Jump to content

Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1102

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1095←Archive 1100Archive 1101Archive 1102Archive 1103Archive 1104Archive 1105

Wee Willie Keeler

Wee Willie Keeler

Referencing what an Americanized name is? Anglecized is a known thing. "Americanized" on the other hand is not something I'm familiar with. Are we to have "Frenchacized" names? "Italianized"? "Zamibianacized"?? Shouldn't "he changed his name to Keeler" suffice? My mother thought he was a Keeler all her life. When in fact he was of no relation to the Keelers. 69.207.44.132 (talk) 04:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! See wikt:Americanize. If you have any suggestions on how to improve the Willie Keeler article, you can make them on the article's talk page: Talk:Willie Keeler. Or just be bold and make them yourself! Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:26, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
And see Americanize at Merriam-Webster. I'm intrigued by your "Zambianacized": Simultaneously Zambianized and Namibianized, with an additional syllable tossed in just for fun? -- Hoary (talk) 06:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Rollback permission

Hello, after 3 months of counter vandalism i'm aiming to request Rollback permission, put they're saying Applicants with fewer than 200 mainspace edits are unlikely to be granted this right. So how could i know if i edited in more than 200 mainspaces ? Also they're saying the ccount should be old, how old should my account be to be granted Rollback permission ? Whatsupkarren (talk) 08:27, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Whatsupkarren I think you misunderstand. That means that you should have 200 edits to articles - articles are in "mainspace" (so for example, edits to talkpages or userpages would not count). this is a decent edit counter - you have 600 edits to articles, which is more than sufficient. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:39, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft Delete

How to delete a draft which is not edited for more than 6 months? Lemme know the templete to put there? Ghxhb (talk) 09:00, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ghxhb: the template you are looking for is {{Db-g13}}. Elli (talk | contribs) 09:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Child Model

Hello, let me know what are the important things to know before writing an article about a child Model who did more than 50+ international advertisements? Ghxhb (talk) 09:03, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ghxhb: make sure you read Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons as well as Wikipedia:Minors and persons judged incompetent for information on writing about them - living people and especially children require special care given the potential legal and reputational consequences. I'd also recommend reading WP:NMODEL to make sure they qualify for an article. If you can find significant independent biographical coverage of them from reliable sources, they likely do. Elli (talk | contribs) 09:08, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm not quite sure what an "international advertisement" is; but whatever it might be, even verifiably having appeared in two hundred of them does not bring notability in Wikipedia's sense. See WP:PERSON. And if this is about Draft:Izin Hash, note that Indian news websites (even those with serious-sounding names) are notorious for their paid-for profiles of celebs. -- Hoary (talk) 09:32, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

LTA 1105

Hi, I'm wondering who is LTA 1105? Firestar464 (talk) 01:41, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

"LTA" implies to me that it's a long-term abuser identifier, but I don't know what identifiers we use (in fact per WP:DENY we try to avoid speaking of LTAs when we can). Where did you see this? — Bilorv (talk) 01:44, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Bilorv In an edit filter. Firestar464 (talk) 04:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
1105 is yust a reference to the filter ID used internally by the software. In this case it would be Special:AbuseFilter/1105, which may or may not refer to a single LTA, though I am pretty sure no admin will tell you how it works exactly. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:29, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Firestar464, I'm afraid you won't get an answer because the EF guideline generally prohibits sharing details of private filters. LTA filters are named the way they are to deny recognition and because more descriptive names would make reverse engineering (and thus circumvention) easier. For what it's worth, almost all filters have false positives, so someone may well trigger them without being (one of) the individual(s) targeted by any given filter (or a bad-faith or disruptive user at all). Blablubbs|talk 10:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

how do I create a profile on wikipedia?

I need to create profile on wikipedia for my boss who is a celebrity trainer, what is the process for this and who can help assist? Indiadiamond (talk) 15:39, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Indiadiamond Hello and welcome to the Teahouse Your use of the word "profile" suggests that you have a common misconception about what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia does not have "profiles", not a single one. Wikipedia has articles. Those articles summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a person, showing how they meet Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person. Wikipedia has no interest in what someone wants to say about themselves, only in what others completely unconnected with them choose to say. Wikipedia is not like social media where people tell about themselves, either directly or through a representative. If you just want to tell the world about your boss, you should use social media.
Please understand that a Wikipedia article is not necessarily desirable. There are good reasons to not want one. You should review conflict of interest and paid editing. If your boss truly meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable person, someone will eventually take note of them and choose to write about them. 331dot (talk) 15:49, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
First of all, there are no "profiles" on Wikipedia unless you mean user pages. I'm curious why you need to create a page for your boss. You most likely should not do this, as paid editing is generally discouraged, and your boss may not be notable. βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 15:49, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

how to do I create a wiki page?

I need assistance to create a wiki page this website is impossible to understand! Indiadiamond (talk) 15:51, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Indiadiamond We have answered you above. Creating a new Wikipedia article is the absolute hardest task to perform here. It's even harder with a conflict of interest. Please review either the information here, or on your user talk page, User talk:Indiadiamond. You have some formal disclosures you must make. 331dot (talk) 15:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
User:Indiadiamond - The problem is that your employer, in good faith, has asked you, in good faith, to do something that isn't consistent with what Wikipedia is. This is comparable to the situation if your employer asked you to go to a library and bring back books that were disposed of by the library, but the library wasn't giving books away. Everyone is acting in good faith, but there is a fundamental misunderstanding as to what is possible. You can't create a Wikipedia page for your employer just because your employer has asked you to do that. It isn't your fault. It isn't their fault. It isn't our fault. It just isn't. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
We, the hosts and experienced editors at the Teahouse, need an essay for the new editor who has been asked by their employer to create a Wikipedia page about them. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

:Honestly in my opinion this user's actions constitute disruptive editing or maybe even vandalism. I am reporting them right now to WP:ANI βӪᑸᙥӴ • Talk • Contribs 16:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm glad this comment was struck through - in no way does a confused user asking a question twice constitute bad faith editing. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:33, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you It was a computer error asking twice. I think that answer is a little harsh I'm just trying to find out how to write an article or some assistance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indiadiamond (talk • contribs) 10:27, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Indiadiamond And we have told you that doing so is not advisable, as it seems that you and your boss do not understand what Wikipedia is about. Please review the comments here, and feel free to show your boss these messages. If you just want to tell the world about your boss, you should use social media or other alternative forums with less stringent requirements where what you want to do is permitted. Writing an article is difficult under ideal circumstances- it's even harder with a conflict of interest. Wikipedia is not interested in what your boss wants to say about themselves, only in what others say about them. If you have reviewed the notability guidelines for people and truly feel that your boss meets the definition, and you have significant coverage in independent reliable sources to support it(not interviews, his own website/social media, brief mentions, routine announcements, etc.) you may use Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article. You would need to forget everything you know about your boss and everything he tells you about himself, and only write based on what others say about him. Most people in your position have great difficulty doing that, and are unsuccessful with their efforts. I advise against you attempting to do this, but if you must, you should review Your First Article and use the new user tutorial first. 331dot (talk) 10:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)


Ok thank you for your advice — Preceding unsigned comment added by Indiadiamond (talk • contribs) 10:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

What is the best article on Wikipedia?

I just want to know what the best article is. It would more than likely be in FA-class. xdude (talk) 18:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)

Based on what criteria? RudolfRed (talk) 19:04, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
It's the article I most recently wrote, of course (which makes it Hell Is a Very Small Place at time of writing, and what an interesting topic it is!). — Bilorv (talk) 19:46, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Best. You may find Wikipedia:Top 25 Report interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:14, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Can I also recommend Wikipedia:Unusual articles? Elli (talk | contribs) 08:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Toilet paper orientation. -- Hoary (talk) 23:22, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Good choice. And don't miss This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations: at the talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:13, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Been Hacked

216.8.236.112 (talk) 13:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC) {{subst:Been Hacked. I have little to no computer knowledge trying to learn as I go. Your site is awesome,John thanks for the heads up! I plan to learn more as I go.. However right now I have someone that is disrupting my digital life. Every aspect cell phone, computers the whole thing is a pain. I don't have any use for much and I am a simple person. About to retire and drop off the grid, Life is short now all I want to do is enjoy what time I have left... In the good old days, a really good shot to the nose cured a lot of problems. But today our world is too violent to attempt lessons like that.. Any help would be greatly accepted.

