact". Whether content like that belongs in a particular article, as a matter of editorial discretion, is another matter. But if the use was as you say; you want to keep in the content; and there's no secondary source for verification, the citation to the primary source is fine, and should be returned. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 05:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Why was my article declined ( Nikhita Khan Rhino Centre)

Why was my article declined? Did it violate any copyright policies?Did it not have any reliable sources? Ishaan bommakanti 6548 (talk) 07:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Ishaan bommakanti 6548, you can see it at the page. It's because there's no reliable sources. GeraldWL 07:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

How can I add reliable sources?

I have two questions,What are reliable sources and how can we add them? And what are reliable sources for? Ishaan bommakanti 6548 (talk) 07:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Ishaan bommakanti 6548, there's more information over at WP:EASYREFBEGIN as to how to cite reliable sources. They are needed to allow other readers to verify that the information being cited can be trusted to a degree. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 08:42, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

How to report for deletion

I saw useless one draft page that is about to delete from Wiki, it was already in draft. How can I report to ask to delete by editor. Thank you. Sorry, this is my very first time in Wiki. Burmese King (talk) 06:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Burmese King, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's best to leave 'useless' drafts alone and in 6 months they'll be deleted from Wikipedia by the G13 speedy deletion criterion. If the draft is yours, then you can tag it for deletion using {{db-g7}}. However, deletion of this draft will not stop the Sockpuppet Investigation at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Nyiminsan as administrators can still view most deleted pages. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 09:57, 2 January 2021 (UTC)


  • (Non-administrator comment) The page I requested to make deletion is duplicated topic for YangonThu Michelle and it's already deleted. I used {{db-g7}}. I'm helping the community.

Reason why contribution was declined

Reason why contribution was declined Good day,

I made a contribution on a page where I added additional information about Music Video. I can't find the reason or still don't understand why my contribution to a LINK was declined.

Looking forward to hear from you please. Kayworld009 (talk) 08:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: about Auld Lang Syne. Per discussions on the Talk page of the article, in the Archives (older discussions), there have been debates about including specific information about notable performances. The consensus is that there are so many contenders, that better for the article to not have a list. David notMD (talk) 12:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Article rejected

Rejection

My wikipedia article was rejected because it 'read more like a magazine article'. Can you advise how rectify this Brenda P. Hall (talk) 14:49, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@Brenda P. Hall: No offense, but it would be useful if you told us what article. Paul Vaurie (talk) 15:04, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
 Courtesy link: User:Brenda P. Hall/sandbox. Theroadislong (talk) 15:07, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

It was a biographical article about the musicologist, conductor, writer and broadcaster, Michael Hall. I assume that as it has been rejected you won't be able to see it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenda P. Hall (talk • contribs) 15:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Brenda P. Hall,
As a rule on Wikipedia, if you can see it, everyone can. But first, judging by your username, is there a conflict of interest here? If so then it'd be best to declare that before doing anything else - but it shouldn't in of itself prevent getting the article accepted.
To get an idea of encyclopaedic tone a good place to start is looking at other articles on a similar topic or to read the manual of style. At the very least, you'll notice that the majority of articles start with "X is a Y" and go from there.
--Paul ❬talk❭ 15:43, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
@Brenda P. Hall: when using other articles as a template, please make sure you choose from our best or nearly best. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:50, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the helpful advice. Yes, I didn't see the coi rule but will declare the interest and will try to amend the style of the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Brenda P. Hall (talk • contribs) 12:34, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

About warning an IP

An IP did some unconstructive edit and I reverted it. When I was going to give a warning template, I noticed it was issued a level 2 warning by an editor in December 27. So what level of warning should I give it now? Kajjul (talk) 11:41, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Kajjul Level 1. Warning levels generally reset each month, so that people don't have stuff they did months ago hanging around their neck. And also after almost a week, it's entirely possible that it's not the same person behind that IP. However, you can of course just skip a level if the offence was particularly egregious. --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you so much for your help!Kajjul (talk) 13:08, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

adding to or changing a relative's entry

Alexander Orenstein was my great-uncle. I found one error in the listing and could add far more material, though this might interest almost nobody. Even it would be valuable, I have no idea how to do it. K3amu (talk) 15:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Perhaps Alexander Jeremiah Orenstein. (If not, then which article?) David notMD (talk) 16:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

I want to upload a logo in a Wikipedia article but I'm not sure how to do it

I can download the logo from a website and upload it in the Wikipedia article but I'm not sure if that's the right way to do because of copyright issues(I'm not sure if the logo is copyrighted). Can someone please guide me? Dfsibun (talk) 13:44, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dfsibun: Which article and which website are you talking about? Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Victor Schmidt: Wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnson_Grammar_School Website: https://www.jgswm.in/ Dfsibun (talk) 14:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Dfsibun: As far as copyright goes, the Image does not appear to be licensed under a free license or be in the public domain, meaning we can only use it under fair use. I recommend that you use the upload wizard to upload images. As for the formula, You want to select "This is a copyrighted, non-free work, but I believe it is Fair Use." followed by "This is a logo of an organization, company, brand, etc." remember to fill in all the boxes marked with * Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:34, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Victor Schmidt: I've uploaded the image. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Logo_of_Johnson_Grammar_School_(CBSE)_with_motto_and_year_of_establishment.png#filelinks Is there any rule which I must follow while using this image in Wikipedia? Dfsibun (talk) 16:10, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
(e/c) @Victor Schmidt and Dfsibun: That is certainly good advice for most images we see users questioning about uploading. In this case, though, I think the image does not meet threshold of originality for copyright protection, and thus is eligible for upload to the Wikimedia Commons, to be marked there with {{PD-textlogo}}. To expand on that slightly, images that consist "only of simple geometric shapes or text" are not considered original enough to enjoy copyright protection under United States law, and so if meeting that description, are in the public domain by default. Other countries have similar doctrines. In this case, India's doctrine has been listed at Commons:Threshold of originality#India as similar the the U.S.'s ("Modicum of Creativity"), and so logos of companies based in India within this set are permitted to be uploaded there as in the public domain. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:02, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Need opinion for the last section of Bhutanese Nepali Literature

Hey, Look at the last section of the Bhutanese Nepali Literature wikipage. Doesn't it sound promoting the website? Or, it could be "the real information and is not supposed to be changed"? I'm unsure. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 08:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, it is what we call a WP:SPAMLINK and should be deleted. Please see Wikipedia:External Links for details of the type of link it is appropriate to include. The "Bibliography" section is also dubious, as it appears to promote just two titles without stating why they are specially relevant to the topic.--Shantavira|feed me 09:46, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Shantavira, alright, thanks. Changing it then. Lightbluerain❄ (Talk | contribs) 16:11, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

COI asking for help to review suggested edits

 Courtesy link: RightScale

Hello everybody, I am asking for help in order to make the subjected page (RightScale) better.