Thank you all so much.

}} 216.8.236.112 (talk) 13:24, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

You probably haven't been hacked. Try resetting your device(s) and see if that fixes the issue. Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 13:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi. This page is actually about questions specifically related to Wikipedia matters, and those who contribute here are not necessarily computer experts at all. We do have a forum, however, where general questions may be asked, that is specific to computer issues: the computing section of Wikipedia's reference desk <--that's a link>

So, if you restart your devices, and are still having the same problem, I suggest you post at that forum. However, your post gives no details that anyone who might have a solution to suggest could work from. If and when you post there, I suggest explaining in as much detail as you can exactly what is happening; the text of any error messages; that X happens when you do Y; what devices are affected; what operating systems you are using; which browser—anything that might be relevant given the actual nature of the problem.

To put it in more familiar terms, by analogy, your current post is akin to someone at a legal advice forum posting "I have a terrible legal problem that affecting everything in my life, please help me with it", and ending there, with no account of what the legal issue actually is. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:15, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

@EDG 543 and Fuhghettaboutit: for future reference, I presume this person was just confused about why they had received a notification about having vandalised Wikipedia (hence the reference to "John", as John of Reading left the warning). All that's needed to answer this question is to point them to the information at the bottom of the warning template: If this is a shared IP address, and you did not make the edits referred to above, consider creating an account for yourself or logging in with an existing account so that you can avoid further irrelevant notices. There may be additional context to the message but not Wikipedia-related. — Bilorv (talk) 19:44, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
@Bilorv: Except that that your presumption does not comport at all with the person's message.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:13, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: (didn't get the ping due to a misspelling) What do you mean? I've seen similar questions before at the Teahouse and that was the question intended. — Bilorv (talk) 07:45, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@Bilorv: Hey. I mean that the person specifically said they are having problems with multiple devices (that seem related to one hack). First they saoid that what was being "disrupt[ed]" was their "digital life", and then they mention, apparently as examples among others: "Every aspect cell phone, computers..." So, it's possible they misunderstood the vandalism warning as one more part of the supposed "hack", but it doesn't sound like if that was the spark for their post, it could possibly be "All that's needed to answer this question". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:32, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Help! English-speaking reviewer who can read sources in French needed :)

I have submitted early december an article Draft:International_Association_of_Department_Stores which has been reviewed by SK2242. I have made changes, however he advised me to come and look here for someone who could review it top priority. I have submitted the draft 2nd of December, and I reviewed following his refusal on the following day. Any help would be appreciated. Thank you! --Perchsquirell (talk) 16:24, 23 March 2021 (UTC) Perchsquirell (talk) 16:24, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

@Perchsquirell: I can see why it was declined. It could also be declined again unless it is restructured and tightened up. I recommend you reorganize it into these sections: History, Operations, Membership. I've deleted the long list of managers and external links - that's too much, per WP:NOTDIR. Refs go after punctuation. Avoid unsourced promotional-leaning sentences such as "Of the many scientific management research groups set up in the 1920s, the IADS is practically the only body that has a record of continuing membership and activity since then." Also, please read WP:COI if you have a connection with the organization. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 01:08, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
@Timtempleton: Got it, thank you. I have followed your advice and restructured / shortened quite a bit the article. I am not directly or indirectly compensated for this article, let me know if there is a procedure to show so. Regarding the list, I removed it - your edit was not published yesterday and I got confused between the long list of managers (that was shortened yesterday) and the long list of presidents (that were just removed). let me know. Above all, thank you for your time. --Perchsquirell (talk) 12:37, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Good suggestion to correct a article

Hi , Sureshdada Jain article's heading is wrong. The person about whom this article is written is a politician. In Maharashtra the followers and sidekicks of these politicians call them as Dada (means Big Brother in Marathi) And sometimes newspaper's also repeat this Honouring suffix. It is like a title. I know WP don't allow to write titles as Heading of article. I think his official name is Suresh Jain or Sureshkumar Jain but it ain't Sureshdada Jain. I suggest it to change to just Suresh Jain. I suspect a admin , extended editor from India who now say by his user page to live in US altered this title. Possible he know this person personal. But tweak this title. 106.195.7.163 (talk) 12:17, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I see that CommanderWaterford moved Sureshdada Jain to Sureshkumar Jain. For other comments or suggestions about this article, you can post on the article's talk page: Talk:Sureshkumar Jain. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 13:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Because I worked at great length on the housing scam article, I looked at numerous newspaper articles talking about this individual. Given how they refer to him, the common name appears to be Suresh Jain. I have completed the move.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

I would like to change my screen display to black background and white characters

As the title says. thanks!--SilverMatsu (talk) 01:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi SilverMatsu. I have heard good things about the Vector-DarkCSS skin (though I've never used it myself). In order to apply it, you can copy the contents of this page into your vector.css page. Another option is to go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets and check the option for "Use a black background with green text". Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit:Thank you very much! I tried both. I thought it would be very convenient to use a cudget because it can be turned on and off. It's not dazzling, so it's good on the eyes.--SilverMatsu (talk) 10:19, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@SilverMatsu: Great. Glad to help. By the way, what's a "cudget"? (I did a quick Google search and I only found pages asking if I was misspelling cudgel.)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 13:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: oh… This is a gadget typo (miss touch).--SilverMatsu (talk) 14:10, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit summaries

Hello, I've forgotten to edit the summary in few parts of my article. How to recover that. Can I publish my article with that mistakenly done error? TahiraY.Awan (talk) 15:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit summaries are not particularly important when you are the only person editing your own WP:userspace draft. What is important, before you submit your draft for AFC review, is to provide references to reliable sources independent of the subject. At present all of the references are to primary sources, so your draft would have no chance of being accepted in its current state. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:48, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

How to retrieve reference for an article

I have read through other articles on Wikipedia and noticed the retrieved attached to references cited with media sources for articles. What does that mean? How can that be created? Torksimlife (talk) 17:20, 25 March 2021 (UTC)Torksimlife

@Torksimlife: It indicates the date on which the source was viewed by the person adding, or altering, the reference (since a source may be changed at a later date). It's most often created by filling in the |access-date= parameter in a citation template. Deor (talk) 17:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

How to see a article's views ?

Like YouTube videos , Can we see a article is , How many times seen by reader. Traffic of a article. About which article readers are searching most at the moment ? Is there any button by pressing which we can see these statistics. 106.195.9.31 (talk) 17:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

See pageviews.toolforge.org. You can access it from the history page of every article. Kleinpecan (talk) 18:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

How do I send a new article for review from User Talk?

 Aoksk2099a (talk) 18:30, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello Aoksk2099a and welcome to the Teahouse. Forst of all, I have moved the article draft to User:Aoksk2099a/Article Draft. Your user talk page is intended as a central way for other editors to contact you. I have also added a banner to the top of the draft, allowing you to submit it for review. See Wikipedia:So you made a userspace draft for more info. Right now, I am slightly concerned by the choise of words, as Kaprov is greatly influenced by the bold and fearless approaches is unencyclopedic. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Words to watch for more info. Victor Schmidt (talk) 18:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!Aoksk2099a (talk) 19:23, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Your draft is currently in two places: User:Aoksk2099a/Article Draft and Draft:Susan Kaprov. I did some light editing to the first before realizing the second also existed. Be careful to work on only one. David notMD (talk) 19:13, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Many thanks!Aoksk2099a (talk) 19:23, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Probably a dumb question

Is there a way that I have to sign up to join this? I was invited, but I'm not sure what to do next ;-; Sorry...