I am connected to RightScale and hence can't edit it directly.

My suggested edits are backed up with references and were actually in place until the user who put them got banned.

Please review my request and edit back the page.

I am not suggesting anything that's wrong or false, it's the truth, so I hope someone will act on it and revert it back to Hugo999's version.

Thank you! Flenleaf1 (talk) 16:40, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Flenleaf1 (talk) 16:40, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@Flenleaf1: You have used the {{request edit}} template correctly at the article's talk page, so an uninvolved editor will take a look at it at some point. Please note that the template says "The requested edits backlog is very high. Please be extremely patient." By posting the request, you have flagged it for review, and that's really all you can do right now. Adding a second request edit template is not going to speed up the process, I'm afraid. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 16:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Difference between citations, sources and footnotes

Hello and thank you for the welcome! In attempting to edit / update an article about myself that was originally contributed a few years ago by an acquaintance, I could not easily grasp the distinction (if any) between links, sources, references and footnotes.

Is there a succinct document somewhere that a) makes the distinction and b) explains how to insert them accurately.

In the article in question, about Victor F. Zonana, the reference to my business partner David Gold seemed to come out a bit awkwardly. Also don't know if I did the references to GHNZ.org and EHF.org correctly. VictorFZo (talk) 16:26, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

VictorFZo, welcome to the Teahouse. WP:EASYREFBEGIN has information on how to properly cite information. Sources (which should be reliable and independent from the subject) are used to verify information being given about the subject. This is done by referencing them, which appear near the bottom of the article as footnotes which can be linked to the appropriate page, if any. Wikipedia does not do external links (for example, the links to EHF and GHNZ) in the body of the article, which should be in an "External links" section at the bottom of the article; a simplified breakdown of what to do and not do when linking can be found here. Since you're editing an article about yourself, I suggest you exercise some caution, as while writing about yourself isn't strictly prohibited, it's strongly discouraged as subjects more often have trouble writing neutrally about themselves than not.
Taking a quick look at the references used, only the Huffington Post reference potentially appears to be a reliable source, as press releases and company profiles tend to be not independent. Better secondary sources should be looked for. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:52, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Tenryuu. The first footnote (HHS Press release) can be replaced by this Washington Post op-ed, which confirms my position in the Clinton Administration.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/09/01/presidents-have-history-over-promising-vaccines-heres-why-thats-problem/

I believe EHF.org issued an announcement of my appointment as a Fellow, but I fear that would be considered a press relesase. There is also this article from a New Zealand newspaper that describes me as a Fellow: https://www.stuff.co.nz/business/industries/123600320/overseas-entrepreneurs-supercharged-kiwis-plan-to-rid-niue-of-hepatitis-b-and-c VictorFZo (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Nancy Thorndike Greenspan

I added this author because of her influential books. In fact, one of her books, The End of the Certain World has it's own wiki article. Yet the author was declined by the moderator asking if the author has any awards? The NYTimes and Wash post have done articles on this author and do not understand what else I should do to bolster the article. Any advice is appreciated! Fergyman (talk) 16:09, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Nancy Thorndike Greenspan has refs, but for reviews of books she has written, not about her. And Wikipedia dos not count interviews toward establishing notability. Search for published content about her. David notMD (talk) 17:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Fergyman, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. --ColinFine (talk) 17:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

What is the point of enabling editors to provide new information, if they are deleted and called "Spam" without any due process ?

I get that I'm SPA, I was trying to update the NFT World to a new use case of this technology, so why does my edit get deleted and called "Spam" without first being investigated or myself to be contacted to verify the edit ?

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Non-fungible_token&type=revision&diff=985223340&oldid=985011037

I was trying to make a informed post about what is capable and for people to be informed, thought that was the point of Wikipedia.

Is further proof required ?

https://emblem.finance/nft?id=327289 https://etherscan.io/tx/0x14cfea08df942fe8a4b7df6e2e092e9b24d5c79e6be8e9a31d2a7dc161a89567 https://opensea.io/assets/0x82c7a8f707110f5fbb16184a5933e9f78a34c6ab/327289 As above the Bitcoin/Ethereum addresses within the NFT contains Fungible Tokens.

https://www.blockchain.com/btc/address/1HNmmzNkbjSCfTNJycuRsosyi34aV9CeGp https://etherscan.io/address/0xc51bD93c41aD07fc49F2DE7264501E3CF44d0BfA#tokentxns

https://desktopcommando.medium.com/what-is-emblemvault-14aaaff92a20 DesktopCommando (talk) 03:03, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

DesktopCommando, the diff shows an IP's edit being undone, not yours. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 03:32, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
My apologies after seeing how the 'compare selected revision' works it show's user: Vicwd moving it (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Non-fungible_token&type=revision&diff=995521773&oldid=995521123) and user: Hidden Lemon deleting it (https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Non-fungible_token&type=revision&diff=995822205&oldid=995817950) DesktopCommando (talk) 05:39, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
It looks as though my editorial is being removed due to user: Vicwd's contribution, may I please re-apply my submission ? DesktopCommando (talk) 13:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
From what I can see, you added one reference, linking to circuitsofvalue.com. That, and the sentence supported by the link, were removed as part of a larger effort to clean up inapproprite sources and promotion from the article, not because they were added by a new user, and not because the sentence+source had been moved to a different part of the article. circuitsofvalue.com does not seem to meet Wikipedia's requirements for reliable sources, and it violates the external links guideline, so it would not be meaningful to restore it to the article. I don't have any opinion about the links you posted above. If you disagree about the usefulness of the circuitsofvalue site or have other comments, the best place to post them would be the article's talk page, Talk:Non-fungible_token. (Keep in mind that the purpose of Wikipedia is not to showcase cutting-edge development, though.) Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Circuits of value (COVAL) is the Emblemvault's cryptocurrency "owner", its the first of its kind, the article was a means of including what capabilities an NFT can achieve in order to confirm to WP:PURPOSE "in a fair and accurate manner with a straightforward, "just-the-facts style"." the only linkable page was the webpage, how do other newly emerging additions then appear, if there is no first ? You say its "cutting edge development" Wikipedia's own explanation of that it is a "term in advertising and marketing" this is not intended as the case, if you feel this is true then maybe you should delete half of Wikipedia's content including the current NFT contents with regards to Cryptokitties, Rare Pepes, Age of chains ...etc, your issue with the WP:RS "articles should be based on reliable, published sources" WP:SOURCE "The piece of work itself (the article, book)" this is the website www.circuitsofvalue.com, yes its not a book, yet WP:AFFILIATE seems to allow content that "inline citations may be allowed to e-commerce pages" it does ask for published articles how about this https://blog.goodaudience.com/the-king-of-atomic-swaps-c9becff072aa, or even a blockchain entry that unlike Wikipedia cannot be edited https://etherscan.io/tx/0x14cfea08df942fe8a4b7df6e2e092e9b24d5c79e6be8e9a31d2a7dc161a89567 the blockchain transaction shows that it has been minted and is verifiable DesktopCommando (talk) 16:36, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, DesktopCommando. Anything that is "the first of its kind" is likely to be TOOSOON to figure in Wikipedia. You ask "How do other newly emerging additions then appear?" The answer is "Not in Wikipedia". Wikipedia is only interested in things that independent reliable sources have already been written about. If the only source for something is its own website, then it is not notable, and it is hard to see how it can be regarded as a reliable source. --ColinFine (talk) 17:49, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
  • DesktopCommando Wikipedia is not a government that is required to provide "due process". It has rules and policies to guide its content, just as you have rules and policies regarding conduct in your residence and you don't have to provide for a process for your guests to challenge those rules. That doesn't mean Wikipedia does not try to be fair, which is why there are talk pages to discuss issues of concern and dispute. I will add that Wikipedia is not for merely providing information(a common misconception). It is for summarizing what independent reliable sources say about subjects that meet Wikipedia's special definition of notability. 331dot (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Replacing wrong Indian High Commission Photo on India Malta Relations.

1) I wish to replace the wrong photo of the Indian High Commission in Malta with the right one. Please help in easy steps.

I see that there are currently three pictures in the Wikimedia Commons category "Consulate of India, Malta". I presume that you wish to add another such image but perhaps of a new building. The steps for uploading pictures are fairly easy if you follow the Upload Wizard at "the relevant Commons page".. The crucial step is that you must be able to assign a license (usually CC BY-SA 4.0 — see Commons Help pages), which means in practice that you took the picture yourself or have evidence that the picture you wish to use is available under such a license. Please provide more details so I or another editor can help further. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

2) I am having difficulty adding References in Indian Foreign aid article and I need help. Sbali9 (talk) 14:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank for invit me, Teahouse

 Ybsanizk (talk) 16:50, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@Ybsanizk: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The Teahouse is intended as a spot where new users can post their questions. Most questions here are answered rather quickly. If you ever have a question about using or editing Wikipedia, feel free to ask. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:14, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

adding name to main name

Hello Friends I have an account on Turkish Wikipedia for many years. The name in the title is my artistic name “Cenk Taşkan” , To existing Name,how can I add my real name whıch is “Majak Toşikyan” in conclusion : Majak Toşikyan - Cenk Taşkan 

                      or

Cenk Taşkan - Majak Toşikyan  96.20.210.103 (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

We cannot help you with issiues involving the turkish Wikipedia, sorry. Maybe try to ask at tr:Vikipedi:Danışma masası Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:17, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
I have just replied to this question on the Help Desk. Please don't ask the same question in different places, as it wastes everybody's time. --ColinFine (talk) 19:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

copy of ap picture in the Indianapolis Business Journal Dec 11, 2020 issue.

FYI
 – Heading refactored by Tenryuu, moved rest of it into body below.

Greetings, and happy new year to you all. I am looking to request a copy of a front page picture in Indianapolis Business Journal on Dec 11,2020. It is the picture on front page of Organization Day in the Indiana House Statehouse Chamber. Our son is an employee of the Republican Party of Indiana, and he is in the picture. My husband and I would like to respectfully ask if we might get a copy of the picture, please? Thank

 2600:1700:5F50:9750:E429:DD40:D3A1:1554 (talk) 11:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

IP editor, you should probably contact the Indianapolis Business Journal, as they would hold the rights (or properly direct you to whoever holds them) to the picture. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 11:12, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Perhaps it's in this article. You can also order reprints here. For future reference, questions like this are better posted at the Reference Desk. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

What to do when a source is probably going away

NSFWCORP is being acquired and their brand is going away.

The NSFWCORP brand and voice will be going away, and everything will now be under the Pando brand.

— Sarah Lacy, https://pando.com/2013/11/25/pandodaily-acquires-nsfwcorp-to-double-down-on-investigative-reporting/

insource:NSFWCORP It's used in a few places, but I'm not sure exactly what to do. These links are probably going to die soon. Jdphenix (talk) 20:40, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello Jdphenix, and welcome to the Teahouse! Save the links in the web archive - [9]. Add the archive link as a parameter of the reference and we'll be able to use it as a reference even if the site gets taken down. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 21:18, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
N.B. I think their site might be up to stay, the acquisition appears to have happened 7 years ago. Pahunkat (talk) 22:05, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
I've archived all the URLs anyway. Pahunkat (talk) 22:28, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Jdphenix, for future reference, you can use the external tool "Fix dead links" on any article's history to try and salvage archived versions of dead links. More information can be found here. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 🎄Happy Holidays!⛄ 00:05, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you both. Very helpful. Jdphenix (talk) 21:24, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Question on creating articles

Hello! Thank you for the invite. I have a quick question regarding creating an article. Can a user create an article on English Wikipedia that is based (but not translated) from non-English Wikipedia? I have seen some non-English Wikipedia articles that have their English counterpart, but it's different in terms that the English article is more up to date than the non-English one.