}} Thanks! User:NotSchoolSmart (talk) 19:40, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@NotSchoolSmart: Hello, and Welcome to the Teahouse. No, you don't have to sign up/in somewhere, all editors are welcome to ask questions here. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

This page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kelsey_Lake_Diamond_Mine ref 13 results in a 404. Whereas I have found the document on the domain shown in the ref, there's no way to directly link to it as it's now behind a free paywall. I see that ref 8 does the same. I've done minimal editing, never of the refs. So what's the best way to fix this. 108.52.219.37 (talk) 20:29, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Are the sites archived on a service like the Wayback Machine? —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:43, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, 108.52.219.37. I went ahead and found an archive URL for that article and placed it in our citation, but I'll also see if this article is still up somewhere on their website and place that in the citation as well. I'm also going to do a bit of citation cleanup on that article. Link rot is a huge problem on a site as massive as Wikipedia, so bringing these incidents to our attention helps a lot. If you come across this sort of issue in the future, leaving a dead link template can help us find these as well. If you ever have any in-depth questions about combating link rot, feel free to hop over to my talk page, and I'll be happy to help out. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:50, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict)
Hello IP editor. My approach when hitting a failed link is to do a browser search for the article to see if it's available elsewhere. To be honest, we don't require any properly published source to be online, though it does help the user verify statements. But, I found your source at this alternative location. It would help if you would consider showing the specific page numbers to each use of the reference so that it shows clearly where the source can be found. Thus page 8 for the mention of a large diamond of 28.2 carat.[1]: 28  I haven't checked whether the yumpu version was legitimately uploaded or not. But if it weren't I'd check the source supports all the statements and then link back to the free paywall site. Does this help? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

References

  1. ^ "Diamonds - Colorado Geological Survey". Rock Talk. 2 (3). July 1999. Retrieved 25 March 2021.

Have we correctly inputted COI?

I am employed by the company I am developing a Wikipedia page for. The page is currently in Draft mode and we have submitted the page for review, but I'm concerned I did not state my COI properly. Can you please review to see what is possibly missing?: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Better_Holdco Oat2021 (talk) 20:12, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Oat2021, your draft had been rejected because of clearly advertising your company, it will not be considered further. CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:24, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
And you made your PAID declaration while not signed in, so it shows up on an IP account rather than your User page. David notMD (talk) 21:47, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I feel as though this would be a great candidate for RA though as it cites 39 sources total and definitely could be written about in a non-promotional way. bop34 • talk • contribs 21:50, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Deleted the Honors and Awards section entirely. All that might belong there are nationally or internationally awards from major organizations, not all the piddly crap there now. Ad remove naming staff (although a bit of that could be in an info box). David notMD (talk) 21:53, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Making an article

How do i make an article? Arezoner the best (talk) 16:49, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Please see Help:Your first article. It's kinda hard to explain within a comment. bop34 • talk • contribs 16:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Arezoner the best
  1. compile a list of reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detail (think at least two to three paragraphs dedicated to the topic), to see whether it is actually notable, as we use that concept here;
  2. if you can't make that list with at least three entries, with different content from one another, write nothing – no article is seemingly possible on whatever the topic is, at this time, because it hasn't been the subject of sufficient independent publication by the wider world – and you will be wasting your time; no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability;
  3. if you can, visit the Wikipedia:Article wizard and follow the prompts to create a draft;
  4. write only what the sources you've compiled first verify (without copying the words used); and
  5. cite those verifying sources as you write, which will also demonstrate the topic's notability.
Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:41, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Editing My Talk Page

Hello! My talk page has a note that an article I wrote was initially tagged for deletion That did not happen but the note is still on my talk page Can I remove that as it is my talk page? Meam70 (talk) 21:52, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Meam70 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, you may remove most content from your user talk page. There are a small number of exceptions, but none relevant to you now. Many prefer archiving, but it's not required. 331dot (talk) 22:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
331dot Thanks for the response!Meam70 (talk) 01:05, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Please help, about "Zhou Chengzhou"

Dear Wikipedia editor,

Recently I came across such a problem, do not know how to deal with, ask everyone's help.

The questions are as follows:

I established "Zhou Chengzhou" English wiki entry "Zhou Chengzhou" has passed the audit. This is an article about Chinese mainland people. Here I would like to thank the wiki users who have passed the audit and edited together. However, after that, I received a discussion reminder that the page was deleted.

His user page is here: Chwiki page: https://archive.is/oLPpt (https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AINH) ,

Please take a look at the comments on this user（AINH）page, he said: （Page Translation: “Ainh expressed strong dissatisfaction and strong opposition to frequent talks about Hong Kong affairs among Chinese Mainland users, and demanded that such persons stop interfering in Hong Kong affairs immediately What about the fight? Open the whole simple encyclopedia directly! Pink to hide your ears: you don't want to face the problem, I'll be with you. "Yellow and blue are political opinions, black and white are conscience") I come from Chinese Mainland.

His English p.: https://archive.is/yigjl (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:AINH) , which is the same user name, presumably a person.

This is the relevant page of "Zhou Chengzhou" article,

chinese: https://zh.wikipedia.org/wiki/%E5%91%A8%E6%89%BF%E8%88%9F

english: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zhou_Chengzhou

I have had some discussions, but I really don't know much about the terms of Wiki. Maybe I don't know how to deal with such a situation. I sincerely ask all experienced editors to help me and ask for help. Thank you very much.

I respect the standards and guidelines of Wikipedia very much, and I will try my best to cooperate if the items need to be improved.

Best and have a good day. Armidazhou (talk) 15:22, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

The discussion is at WP:Articles for deletion/Zhou Chengzhou. To bring it here could be regarded as forum shopping. --David Biddulph (talk) 15:35, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I agree with DB. All the info above has already been provided by Armidazhou at the AfD. A key issue it that references that justify an article in ZH Wikipedia may not meet reliable source standards for EN Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 18:55, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Ironically, this flood of attention from experienced editors they've given themselves has likely sunk any case they may have originally been able to eke out. Oops. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:41, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
It doesn't justify notability on ZH either. It's just that the notability process on ZH works differently than the one on EN and that it needs to wait a month-AINH (talk) 02:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

User page

How to protect a userpage from others to edit? Logical Puzzle (talk) 04:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Logical Puzzle. You can request protection of a page at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection. We do not protect pages pre-emptively, but only because they are actually receiving persistent vandalism, and we usually protect only for a period commensurate with how long the vandalism is likely to last. Any request that isn't based on those precepts will be rejected. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 04:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Why is some editing

Why is some editing the page I have created, greeting me and inviting me to create an account, when I already have one?

 Philip Sugarman (talk) 21:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Philip Sugarman Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I see a welcome message on your user talk page, but not where you were invited to create an account. When you create a new article, it then belongs to Wikipedia, and any editor may contribute to it. 331dot (talk) 22:01, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Philip Sugarman. It would certainly help if you advised where you saw this; whether it was an automated message that popped up, and if so, what you were doing when it did; maybe some default text on some page you visited—whatever the context is that would allow us to find it. (If it's a false-positive message provided by the interface, for example, we might be able to better tailor it to avoid this repeating.) Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk)

Sorry I can't track down the detail on this. Apologies — Preceding unsigned comment added by Philip Sugarman (talk • contribs) 05:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Review request by the company Freeport of Ventspils

Dear editors ar Wikipedia,

I have recently created an article titled "Freeport of Ventspils" describing the institution and it's activities, however, the article was almost instantly deleted due to copyright infringement. I am an employee at the company and we are trying to create wikipedia pages in different languages in order for people to find information about our company on platforms other than the website.

Could anyone perhaps guide me in the right direction so that something like this doesn't happen again?


Best regards, David Dravnieks Marketing specialist at Freeport of Ventspils authority 193.200.201.150 (talk) 07:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 193.200.201.150/Dave. I suggest you take a look at the following Wikipedia pages: Wikipedia:The answer to life, the universe, and everything, Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies), Wikipedia:Conflict of interest, Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure, Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not and Wikipedia:Ownership of content. Bascially, an article will only be able to be written about your company if it can be demonstrated that it's Wikipedia notable. Moreover, it will be an article written about your company, not for or on behalf of your company and your company will have no editorial control of the content whatsoever. Furthermore, it will have to be written in a neutral point of view and reflect only what reliable sources (preferably secondary and indepenent sources) are saying, have been saying or have said about your company. In other words, the article will not be allowed to become a platform for your company to disseminate information about itself or otherwise promote itself in any way, and there's a really good chance that negative coverage about your company will find its way into the article as long as it complies with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. As for the reason why the article was deleted, that has to do with Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia:Close paraphrase or possibly a combination of both. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
(Note for Teahouse volunteers: there is further discussion of the deletion on my user talk page.) —Tom Morris (talk) 08:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

What do you recommend as a next step?