I am not sure if this question has been asked before, or if this is a nonsense question, but I would appreciate if someone can help. Have a safe and happy new year, everyone. Wjddml (talk) 21:15, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Wjddml Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There are no nonsense questions here, so don't worry. I'm not an expert at it, and others who are might know better than I, but it is certainly permitted to translate an article from another language version of Wikipedia to here; it is done not infrequently. It is important to remember that each language version of Wikipedia is its own project with their own editors, policies, and practices, so what is acceptable on one language version is not necessarily acceptable on another version. So if there is an article you want to translate you will want to check that things like notability are satisfied on the version you are translating for. 331dot (talk) 21:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@331dot Thank you so much for the response. I will keep this in mind. Thanks again. Wjddml (talk)
Wjddml, I'll just add to 331dot's answer that there is a page Translation which explains what you need to do. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@ColinFine This is very helpful. Thanks to both of you! Wjddml (talk) 22:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

SPI for blocked users returning as IP accounts

Hello Teahousians. Lately I have noticed several blocked users that just keep editing using their IP address. I appreciate that Wikipedia thinks there are privacy issues with publicly linking an account to an IP address, but this gives the SPI a big disadvantage by leaving out helpful evidence. So is there a way that the CheckUser can be requested and done privately perhaps? MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 23:39, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

@MrsSnoozyTurtle: I am not an expert in this area, but editing while blocked is block evasion which is not allowed, and per Wikipedia:Blocking_policy#Evasion_and_enforcement the IP should be blocked. I think that means you could make a request at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet_investigations#Quick_CheckUser_requests to validate if the IP address is associated with the blocked account. RudolfRed (talk) 23:48, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks RudolfRed. I had a look at Quick_CheckUser_requests and it doesn't mention linking an IP to a blocked user as one of the examples, so hopefully someone familiar with this stuff can chip in please? Cheers, MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 22:20, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@MrsSnoozyTurtle: This is indeed tricky. Checkusers are hardly ever going to link accounts with IP addresses. There's a few exceptions, such as when the link has already been made public, but the exceptions are rare. Quick CU is therefore not the place. Instead, I can think of three options. One is to create a SPI report in the name of the blocked account, pointing to the connectuon between the IPs and accounts. Any patrolling admin can use the duck test. The second is to find another way to ask any admin(s) if the IPs should be blocked. In both these cases it can be useful to loop a checkuser into the request, but they are not going to provide any written response to it (that is they may, or may not, check the link and/or just block the IPs without any comment). The third option, and IMO least appetising for the situation you describe, is to email a checkuser. Again, don't expect a response. Hopefully that's useful. -- zzuuzz (talk) 22:51, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi zzuuzz. Thanks for your help with this. It is quite ironic and frustrating that Wiki policies give an advantage to blocked users who further break the rules by then editing with their IP!

Sometimes the Edit History isn't enough on its own to be certain and a CU would be helpful, so I'll give option 2 a try. I've tried emailing Checkusers in the past, but there was no response or action. Thanks for laying out the 3 options for me, it is really helpful. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle (talk) 23:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Antikult why I cannot publish the voice?

hi, why i cannot post my ANTIKULT voice? I just texted that I have a conflit of interest cuz I knew them personally. And now I wanted to write on Waiki the band I find out so I started from this great band. Is it so hard? Alison Krebs (talk) 12:36, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Antikult
Hi Alison Krebs - you've already made a start on your draft article. You'll need to add some reliable sources before you hit submit, but apart from that what specific trouble are you having? --Paul ❬talk❭ 12:48, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)@Alison Krebs: yes, sucessfully creating a new article about somethign on Wikipedia is hard, in fact, its one of the hardest tasks one can start on Wikipedia. And having a conflict of interest does not make things easier... As for Draft:Antikult, drafts are not automatically resubmitted, you have to use the resubmit button. However, if you were to resubmit it now, it would likely be declined, because it is currently unverifyable. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:50, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
In particular, you need to say who "[defined them] as one of the best world grind/jazzcore bands", and in which publication this definition may be read. (And by "best world", do you perhaps mean "world's best"?) -- Hoary (talk) 12:58, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

But if I added link of pages with records companies who published band works! the comment under pic was by Apocalix Distro Label (the page of the Distro Label is existing an active on FB). It seems that here those who have time to let a pc wizard publish fakes news can have success and real supporter8experts of band, especially in the underground, have no chances for them and for the band to be known!!!!! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alison Krebs (talk • contribs) 14:26, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Alison Krebs, don't forget that Wikipedia is not the place for you to promote bands that you like. That said, I think it's entirely possible that Wikipedia could have an article on Antikult, if you can find just a few sources independent of the subject then you'd be able to establish notability and have some encyclopaedic content. --Paul ❬talk❭ 16:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not promoting bands that I like, I like a bands that are known in the underground and I think that any kinda band and style culturally interesting should be in an Encyclopedia and should be spread around. I'm not a pc programmer but here seems that if you are not focused on that techs it's all but not an open instrument for develop art and culture. I just wanted put some artistical high value bands here. More tha link and pages of who wrote or published cd, vinyls, cassette and so on I can't do. It should be do a step by step easy path to who wants publish voices with the clear limits and needs. Anyway,,here was not possible post pics done by myself, of my own, I'm sad and since here all is complicated I think I will abandon this experience. Hope for great artist and innovative players that somebody else will be more prepared than me! thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Alison Krebs (talk • contribs) 19:30, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

I'm sorry that you've found editing wikipedia too complex. We do try to welcome articles on all notable topics, and we do have some pretty great articles about various bands - I very rarely edit anything IT related I don't have any 'tech skills' beyond Excel but I've always found Wikipedia pretty welcoming. I think the process for introducing a new article is about as step-by-step as it can be, I don't know how it could be simplified. But your draft will stick around for a few months if you want to pick it up again. --Paul ❬talk❭ 20:04, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Alison Krebs: The very nature of "underground" is that it is not written about in reliable sources. Such artists become popular by word-of-mouth, social media, etc., right? Unfortunately, that is incompatible with Wikipedia's standards and purpose, which is not to promote anything (no matter how good), but instead to summarize what reliable sources have written about in some detail and independently (without prompting by the subject). Anything connected with the band, like their publicist, commercial (even "indy") websites, record labels, etc., are all disqualified. We need someone like Rolling Stone or Variety or even the entertainment section of newspapers or local television news programs, etc., to have written about the subject. That makes it notable for Wikipedia.
Also, just a suggestion: attacking your fellow volunteer editors for carefully upholding our community standards is not the proper response, nor the way to get further help, from those who have already spent significant time trying to help you. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:46, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Alison Krebs: Your only attempt at submitting your draft was here [10]] where you submitted a blank page which was declined of course. Theroadislong (talk) 21:53, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Alison Krebs: You might have a look at other articles about relevant bands, like the B-class (an above-average quality) Napalm Death as an example of what kind of sources that editors have found to be appropriate, article contents, style, etc.. Other B-class articles of interest to WikiProject Metal are listed here. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:19, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Follow-up to Dating System in articles; CITED REFERENCES

Continuing Discussion on threats of Blocking re BCE/CE Dating System V. BC/AD Dating system.

I previously in this space indicated that I was opposed to authors of Wiki using the BCE/CE dating system, when the referred to sources used the BC/AD system and that I was shocked at the threats of being BLOCKED for such an action as correcting an article to conform with a cited source. There was a note that many editors who were NOT Christian (Emphasis mine) on Wiki were very opposed to the use of the BCE/CE dating system. What about those of us who ARE Christian and who see the change from the dating system used in the reference source to that in the article as offensive?There are also many people who are not apparently religiously motivated and who simply want an ACCURATE depiction of a cited source.

One would THINK that accurately citing authorities is at the very heart of good scholarship.

I was surprised at the hostility of one writer who stated that: "It is especially disruptive to impose a Christian based dating system on articles about China (or other articles with no connection to Christianity), as you have done." IS it not disruptive to graft and "impose" your own dating system on the citation that you use in an article? WHY is this not disruptive while editing the article to return to the dating system preferred and used by the source is? This is what the reference stated and used. It is those who change this piece of information who are being "disruptive". Moreover, this writer states that "China.. or other articles(sic) with no connection to Christianity.......... This writer truly needs to educate himself. China has along and very deep connection to Christianity, dating back to Nestorian Christians who established communities there in the 7th century. There are over 44 million Christians in China and Christianity is the fastest growing faith there. I strongly suggest you consult Wiki before making such ill founded statements.

My point is that the disruption so loudly condemned here actually originates froma DEVIATION of the information contained in the source. You want to cite a source? Do so with respect and accuracy to the intentions and information contained in that reference source. The threats to "BLOCK" employed here can plainly be seen as bullying tactics and I would think are beneath the dignity of an "Editor". Lookout657 (talk) 19:00, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

You are free to have whatever opinions you wish about appropriate dating systems, but when you edit Wikipedia you are not free to ignore Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. You have not been met by any hostility, only honest information about what these policies say; also please remember that Wikipedia is governed by consensus and not by what any one individual editor feels. It is absolutely not a misrepresentation of a source to say "BCE" in the article even if the source used for the information says "BC". The only exception is in direct quotes. Read WP:ERA and stick to it; if you find that to be distasteful to you personally, avoid articles where you may be tempted to violate it. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 19:09, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Changing date system is obviously not a deviation from the source material. --Paul ❬talk❭ 20:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
My question to the OP is: What happens when two reliable sources use different dating systems? Does one take precedent over the other or should it just be arbitrarily chosen? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I get a page to write an article.

 2001:BB6:29BC:5E58:3C92:8E24:C2C9:AADE (talk) 15:07, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello. Successfully writing a new article is the absolute hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It takes much time, effort, and practice. Many new users who dive right in without experience in general editing often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings when their work that they spent hours on is rejected. I don't want you to have bad feelings, so I'd suggest that you 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. If you create an account, you can use a new user tutorial that will help you learn more about Wikipedia.
If you still wish to create a new article despite this cautioning, you should first read Your First Article and then use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft for review by another editor before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 15:11, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Do also consider registering an account, which will make communication with other editors (a necessary part of the collaborative process here) possible. It also lets you set your preferences for many things and gives you access to many helpful gadgets and tools. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 01:55, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Moving Categories

Hello, I don't see a "More" (and "Move") tab at the top of any categories. How can I move a category? Thank you, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 01:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Charlie Smith FDTB: You need special rights to move a category. You can make a request at WP:CFD. You can check that page to see if it qualifies for a "speedy" move. RudolfRed (talk) 02:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Okay, thank you. Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 02:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Question about conflict of interest

I am a bit stuck about what I need to do regarding addressing the COI comment at the beginning of https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jim_Truscott All the facts in the article are accurate. I am no sure what you mean by working in mobile view or VisualEditor. --Woonga (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC) Woonga (talk) 23:55, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Note: Editor seems to have previously edited under the name of "Stephen Truscott". This seems like a discussion that would be better had with Eagleash, as they were the editor who added the COI tag. Woonga, if you have a conflict of interest (going off your edits to nearly exclusively pages with the surname "Truscott", that seems more than likely), you need to disclose it. Information on how to do that can be found at WP:DISCLOSE. Moreover, if you happen to have a COI, you are strongly discouraged from editing affected articles directly (WP:COIEDIT). In a way, it doesn't matter that much that the "facts in the article are accurate". You should not be editing those pages, much less creating them. Sdrqaz (talk) 00:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
  • Editor created Draft:Stephen Austin Truscott in which the Jim Truscott article was linked to. It appears they have now changed their username and the draft has been tagged for deletion, although that will not work as it has been placed between 'nowiki' tags. It appears (to me) that the draft is an autobiography and unless I'm reading it wrongly 'Jim' is the editor's brother. As noted, with a COI they should not be editing the page but are welcome to make requests at the talk page. Template:Request edit has instructions on how to do this. Eagleash (talk) 01:07, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your respective suggestions. I have requested an edit as you suggested.