I have been a contributor for over 10 years, but I haven't written or edited hundreds of articles yet. I have translated a handful, and expanded or improved a dozen articles or so. Although I am quite familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines (I read more guidelines, conventions, and tutorials than I care to list), I have always been hesitant to request more rights. I guess it's time for me to be bold.

I recently wrote a draft for an article about my employer, and declared my COI so that someone else can supervise it and hopefully improve it or release it. I am not paid or compensated in any way for it, but I work for a non-profit organization (which autofinances itself, and doesn't gain anything from the article); I think an article in Wikipedia is long overdue. This led me to check the backlog of edit requests in general, and wondered if I couldn't jump in an help out with those I have no relationship with. So that's where this question comes in: what do you, more experience Wikipedians, think I should do next? I already volunteered to the Guild of Copy Editors. Should I jump on helping out with edit requests? Ferkijel (talk) 07:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ferkijel. You can be WP:BOLD and improve any articles that you think need improving. If you're WP:REVERTed by someone who disagrees with your improvement attempt, then try and WP:DISCUSS things and see if they can resolved. The same basically applies to answering edit requests: if you think you can answer a request, then go ahead. You may, however, want to look at WP:ERREQ and start slow with some easy ones first just to get a feel for how the various templates work and how requests are typically answered. It might also be a good idea to introduce yourself to an editor or some editors who seem to be active in this area because they might be able to help explain things that might not be immediately obvious to someone not familiar with the process. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Sbdk, it's an excellent resource. Down the rabbit hole I go. Ferkijel (talk) 09:05, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

how do i challenge a statement, find editor of statement?

i noticed references are used for dob, educational qualifications, etc.. excellent. out of curiousity how do i politely point out missing reference for dob, etc.. i have noticed there are several edits for popular articles. how do i find editor of a particular statement or sentence? btw, its cool to know for providing important parts about editing, tasks, etc. of wp on landing page. Givian (talk) 04:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Givian. It would be useful to know which article you are talking about, but in general, you should raise this type of issue on the talk page of the article. If you want wider input, use the Edit request process. If you are sure that you are correct based on what reliable sources report, then boldly make the edit yourself, being prepared to explain your edit. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:07, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@Givian: Welcome to the Teahouse! I like using WikiBlame to find who added a particular statement or sentence. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:31, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
If it's simply an unreferenced date of birth, you can remove it without further discussion per WP:DOB.--Shantavira|feed me 07:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
@Givian: You always have the option of just tagging it with {{citation needed | reason=clarify the specific info that needs a citation | date=December 2024}}. Also, I want to endorse the use of Wikiblame, though it is kind of slow and not obvious how to use. Also note that it doesn't match on the wikitext, i.e. it matches on visible text. But it can be very insightful, it really shows how a sequence of edits can make WP seem like a game of telephone. Fabrickator (talk) 09:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

How to remove my userpage from certain categories?

Hello!

I'm sure this is likely an obvious question, but oh well. As the title states, how do I remove my userpage from certain categories without removing the userboxes that put me into those categories in the first place? Currently, I have the "This user knows science matters" userbox on my profile, and while I don't want to remove it, that userbox put me into the "Users interested in Secularism" category. It's not that I disagree (because I don't), but I have my own personal reasons for not wanting to be in that category. My first thought was to see if, like articles, the categories that page is in are listed at the bottom but apparently for userpages they aren't. So, is there any way to leave it without getting rid of the userbox? Thanks!

 glowing regards, paperandscissors ✉ talk 05:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Paperandscissors: try specifying |nocat=yes Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:05, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Paperandscissors: Your example supports nocat but many templates don't. {{Suppress categories}} is a general method to remove categories from template output. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Duncan baronets

"Clarification needed". I can't clarify WHY, but I can help prove this is the case.

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

Duncan baronets, of Horsforth Hall (1905) Sir (Surr[clarification needed]) William Duncan, 1st Baronet (1834–1908)

Sir (Surr) William Duncan, 1st Baronet (1834–1908) has his title SIR as SURR. I don't know why but in the past few days I've seen both his first wife's gravestone (with him mentioned) and his (and 2nd wife's gravestone) both having SIR spelt/spelled SURR. Can't explain why but can upload photos. How do I deal with "clarification needed" when I can't clarify why on earth he did this, but can clarify this is the case with proof!?

Thank you. Iamaran (talk) 00:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

See the discussion that I had with Iamaran on my user talk page here. ~Oshwah~(talk) (contribs) 02:08, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Reference 5 in the article is to a pdf of a page in the London Gazette (which itself is about the most authoritative reliable source one could wish for: a pdf of it could theoretically be faked, but this and the other announcements there seem to check out).
It's clear from this source that "Surr" is not a bizarre alternative spelling of "Sir" or a different and unique title – it is simply the man's first name. His name was Surr William Duncan, just as the next person in the same announcement was John Reeves Ellerman.
Thus, the latter would, having been made a Baronet of the United Kingdom, be formerly called "Sir John Reeves Ellerman, 1st Baronet" or Sir John (Reeves) Ellerman of Connaught Square, and informally (probably) "Sir John"; the former would formally have been Sir Surr William Duncan, 1st Baronet or —ditto— of Horsforth Hall. Informally, since "Sir Surr" sounds a little odd, I suspect he might have used "Sir William." {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.35.136 (talk) 11:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Category:Rabbis in Bnei Brak

The category, Rabbis in Bnei Brak is linked with the Arabic page تصنيف:حاخامات في بني براك, while the Hebrew page קטגוריה:בני ברק: רבנים is linked with the Yiddish page קאַטעגאָריע:רבנים פון בני ברק. Since all four of these categories are the same, can somebody please merge the interlaguage links of the English-Arabic categories with the Hebrew-Yiddish categories? Thank you, Charlie Smith FDTB (talk) 01:47, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

 Done. Kleinpecan (talk) 12:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Can someone explain how to declare my bias?

Hi, I am Matthew Berdyck, hello investigated and exposed a toxic waste site in Akron, Ohio. I was just informed that an article was created about this Superfund site and I’m the person that conducted the original research on the subject matter. It looks like it was rejected for only having two sources but I have access to at least a hundred more secondary reliable sources for the subject matter. My concern is that I made a movie about it, which exposed it, and parts of the article talk about this, also from secondary sources. How can I complete this article and declare my bias? I am new here so I don’t entirely understand how things work. 2Famous2UseMyName (talk) 23:56, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi 2Famous2UseMyName. Please see WP:PAID#How to disclose. You can post to your userpage, which has not yet been created and is linked here, this template {{paid|user=2Famous2UseMyName|employer=InsertName|client=InsertName}}. See {{Paid}} for a information on the fill-in parameters. Question: Was the draft about Poison in the Grapes, or about the Superfund site itself? It might be good to tell us the name of the draft, so we can advise further.