--Woonga (talk) 02:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Undo redirect

On the last (top) entry in page history, why would pressing undo send me here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Reverting#Undo ? I was here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Hunter_Biden&action=history , trying to restore FeralOink. Charles Juvon (talk) 02:06, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Charles Juvon: ...  Undid revision 997210111 by FeralOink (talk) BLP (undo | thank) (Tag: Undo) [automatically accepted] I'm guessing that you clicked on the second link, in (Tag: Undo), which is a tag on that edit, instead of the first one, at (undo | thank), which performs an undo. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 02:23, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Very strange. I see: "curprev 14:25, 30 December 2020‎ SPECIFICO talk contribs‎ m 81,994 bytes −2,654‎ Undid revision 997210111 by FeralOink (talk)BLP thank Tag: Undo [automatically accepted]" --------> "(undo | thank)" is completely missing. Charles Juvon (talk) 03:18, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
@Charles Juvon: I think it's because the article is extended-confirmed protected, you are not yet extended confirmed, and therefore cannot "undo", so it doesn't give you the option. I assume it's missing from other entries in the history as well? —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 03:59, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Yes, and I have the time, but only ~400 edits. Thank you. Charles Juvon (talk) 04:32, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Temporarily Watched

Hi, I made an edit to a wikipedia page, namely Criticism of the BBC but it got reverted by a bot. I did it in completely good faith, and I thought my edits were legitimate, so I reverted the bot's reversion - all a bit abstract. Anyway, that got reverted by an actual user who kindly and politely pointed out that my edit didn't add much to the article. So, now I've got a "temporarily watched" thingmy-majigy on my watchlist. What is it, when will it go away and should I be concerned? Many thanks EcheveriaJ (talk) 20:47, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

@EcheveriaJ: Goodness no, that just means the article is on your watchlist temporarily. This probably happened automatically during one of your edits. Nothing to worry about at all. --Paul ❬talk❭ 21:06, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@EcheveriaJ:, Paul is right. If you want to remove the article from your watch list, go to the article and click the blue star in the menu bar, so that it stops being blue. Maproom (talk) 23:33, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@EcheveriaJ: Temporarily watched is a new feature documented at mw:Help:Watchlist expiry. PrimeHunter (talk) 08:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: @Paul Carpenter: Thank you ever so much for your advice and help! What a relief; I was thinking it was some sort of Orwellian tracking because I'd triggered a bot. Many thanks! EcheveriaJ (talk) 11:03, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
@EcheveriaJ: To be honest, sometimes I wish it were possible to watch users for those who are clear vandals but cannot be reported yet because they haven't been warned sufficiently! Sdrqaz (talk) 12:48, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

irrational sets

DEFINITION OF IRRATIONAL NUMBERS I think the definition of irrational sets should be amended to read "Irrationl numbers are numbers that can de defined by a finite numbers of integers". 2600:8801:B000:5A0:617B:AFB9:396D:2276 (talk) 05:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

If you have a reliable source, this may be something you want to suggest over at Talk:Irrational number. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:59, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello IP user. If you are saying that the infinitely repeating decimal number .33333… is not rational, no that number is 1/3 which is rational. If that is not what you mean, then it is not clear what you do mean. —teb728 t c 07:39, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Welcome to the teahouse. I'm guessing there is a "not" missing from your proposed definition. However, as pointed out, even with that change the definition is incorrect. I just read the definition and it's a little disappointing. While correct, it's less than fulfilling to have a definition explaining in the negative — instead of stating what they are it states what they are not. That said, it is correct.--S Philbrick(Talk) 14:47, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Conflict of interest

Hi Guys, Happy new Year. I'd like to know how serious of an issue a "conflict of interest is. I recently created an article about a teacher of mine. I will not receive any compensation, I tried to be as objective as possible and I mentioned it on my own page. But I genuinely think he meets the notability guidelines of Wikipedia, given that he is a world champion in Fighting Ju-jitsu. So am I the wrong person to have written the article? It is currently pending for review, but given the time it takes (60 days at the moment) I'd like to do everything as good as possible. That's the article by the way: Draft:Wolfgang_Heindel Thanks for helping me out Tobias Geller (talk) 15:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

FYI - the drafts at AfC are not in a queue, meaning that any one could be examined by a researcher at any time. David notMD (talk) 15:54, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Tobias Geller. Editing with a conflict of interest is not forbidden, though it is discouraged. But since the articles for creation process has been available, it is quite acceptable for editors with a COI to create a draft and submit it for review; The notice you've put on your user page will warn the reviewer to check the text carefully; but on a quick look, it seems pretty neutral to me. As David not MD says, it might get reviewed today or in three months. But in any case, there is work you can do to improve the sourcing. Several of the references are bare URLs, which makes it take longer to review them for reliability. More to the point, many of the references are not independent of Heindel: these are primary sources: they can only be used in limited ways, and do not contribute to notability. You need to remove all citation to unreliable sources such as Wikipedia, YouTube, and sales sites. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. You should concentrate on sources which meet that criterion. --ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Archiving issues

I have recently set up a archive for Talk:Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election this used to be the name of Talk:Opinion polling for the 2019 United Kingdom general election which meant Talk:Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election/Archive 1 and three other archiving pages had been turned into redirects. I have removed the redirects but when the first discussions started to be automatically archived they were sent to Talk:Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election/Archive 7 rather than Talk:Opinion polling for the next United Kingdom general election/Archive 1 Llewee (talk) 17:04, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

New Page

How do you put the box with details on the right hand side and get the lines for the paragraphs Paevans620 (talk) 17:13, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Paevans620 See WP:INFOBOX, and paragraph breaks are simply created by a single blank line between paragraphs. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:23, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Paevans620, and welcome to the Teahouse. Dodger67 has answered your immediate question, but (assuming that this about User:Paevans620/sandbox, I'm afraid that you're making the mistake that most new editors make when they come here and immediately start the very difficult task of creating a new article: what you are doing, asking about an Infobox, is building a house by painting the woodwork before you've built the foundations, or even investigated the stability of the site. An infobox is a fiddly detail which can be added at the end, to make an article more attractive. The important thing is the references to independent reliable sources: Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.. Judging from your username, I suspect that you are trying to write an autobiography, which is strongly discouraged in Wikipedia, because you are likely to find it difficult to write sufficiently neutrally, and to stick to information which can be found in a source indepedent of you. You should begin by finding the sources that are essential to establish notability, as if you do not meet these criteria, any and all work you have put in on this will be wasted. --ColinFine (talk) 17:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