Many drafts are created here and are rejected not because the subject is not suitable for an article but because whoever attempted to post it, violated copyright, or didn't use suitable sources, etc. It might be as you say, just needs more sourcing, or it may be it would be better to start from scratch for a variety of reasons. Just be aware that Wikipedia is by, and everyone you see here, are volunteers. Holes in coverage are filled by people like you noticing the hole and filling it. Anyway, I suggest starting with the WP:Tutorial and then reading Help:Your first article, exploring some of the more prominent links found through them. By the way, while you do have a technical COI, it's of a subtype that is often not so disabling the way so many are, and given your background I expect you have some innate sense of journalistic precepts, neutrality in writing, what an encyclopedia is, etc. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 00:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

You could put a list of them on the talk page of the draft. This would be very helpful and likely speed up the process of the draft becoming an article. bop34 • talk • contribs 00:36, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
The article is called Summit Equipment & Supplies Superfund Site and has a short section on my film which exposed it. I’m actually an arm chair historian and I have a strong belief in providing accurate, non-biased history, whether I like it or not, which can be controversial, like what happens when I tell you a Republican named Richard Nixon formed the US EPA, in 1970, and then a Democrat finds my moms phone number, calls her, threatens to slit her throat because I’m “funded by the Koch Brothers,” and then tries to get me to fire myself. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2Famous2UseMyName (talk • contribs) 00:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@2Famous2UseMyName:. Please see WP:REALWORLD because if you're worried that somehow the edits you make on Wikipedia might some be traced back to you out in the real world, then my suggestion to you would be not to edit at all or at least to avoid editing controversial or contentious subject where someone might be able to connect the edits back to you. As for your strong beliefs on things, please see WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS and WP:ORIGINALRESEARCH; your beliefs might be important to you, but probably not so much to Wikipedia unless they've can be supported by citations to WP:SECONDARY sources. Moreover, even in the latter case, they still might be considered WP:UNDUE or otherwise WP:NOTEVERYTHING for Wikipedia's purposes. Please understand I'm not trying to be harsh here, but try and keep in mind that Wikipedia wants us all to be as WP:HERE as we possibly can, and most editors only start having problems with other editors when then move too far into WP:NOTHERE territory. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Summit Equipment & Supplies Superfund Site was created in May 2020 and declined, not resubmitted. The creating editor was indefinitely blocked for behavior, so that person not coming back to improve the draft. David notMD (talk) 02:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

For starters, mention on your User page (perhaps before all the short paragraphs), that you are editing the draft while you are also mentioned in the draft. Anyone else have guidance here? David notMD (talk) 02:08, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Whoops - blocked for sockpuppetry (multiple accounts, including the account that started the draft). David notMD (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

How do I print/save a wikipedia article without the brackets/numbers that are interspersed throughout the article?

I am trying to make a long post on reddit that includes me copy/pasting about 40 paragraphs of text from wikpiedia but all the text I grab includes numbers like this[1] and this[2]. Is there a fast way to remove the numbers with brackets around them? Also what are the bracketed numbers formally called? 2600:1006:B054:DE27:9042:63B0:7DA9:3E23 (talk) 02:15, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi IP 2600:1006:B054:DE27:9042:63B0:7DA9:3E23|2600:1006:B054:DE27:9042:63B0:7DA9:3E23. Those bracketed numbers your seeing are footnote markers which indicate that the preceding content is supported by a citation. They are added inline to article content by those editing the article and can only be removed if the corresponding syntax itself is also removed, which is something that you shouldn't being trying to do since it will likely create problems that others will have to clean up. As to reusing Wikipedia content on other websites, please take a careful look at Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content because Wikipedia's licensing policy requires that any content copied from it and used on other websites be properly attributed; so, instead of simply copying-and-pasting content from Wikipedia article's onto Reddit, it would probably be much easier to just simply add url links to the Wikipedia articles to the Reddit discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I posted a way at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#How do I print/save a wikipedia article without the brackets/numbers that are interspersed throughout the article? Please only post a question in one place. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:18, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Additionally, without the references you will need to consider whether the information you are quoting is true, as Wikipedia is not a reliable source. The references are there by design so that anyone can check the information in a reliable source. What reason will someone have to believe the information without the referencing? — Bilorv (talk) 14:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

how can i create a sandbox in wikipedia

 Buzzie19 (talk) 14:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse Buzzie19. You already appear to have one at [1], created March 20. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Question

Is it okay to move an article to draft space while editing? I've already place 'inuse' and 'under construction' templete there. The page reviewer moved the article to draft space while and editing without telling. Is that okay? Draft:SONA New York. YogeshWarahTalk 13:05, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Yogeshwarah Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, it was okay to move the draft. That is better than outright deleting it, if it is unsuitable as an encyclopedia article. Your draft just tells of the existence of the restaurant and that a notable person started it. You will need at least three independent reliable sources with significant, in depth coverage of this restaurant, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable business, to summarize in order for this restaurant to merit an article. It doesn't merit an article because a notable person started it. The sources you have are just routine announcements, which do not establish notability.
Successfully creating a new article is the absolute hardest task to perform on Wikipedia, and diving right in often ends up with disappointment and hurt feelings as your work is mercilessly edited and even deleted by others. It is much better to gain experience by editing existing articles first, to get a feel for how Wikipedia operates and what is expected of article content. There is a reason new users are not permitted to do so immediately. Even once you technically can create an article directly, it's a good idea to run it by other editors before it is formally placed in the encyclopedia. 331dot (talk) 13:32, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi Yogeshwarah. Once an article is added to the mainspace, it's there for anyone to edit at anytime, and this includes nominating or tagging it for deletion. So, sometimes an article is draftified instead because someone (often a WP:NPP reviewer, but not always) feels it's not quite ready for the WP:MAINSPACE, but has potential. This can actually be a good thing because it gives the creator or primary contributors to the article a chance to work on improving it at their own pace without having to worry about others editing it, or nominating/tagging it for deletion. My suggestion to you would be to continue to work on the draft and submit it Wikipedia:Articles for creation when you think it's ready. You might also want to read Wikipedia:Notability (organizations and companies) because that's how the draft is likely going to be assessed. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:34, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Sudden IP ban from Wikipedia

Question

For some reason the IP I had at home was blocked so I couldn't create an account, I had to request for one. I haven't done anything wrong, I rarely edit wikipedia posts unless it's necessary so it is weird. Anyways, I would edit wikipedia on my account because I don't want people seeing my IP. Could it possibly be... that someone was on a VPN and was doing vandalism on this one? I'd like to know. AlexEditsWikipedia (talk) 14:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@AlexEditsWikipedia: Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. The folks here at the Teahouse can't see your IP, therefore, we are unable to help you. The vandalism idea is certainly possible, though there are a lot of other explanations, including autoblocks from blocked accounts, or any other rule violation. Victor Schmidt (talk) 14:48, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Politicians and elections in Wikipedia

Hi I am currently attempting to fill in all of the members of the West Virginia House of Delegates who do not have pages and I came across one who was elected in 2020 but had run for office 5 times previously. Should I include his failed campaigns in the elections section? Thanks. FlyingKitten2024 (talk) 14:59, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

FlyingKitten2024 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If they are a current member(and thus meeting WP:NPOLITICIAN), you can add information that you have independent reliable sources for, including failed campaigns. 331dot (talk) 15:08, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Courtesy link: West Virginia House of Delegates @FlyingKitten2024: The article doesn’t look like it has any information about failed candidates, only current members. If that candidate was notable enough to have their own article, you could put the previous unsuccessful campaigns there. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 15:11, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey FlyingKitten2024! Short answer: yes. If they are a member of the House of Delagates then they'd get an article, and you can put their past election runs in a separate section of that article (provided that you have a reliable sources for them like 331dot said). Which article are you currently working on? Bkissin (talk) 15:52, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

An article’s next step

Once all possible encyclopedic information has been added to an article, say a stub or start class article, what exactly is the next step for the article? Copy/edit format check? Nothing? Or once all possible information has been added, does the article’s class just increase? More of asking how can the article be improved once all information is in the article. Thanks for the advice in advance. Elijahandskip (talk) 15:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Elijahandskip: Wow, we are talking a lot today! The answer is that it depends. When I first started on WP (FOREVER ago) I worked on the article for my my local airport. When I felt like I had brought the article up to a good level, I asked that the article be assessed as a good article, with the hope that someday it would be featured. The reviewer pointed out several things on the talk page that still needed work on the article in order to bring it to a good level.
The other option is to look at the Wikipedia assessment criteria and see where the article fits. Look at the examples listed as a Featured Article or a B-class article and see what (if anything) your article needs to get up to that point. Some WikiProjects have more specific criteria for assessment. For example Wikipedia:WikiProject Canada has its own level of assessment and importance criteria, and Wikipedia:WikiProject Indiana has its own importance criteria that each of those projects uses to assess articles on its own scale. Sometimes, what is a High-importance article for one project will be a low-importance article for another. I hope this helps answer some of your questions. Bkissin (talk) 16:07, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks Bkissin! Elijahandskip (talk) 16:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Minor Edits?