area of a circle

@SK2242 and UnitedStatesian: Hi! I've just found, that I can write in here, using the new section button. Previously I've tried the 'edit source', that was too much for my browser to load. I've understood NOTHOWTO, and fixed it. I've also added {cn}. I'll try to add it to the 'area of a circle' page later. 37.76.43.195 (talk) 13:27, 3 January 2021 (UTC) I got logged out, while writing.Gmac4247 (talk) 13:31, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gmac4247: In Draft:Area of a circle you claim "When the arches of the four quarter circles cross each other on half way between the center and the side of the square, their combined area equals the area of the square." This is not correct. Your claim gives a circle area of . The real area of a circle is πr2 where π = 3.14159... Your work is original research and would not belong in Wikipedia even if it was correct. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:05, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: May I use this as citation?Gmac4247 (talk) 14:20, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Gmac4247: If you mean my post then it cannot be used as citation in an article per Wikipedia:Verifiability, since it was not published in a reliable source. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:25, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Gmac4247 You can cite any of a multitude of textbooks for πr2 - it's been generally known for several centuries. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 17:35, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Dodger67: Thank you. You can see/edit/help to cite my proposal: talk:area of a circle#addition requestGmac4247 (talk) 17:53, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Advice on improving a draft

I wrote a draft for https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dan_Feyer

Seems to me this person is notable, in that they are the 8-time American crossword champion. Various other equally-notable figures in the crossword-world have their own wikipedia pages, see highlighted individuals in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/American_Crossword_Puzzle_Tournament

It was sent back to draftspace with message:

> 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).

To me it seems that winning the top competition in a relatively popular activity 8 times is notable on its own, hence I wrote the article. The subject has an individual profile in the New York Times and their competition wins get coverage in the NYT repeatedly, which again seems impressive to me. But I don't have strong feelings about this, if it's collectively felt that the subject doesn't meet notability criteria, fine by me. I'm just a little unclear if I did something wrong in how I drafted or presented the article -- for example, I did not include the references "in order of relevance", perhaps that was wrong.

Anyway, any advice or guidance much appreciated. Davidoaye (talk) 18:02, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

(pinging Robert McClenon) —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 19:53, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
User:Davidoaye - First, you didn't do anything wrong. Second, I welcome the comments of other experienced editors here. If other editors think that he is notable, or that he is probably notable, I will accept the article. But I would like their comments. Robert McClenon (talk) 21:45, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Sure! And thanks for the feedback. A question: I was planning for this to be the first of several pages on various people in the crossword world, but if Feyer isn't notable (or is at best boderline-notable) certainly none of the others I wanted to cover would be. I realise this is surely wading into a long discussion among experienced editors but... I guess I'd love to know whether one component here is about how notable crosswords themselves are considered to be? I basically thought anyone who won the biggest crossword championship even once would count as notable, but if that's not the case (absent other factors / notability in the media / etc) I won't even try to write those other pages! Davidoaye (talk) 23:09, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

I suppose a question could be put - is every past winner of American Crossword Puzzle Tournament article-worthy? Or are other activities needed to establish notability? David notMD (talk) 21:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes. That is the basic question, which appears to be implicit in User:Davidoaye's comment and explicit in User:David notMD's question. Should there be an implied special notability criterion? Is crossword-solving a mental sport like chess and checkers and Go? We have special notability criteria for a lot of obscure physical sports, so why not for a lot of obscure mental sports? Robert McClenon (talk) 07:45, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Absolutely! I want to clarify that I think there's a "special case" for Feyer in that he's the 8-time champion (most championships ever), has had a full-page NYT profile devoted solely to him, etc. Whether winning ACPT *once* is enough on its own, though, I don't think I'm Wikipedia-experienced enough to say -- personally I'd be happy if the answer were yes, and if some special notability criteria could be set for the sport, but I'm absolutely biased by my affinity for the obscure sport here! Davidoaye (talk) 09:34, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
oh, p.s. : I modeled my page on this one about another top crossword solver (instantiated ten years ago), which uses the layout/approach for a sports player -- I'm afraid I'm not experienced enough to figure out where to look, but is it possible that there's relevant discussion from that page as well? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tyler_Hinman Davidoaye (talk) 09:42, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
On further thinking about this draft, I think that the NYT article establishes gemeral notability. Since the article was once draftified from article space to draft space, I want the concurrence of another experienced editor before accepting. Do other editors think that I should accept it? I have copied this dialogue to the talk page of the draft as a record of the discussion of its notability. Comments? Robert McClenon (talk) 18:52, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Liberal Democrats (UK)

Why are the liberal democrats represented as Center-left when liberalism in the capitalist camp is represented as right wing? Even on other pro-libertarian parties their ideology is always defined as either a big tent subtype or simply center to center right.

Examples:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Columbia_Libertarian_Party https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarians_(Brazil) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertair,_Direct,_Democratisch https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Libertarian_Party_(United_States)

The only other exception I found was this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reason_Party_(Australia)

Another libertarian party in an anglo country. Are these parties perhaps inserted as "center-left" so that the unaware young voter finds their wikipedia party and believes it might be aligned with their interests?



I believe, in the search of true impartiality, that the Liberal Democrats from the UK should be catalogued either as Center or Center Right. As categorising them inside Center-Left is directly opposed to the Marxist viewpoint on the subject. Unless wikipedia operates and provides exclusively a capitalist leaning viewpoint, the right thing to do is to change their ideological section.