Hello, I'm a little confused on what is considered a minor edit. While i'm pretty sure a grammatical fix etc would be considered minor, would it be considered minor to add a date or entry on to a list? Or a paragraph on an already large article? Defwe12 (talk) 16:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

There is no precise definition but you can look at Wikipedia:Minor edit. Ruslik_Zero 16:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Defwe12: Hello, welcome to the Teahouse. Help:Minor edit might be helpful for you. max20characters 🇺🇸 16:44, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Adding any substantive content, even a date, is not a minor edit. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Close a sockpuppet investigation

How do I close a sockpuppet investigation I started a week ago and which hasn't been active since then? Both users in question are already banned, and honestly it was probably an overkill. Should I request a speedy deletion under G7? Kleinpecan (talk) 13:02, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I don't thinkWP:G7 is necessary. Just post something similar on the SPI page itself to let the clerks who handle such investigations that you've decided to withdraw your request. You can also go to WP:AN and explain what you've explained here and an admin will probably close it asap. Maybe even one of the admins who are Teahouse hosts Like Cullen328, Nick Moyes, Hoary or 331dot will see this and close it for you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Also, even if both users in the investigation are blocked, it might still be worth a member of the SPI team looking at it, to check there's no more related sockpuppet accounts. Joseph2302 (talk) 14:34, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Many sockpuppet investigations are sitting in an open state for a long time, so adding anything to an open sockpuppet investigation will only be seen when the SPI itself is seen. Some SPIs have been open without being looked at by a CheckUser or a clerk for two weeks. Robert McClenon (talk) 16:58, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Formatting Tables

Hello! I am creating a table for an article and I am unsure about how to combine cells. To be more specific, I am listing a director's awards, and there are different awards she received on the same year at the same film festival. Instead of repeating the year and festival names in numerous cells, I would like to create a larger cell that only lists the name and year once. Any advice on how to do this would be greatly appreciated. Midnightmadness7 (talk) 17:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Midnightmadness7: you use rowspan="" or colspan="". An example table should illustrate that:
Header Cell 1 Header Cell 2 Header Cell 3 Header Cell 4
Content Cell A1 Content Cell A2/A3 Content Cell A4
Content Cell B1 Content Cell B2/C2 Content Cell B3 Content Cell B4
Content Cell C1 Content Cell C3 Content Cell C4
If you have problems with the formatting or don't like to mess up, I recommend using the VisualEditor. You can connect two ore more cells there by holding ⇧ Shift and selecting the cells. Victor Schmidt (talk) 17:55, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Help

Can anybody help me to expand a draft article, Draft:Divya Gokulnath, co-founder and director of Byju's. She is the wife of Byju Raveendran, founder of Byju's. The sources in the article have deep details about her and the reviewer also states that, see this. I'm new to Wikipedia and learning.. kindly kelp me please... Thanks in advance YogeshWarahTalk 13:53, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

You started an account on 22 March, then started drafts on the 23rd, 23rd, 25th and 26th, with outcomes respectively declined twice (Divya), accepted, declined once and not yet submitted. From looking at the Divya draft, several editors appear to be contributing. Persevere. David notMD (talk) 15:42, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Appropriateness of Interwiki Linking

The Help pages regarding interwiki linking describe 'how' to do it, but I'm not sure if it's acceptable in every case when there's an article on a subject lacking an article in EN WP. Is it better to hold off until there's an EN page on the subject? Do I have to confirm the linked page adheres to any basic standard by EN WP? Could I just add it to the prose, or add it as an external link at the end?

The question is somewhat general, but the article I'm looking at is Adaheli, I think the nl:Cornelius van Coll article could be linked. Cheers, Estheim (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Estheim. The preferred way for linking articles now is by Wikidata, but that should only be used where the subjects of the articles coincide. Where there is no precise match, it is still possible to use the old mechanism by putting [[nl:Cornelius van Coll]] (without a leading colon) somewhere in the article - probably at the bottom. --ColinFine (talk) 18:23, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
ColinFine, thanks, I plopped it at the end. Odds are that the Dutch page subject is more notable than the one mention of a mythological figure that all circle back to him, but that is another issue for another time. Cheers, Estheim (talk) 18:46, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Automatically change numbering in a list

I added an Chepstow to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_localities_in_Wales_by_population at position 32 but other listeing below remain unchanged so there are 2 entries for 32. Is there a way to automatically changing numbering when you add to a list? 222288 (talk) 17:15, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hmarcw, it seems that those numbers aren't automatically generated, they've just been typed into the source for the article. 5 is missing. Maproom (talk) 19:27, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hmarcw (talk • contribs) 19:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Newcomer

 41.115.38.61 (talk) 19:43, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Do you have a question? Teahouse is a place to ask questions about how to edit. David notMD (talk) 20:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Photo Rights

How do you know when you can use a picture? For example would a picture from the 1800's have any copyright and if so how can you tell? I want to know bout photo rights mainly for these two pictures of Alexander Hunter. http://www.arlingtoncemetery.net/alexander-hunter.htm and https://archive.org/details/confederateveter22conf/page/468/mode/2up. Please tell me if this is a reference desk question. Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 14:51, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Gandalf the Groovy It depends on your country but I suspect almost any photo that old would be okay to use. I don't think(but maybe others know) any country has copyright last more than 100 years. 331dot (talk) 15:09, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Gandalf the Groovy. In the United States, copyright has expired for all photos published more than 95 years ago. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:13, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@331dot: According to this article, Looks like Mexico has the longest copyright term, life of author plus 100 years, with Côte d'Ivoire coming in second at life + 99 years..--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

how do i get a good account

hello wikipedia overlords, I want to make myself an account (finally). how do you create an account? thanks, 162.245.178.141 (talk) 21:45, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello IP! Just head over to Special:CreateAccount, fill in a few fields, and you're done! If you have any questions as an editor, feel free to ask them here at the teahouse :-) Pahunkat (talk) 21:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
wait why is it that I don't have my contributions anymore? Creator of Chaos (talk) 22:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Your previous edits are attributed to your IP address 162.245.178.141. Sadly, it's not possible to re-assign edits identified with an IP address to an account; if you want, you can write on your user page that you previously edited Wikipedia with that IP address. Kleinpecan (talk) 22:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Unfortunate. Thanks for you help Creator of Chaos (talk) 22:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello

I was wondering, how do you create these little pages like KY 6116 or KY 3611 on this article: List of Kentucky supplemental roads and rural secondary highways (3500–6999) — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheGs2007 (talk • contribs) 21:52, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

TheGs2007, hello, friend! By "little page," I assume you mean a section. You can easily do that by going into the editor, finding where the section belongs, and typing the heading, like this: == HEADING ==. Then, under your heading, you can type the necessary content (don't forget your reliable references!) and go ahead and publish it. Is that what you wanted to know? Thanks, EDG 543 (message me) 22:20, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
(e/c) Hi TheGs2007. If you go to one of those sections, and click the side edit link, you can isolate the code that is creating the content you see. I'm not sure which part of the content you are referring to above, but, for example, if you scroll down to the part of the page for KY 6116, it uses section header markup (==Header==) to create the title; below that makes the infobox you see using the template: {{Infobox road small}}, and uses another template, {{-}}}, to create the ending line, below the text. To wit:
==KY 6116==
{{Infobox road small
|state=KY
|type=KY
|route=6116
|length_mi=0.161
|length_ref=<ref name="DMI Ohio"/>
|location=[[Cromwell, Kentucky|Cromwell]]
|established=
}}
Text of section
{{-}}
You can see how many things work here in the same way (except when they use modules for the output, which presents an accessibility problem in my view). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
A minor correction to the description above: the template {{-}} does not create an ending line; it "clears" the content so that one section finishes completely before starting the next, and they don't overlap.--Gronk Oz (talk) 22:35, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

IP block while logged in

I tried to edit a page with a VPN active and it blocked me form editing it (as is to be expected) then when I logged in, I was still blocked from editing. Is this a bug or can you not edit over a VPN even while logged in? Cynosure-NULL (talk) 21:08, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

VPN's are HARD BLOCKED. you cannot use them at all without Jimbo's approval. sorry man 162.245.178.141 (talk) 21:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Cynosure-NULL: welcome to the Teahouse. The IP above is not quite right – Jimbo's approval doesn't enter into it, but it is true that editing using an open proxy is generally not allowed. If you need an exemption, you can see what is required here. You would need to show why it would not be possible for you to edit without going through a VPN. --bonadea contributions talk 22:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

tools to see who has edited the article and listing which editors edit the same articles

i seem to recall seeing 2 external tools for editors:

  1. tools to see who has edited the article and
  2. listing which editors edit the same articles

Thanks in advance for your help and kindness! Infinitepeace (talk) 23:10, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

@Infinitepeace: "Page statistics" in a page history and Wikipedia:Editor Interaction Analyzer. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:19, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Reference Templates within Basic Form Templates

While editing articles, I've noticed that I've seen two to three (possibly four) Cite Web templates within one Basic Form Template. Is this an acceptable way to make citations? Should I remove the additional Cite web templates within the Reference Template, making individual citations? Pibal373 (talk) 20:50, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

 Anhy999 (talk) 20:52, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Anyh999. It is fine to put several references together into one footnote. See Help:Citation merging. Don't change them. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:57, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Pibal373, I've replied to the wrong person. Sorry. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:08, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you. StarryGrandma--Pibal373 (talk) 01:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Their articles are absolutely what we have on our platform. Not a single trace of difference. Try to speak to host there, but no one care to explain... Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 04:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Hypersonic man 11. My guess is that there's no connection between the two sites, except perhaps that maybe some people are editing on both. See WP:MIRROR for more details, but there are probably lots of other websites that get their content from Wikipedia. This is OK to do per WP:REUSE as long as the website complies with the terms of Wikipedia's licensing. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:00, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
So, is the site comply with the license. I don't really think so because it's a wiki copying a wiki as a public wiki. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 05:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
I don't know what the site is doing, but Wikipedia content is licensed in a way that allows it to be re-used and even modified for any purpose as long as proper attribution is provided to Wikipedia. Even if the site is not complying with Wikipedia's licensing, there's not much that any editors here can do about it. You can contact the Wikimedia Foundation directly if you want. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Hypersonic man 11: We are not affiliated with Fandom (website) (previously called Wikia). Many articles at wikia:Military were copied from Wikipedia but later edited separately. Compare for example Dragoons and wikia:Military:Dragoons which have some differences. They appear to comply with Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. The bottom of their page says "This page uses Creative Commons Licensed content from Wikipedia (view authors)." Some of their articles were not copied, e.g. wikia:Military:Paramilitary firearm. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:54, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Dragoons, is, however, not the case. You expect some Chinese military articles, absolutely, the same. Those Chinese Military sources are hard to find, so over the case, they copied from us and re-used it as their own public wiki server. Besides, other wiki pages are copied directly from Wikipedia. Based on your explanation, which is unreasonable, they copied and slightly edit it over words, will your English teacher accept your paper, where you source from the web or a book, with some grammar exchange? This is an unlawful plagiarism act, and even if they edited it based on words, they still took it from our hard work, so what's the point of creating the Wikia? What's the point of copying us, losing our status, and take exchange. Should they even exist, if Wikipedia is already here, why are they doing so, its not in any way better? Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 11:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@User: Marchjuly, I want to do so to safeguard the justice and rights of Wikipedia. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 11:39, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
That sounds good except that Wikipedia doesn't really care how its content is reused as long as those doing so properly attribute the content to Wikipedia and otherwise abide by the terms of Wikipedia:Text of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. You might want to take a closer look at Wikipedia:About and Wikipedia:Copyrights because this is pretty much the way Wikipedia has always licensed its content and likely will be the way it always licenses its content.I understand how it might be upsetting to find content you've edited or created on Wikipedia being used on some other website; however, you agree to relinquish any claim of ownership over such content every time you click the "Publish changes" button. That's part of the agreement we make with the Wikimedia Foundation; they let us edit their website for free and we agree to waive any claim of ownership over the things we edit. The next time you make an edit, read the small print located above the "Publish changes" button. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:14, 26 March 2021 (UTC);[Note: Part of post stricken out by Marchjuly; oversimplification at best and incorrect (see below) at worst. -- 22:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)]
@Hypersonic man 11: It's only plagiarism if they pretend they wrote it. They say twice that they got it from us. The second time is via the category "Articles incorporating text from Wikipedia". Their only mistake is that the "view authors" link goes to the page history of the redirect Dragoons instead of the article Dragoon. Interested readers can still find the right page via the redirect so I forgive them. We explicitly allow others to copy our articles. They don't need a reason. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:58, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Hypersonic man 11. Let me give some background that might be helpful for a future actual instance of non-compliant re-use, if you want to take action on his type of matter.
  1. We – us editors of Wikipedia, personally – own the copyright to our original contributions to Wikipedia that meet threshold of originality, and not the Wikimedia Foundation ([@Marchjuly:] "we agree to waive any claim of ownership over the things we edit" is incorrect);
  2. Thus, when I write an article, I personally own the copyright to its content, just as you do for your contributions that meet the threshold of originality (and aren't, for example, quotations of pre-existing copyrighted content, that we can use to a limited extent under fair use);
  3. That personal copyright ownership, though, is under the free copyright license or licenses [depending on what and when it was posted) we automatically agree our original content is released under (although some small segment of users actually release their contributions into the public domain, e.g., by posting on their userpage {{User Publicdomain}});
  4. The free copyright license or licenses (it depends), essentially require that re-users, such as the Fandom Wikia site i) provide suitable credit to the authors of the content, which we agree can be done by linking to the Wikipedia page where the list of authors are available from the page history, and ii) by re-posting the license, etc. (see Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content for more nitty-gritty details on suitable compliance);
  5. The rub of this is that any claim for infringement under the free license or licenses must be made by an editor here who actually owns the copyright; I can make such a claim, for example, for some instance of non-compliant reuse of the content of an article that I am a substantial contributor to; I cannot for an article I am not a substantial contributor to; and the Wikimedia Foundation could not, because they have no standing to do so as a non-owner of the content;
  6. You can make such a claim by following the recommendations at Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks#Non-compliance process, such as sending a tailored Wikipedia:Standard CC-BY-SA violation letter (I have done this a number of times and actually had some results; mostly though, the response is silence – you can escalate to a DMDCA takedown notice if you're willing to spend the time; but your options are limited thereafter, unless you are willing to actually sue someone, which I'm not sure anyone has ever done for non-compliance with a Wikipedia re-use (the hypothetical ability to sue some person or organization tells you little about the practicality of doing so);
  7. But as already mentioned, it appears this site is in compliance with copyright. Nevertheless, the unfortunate fact is that about five minutes after an article is crawled by search engines, there are numerous sites infringing the content. It's just the nature of the beast.
Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:33, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for clarifying things Fuhghettaboutit and pointing out my error. My apologies to you Hypersonic man 11 if I oversimplified things too much and gave you some incorrect information in the process. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
So, end to end is it compliable with the terms. I don't think it's by standard CC copyrights and CC-BY-SA acceptable. What's the point of having the second wiki copied directly from the first wiki? If it's not, maybe let's just take action. I've tried to contact them, in the discussion centre, but no one replied. Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 01:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Why is it compliable, any clue? Is it a systematic approach or is it, well, your approach to their utterly "mute". Pls clarify it, it's not that they don't care or no result had been made over the past, but, it is about the basic violation of CC-BY-SA, so we need to take the systematic approach. Even if the answer is yes, how can all of you, maybe some who throw out the systematic ways of accepting things, accept this basic violation of the rules? Hypersonic man 11 (talk) 02:06, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Notification of Change

Will I be notified is someone changes my information on my page? 2600:6C5E:117F:B839:5D6:2667:21E1:BE7F (talk) 02:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC) 2600:6C5E:117F:B839:5D6:2667:21E1:BE7F (talk) 02:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

If you create an account, you can add a page to your watchlist to be notified of changes. Also, you might want to read WP:OWN RudolfRed (talk) 02:20, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Content?

What kind of contents prohibited to be published in Wikipedia? Blasius B. (talk) 02:21, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Blasius B.: Welcome to Wikipedia. You can see some things at WP:NOT. Also, everything you add must be supported by a published, reliable source. RudolfRed (talk) 02:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

New User would like experienced editor to work with me

Would anyone (experienced editor) be willing to help me establish a sitting politician's wiki entry?