Other possible solution would be describing their social policies as "left wing" (although I do find that encapsulating "progressivism" under the left is also factually incorrect) And their economic policies as "right wing"

Have a good day 87.221.249.41 (talk) 20:45, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. What matters is how independent reliable sources describe a political party(or any organization), not our personal opinion as to what a party's ideology is. If the Liberal Democrats are described by independent sources as left wing, then we do too. Posting your own analysis would be original research. 331dot (talk) 21:22, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
I wonder if you are confusing "libertarian" and "Liberal Democrat". The UK's Liberal Democrats are not libertarian. Maproom (talk) 23:29, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
And Liberal Democrats (UK) makes no claim they are libertarian. Even if "libertarian" had been in their name, the description of a party's position should be based on reliable sources about the party and the party's actual position, not what somebody thinks a word in their name means. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:06, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
OP, please be aware that the (political) meaning of "liberal" in the UK may be rather different to what it means in other countries, just as the meanings in those other countries may not agree with each other. For that matter, the current Liberal Democrat Party is far from identical to the Liberal Party that existed in the first 30-odd years of my own lifetime, before it merged in 1988 with the Social Democratic Party, which itself had been formed in 1981 by more moderate or centrist (i.e. less "socialist" or "left-wing"") members of the Labour Party.
Similar caveats apply to the term "socialism", which has a wide span of meanings and implications which differ from country to country, with those meanings also changing over time, as do the socioeconomic contexts in which they are used..
You might benefit from studying the article Political spectrum. (My own entirely personal opinion is that a single-axis "left-right" measure of political philosophies is entirely inadequate; two-axis spectra may be more useful, but I suspect at least three might be required for any truly useful analyses.) {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.122.56.237 (talk) 19:24, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

When will I be autocomfirmed?

 Earthsmoke91 (talk) 19:46, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@Earthsmoke91: You currently have four edits. After you make a total of 10 (six more), then you will become autoconfirmed. RudolfRed (talk) 19:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
You can see a list of your edits here: Special:Contributions/Earthsmoke91 RudolfRed (talk) 19:49, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Article with no sources

I have an article about a notable man who writes a unique form of literature in abundance. I have no sources for this article as all the information included comes from the man himself. What do you recommend as a plan of action to have my article published? Robert Eddison (talk) 19:22, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Robert Eddison, I strongly suggest you find reliable secondary sources, as while some primary sources are useful for confirming facts, they do not establish notability by Wikipedia's standards; without notability, no amount of editing will bring the draft into publication. This seems to be the only edit you've made so far to the English Wikipedia; is this on another wiki or on another account? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:30, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Robert Eddison, what you have learned from the man himself is forbidden from use on Wikipedia by the core content policy No original research. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Help With Aligning Photos

Hello, I recently added three photos which I took but they are not properly aligned. Is there a way this can be fixed so that the photos are evenly aligned? StJohnHall (talk) 20:01, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

StJohnHall, you have recently uploaded 14 images to Wikimedia Commons. They all seem to me to be straight, with the horizon horizontal, except File:TheDAC.jpg which (I assume) uses deliberate distortion. Are you referring to the way you've arranged them in the article St. John's University (New York City)?   Maproom (talk) 20:36, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Non-free image from children's book

Hi! I'm relatively new to the image uploading policies of Wikipedia; I've read through some of the non-free content / fair use guidelines but hoping someone with more expertise can chime in here as well. I'm editing Curious George (film), in which one of the scenes is inspired by a specific moment from the children's book Curious George Takes a Job. This is specifically mentioned in the article text and I was wondering whether it might be appropriate or allowed to upload a corresponding image from the book like this one. (Of course, the image would be massively reduced to make it low-res, properly attributed, with explanation of why it would be fair use, etc.) I've seen Wikipedia:WikiProject Books/Images which discusses book covers, but no guidance about the inside of books. Thanks for any help! —DanCherek (talk) 18:16, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Hello DanCherek. I cannot possibly see the justification for using a non-free image from a 1947 book in an article about a 2006 movie, unless reliable sources discuss this specific image in detail when reviewing the movie. That seems unlikely to me. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:44, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Gotcha, thank you! —DanCherek (talk) 21:31, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Should all the banners on this talk page be included within the banner shell or should only wikiproject banners be placed inside? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Podcast TipsyElephant (talk) 21:19, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: The banner shell should only include the WikiProjects. Thanks, Pahunkat (talk) 21:58, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I understand the difference between adding sources and adding an info box. Can you please answer my actual question?

Can I create this page on wikipedia? "Dadasaheb Phalke Awards South"

Can I create a page about "Dadasaheb Phalke Awards South" on wikipedia? I came across this on google trending topics 223.229.238.9 (talk) 12:21, 2 January 2021 (UTC)

If you can find reliable, published sources that are independent of Dadasaheb Phalke Awards South treat Dadasaheb Phalke Awards South in depth, you can use (and of course cite) those sources to create Draft:Dadasaheb Phalke Awards South. But if you can't find them, you'll be wasting your time. -- Hoary (talk) 12:27, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
Before trying to edit that draft, it would be a good idea to read this information. There are quite a few awards trying to capitalise on the name "Dadasaheb Phalke Award" (the original is prestigious but the copycat awards are not). That doesn't mean that none of the other awards could become notable, but any sources would have to be explicitly about that award (the Awards South one, in this case), and not about the original. Also keep in mind that just because an award has recipients who are notable, it does not automatically make the award notable – I could set up the Bonadea Awards and send them out willy-nilly to ten celebrities, but that wouldn't make the Bonadea Awards notable. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 14:30, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@Bonadea: You missed the important part of the awards scam "process" – you would want to charge the celebrities for the announcement, attending the ceremony, and even the bleeping award itself. I'll organize it for 10%. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 21:12, 2 January 2021 (UTC)
@AlanM1: I like the way your mind works. Maybe I'll also tell each recipient that they may recruit ten celebrity friends, all of whom will pay a slightly higher fee to get the award... what could possibly go wrong! *holds up sign saying "JOKE" and smiles like John Cleese* --bonadea contributions talk 22:15, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

How do I add categories to a draft

 Brandon Lapin (talk) 21:26, 3 January 2021 (UTC)

See if you can improve Draft:Wendy Sachs and then get it approved before thinking about infobox, images or categories, as none of that contributes to notability. David notMD (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
The Film - Surge section has no refs. David notMD (talk) 22:12, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Don't add categories to a draft until it gets approved and moved into the main space of the encyclopedia. Liz Read! Talk! 22:17, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
@Brandon Lapin: Some people have found {{Draft categories}} useful in suggesting categories for the reviewer to use when/if the article is moved to mainspace. The best way to figure out how to use a feature like an infobox is to look at the source (i.e. edit, but don't save) of an existing article, e.g., James Cameron. Copy/paste the {{Infobox person|name=...|...|signature=...}} code from that article to your draft and modify as needed. See the link to that template just given for complete documentation on supported parameters. —[AlanM1 (talk)]— 23:05, 3 January 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1089&oldid=1088802263"