I am new to wiki world, but I am an experienced journalist and copyeditor. Fast learner.


Thanks! Jackson Friedman (talk) 05:39, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Jackson, and welcome to the Teahouse! I don't necessarily have to be the only person who can help you out here (other people can jump in too), but count me in if you need any assistance. Would you mind giving the name of the politician just so I can make sure they pass Wikipedia's inclusion crtieria? If they don't pass notability guidelines, then there's nothing I or anyone else here can do, but these guidelines are decently lenient, and if the politician does meet them, then I can give you as much help as you need. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 08:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

About Wikipedia

How can I can be a much better Wikipedia editor? Zahsj (talk) 23:31, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

First, write better Edit summaries. Writing "Changing" for every one of your edits is bad. Second, see what constitutes a 'minor' edit (Help:Minor edit). Third, stop making small wording changes in existing articles when the existing wording has no problems (especially at Good Articles). Fourth, when you update population numbers, you have to provide an update reference. David notMD (talk) 00:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
@Zahsj: To expand on what David notMD noted about edit summaries, those are there for the benefit of both other editors and you. An edit summary should give those reading the 'View history' section an idea of the kind of changes that were made, not just that a change was made – after all, an edit, by definition, is a change. So for example, in your edit to the article World War II, a good edit summary might have been "Added exact dates to first paragraph in lead section." For more information, please see the 'Help' page for edit summaries. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 08:39, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Appropriateness of images in an article

I recently removed a significant number of images from Truth (after consensus with other members) because they did not comply with Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images. The matter of concern here is an excessive number of allegorical paintings that add no meaningful knowledge to the philosophical topic at hand (which violates the Wikipedia style guide. In Justice, There are 12 images in total of the Lady Justice, including particularly artistic interpretations where she is nude and then some large paintings where you can hardly make out the allegory. Of course at least one of these works of art, preferably a sculpture of lady justice outside a house of court should remain in the article, but I feel the remaining 10/11 works of are are a extraneous.

Since I've already done something like this in Truth, I was wondering if I am overreaching by modifying another article with a similar issue. Again, the images break the Wikipedia style considerably so should not have been there in the first place. Personally speaking, I took action for Truth because it immediately stood out to me that this is not how a high quality encyclopedia article should look and the changes I made were to move it towards a higher quality article by removing the unnecessary images.

Your feedback on the following questions would be appreciated:

  • Since multiple wiki articles have the same issue, which is an obvious break from the style guides, am I missing some unwritten rule that says that articles in philosophy need to be decked in renaissance paintings as if it were the louvre?
  • If those renaissance images should be removed, should I go looking around for other articles in philosophy where the same problem occurs?
  • Do you have any idea why some Wikipedia editors add these figurative paintings to a topic on philosophy? Neither Britannica nor the other more formal philosophy encyclopedias (IEP and Stanford EP) do this, so this must be a homegrown Wikipedia aesthetic???

Reference: Previous justification made to removing the images in Truth, Talk:Truth#Improving the quality of images in this article. TranquilDragon (talk) 23:01, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi TranquilDragon. Lots of Wikipedia articles which display images of one type or another. Most of the times these might be format/syntax issues, but sometimes they are contextual/copyright issues. If you find any of these articles and you feel you can address the problem, then you can be WP:BOLD and do so. However, it might be wise (particularly if the problem is contextual) to at least check the article's talk page first to see if there's been any discussion about the way images are used being used because a WP:CONSENSUS might exist on the image. If you want to dig even deeper, you can check the page history to see who added the image and perhaps why it was added. A consensus can change over time, but you shouldn't ignore an existing consensus without at at least starting a discussion about it. Anyway, if you remove a file and someone restores, you should treat it like a "content dispute" and engage in talk page discussion, unless there's really clearly a serious problem with the image like a copyright or BLP violation.
If you want to going around looking for images inappropriately added to philosophy articles, you can. Cleaning up problem articles is an important part of being WP:HERE and with over six million articles, there's always going to be something that needs cleaning up. You might, however, want to at least discuss what you intend to do on the talk page of the relevant WikiProject (e.g. WT:PHILOSOPHY) to let others in on what you're intending to do. You might find others willing to help, but you might find others with a different take a things who might suggest a different approach. Sometimes doing too much too quickly can attract attention no matter how good your motives are and others might prefer things be discussed first just to establish a consensus one way or the other out of principle.
Wikipedia is edited by people from all over the world and everyone is a WP:VOLUNTEER; so, why people make certain edits is sort of a mystery in many cases. Many editors think you could never have enough images in an article; so, they add them whenever they can. Most of the time these are just good-faith attempts at improving the article and making it more interesting for readers. I think that's one of the strengths of a "homegrown" project like Wikipedia, but in can also lead to some inconsistencies as well that you might not find in a more formal and more rigorously controlled publication like the ones you mentioned. Nobody vets Wikipedia edits before they're made; so, the best that can be done is to try and cleanup problems as we find them. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the suggestions Marchjuly. In the previous article (Truth) there were several attempts by previous editors to get some images removed in the Talk page, but all of these were shut down by another editor on the basis of censorship. Finally when I arrived on the scene, I wrote up a long piece on the fact that it was an unnuanced application of the style guide to call censorship and in fact there were several other issues with including those images as well. This helped me gain a degree of concensus with, I think, three other editors backing me and none against.
While I think I could do the same (post on Talk and build concensus), I feel your suggestion to discuss first on WT:PHILOSOPHY would be better since otherwise I would have to write a long justification every time I make similar edits to an article. Besides, I feel like I've condensed some of the common ways the Wikipedia style guide is misused in Philosophy articles and this might be helpful for all other Philosophy articles in the future especially since the Philosophy style guide on images Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Philosophy#Images is pretty sparse and could include several phyilosophy specific applications of Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Images.
A couple more questions:
  • How do I find which WikiProject an article belongs to (e.g. Justice -> Philosophy)? Is it from the box at the bottom of the page (this simply takes me to the Philosphy article and not the WikiProject page however)? File:Justice-bottom-box.jpg
  • There is a Law portal next to the Justice portal - does this mean the article also belongs to a 'WikiProject Law'?
  • Also, does every Wikipedia article have a WikiProject it belongs to?
Thanks again, TranquilDragon (talk) 06:11, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
You can usually find out which WikiProjects cover an article by checking the top of the article’s talk page for WikiProject banners. WikiProject banners help with categorization, assessments, etc. and ideally every article probably should belong to at least one WikiProject if possible; however, many do not because whomever created the article either didn’t know about WikiProjects or didn’t think it was necessary. Even when there are banners on the talk page, sometimes they’re might not be really applicable. — Marchjuly (talk) 09:18, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Where to report an instance of a shared account

Near the tail end of the discussion on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zhou Chengzhou, which some of you may have seen here the other day, the article's creator stated, in attempting to rebut claim that the article was an undisclosed autobiography: "Due to the IP address‘s problems. So I can't use my own account to edit. So I can just only use Zhou Chengzhou's own account to edit. The statement was never edited by him."

I don't think anyone in the discussion picked up on this, but this seems like a direct violation of WP:NOSHARING and an admission thereof, not to mention an admission of undisclosed COI editing. Essentially: "No, this is not an undisclosed autobiography. I actually just know Zhou Chenzhou and am using his account to create and edit the article about him." I was wondering if there's a sockpuppetry noticeboard where I could report this information. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 08:19, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

May be moot, given that the article has been deleted, and the editor in question has shown little interest in editing anything else. David notMD (talk) 10:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Is "The Kid Icon"a notable figure?

 The Kid Icon (talk) 11:44, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

The Kid Icon Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. That depends on who you are, what you do, and whether or not independent reliable sources give you significant coverage. Note that Wikipedia discourages autobiographical articles, see WP:AUTO. 331dot (talk) 11:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Based on [2], no. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Doane Tigers Draft

Hello, I am making a Draft article for the Doane Tigers football seasons from 2010 to 2019 (I think it is "notable", because WP:NSEASONS says that multiple seasons may be grouped together). And I'm putting summaries in the season sections with CFB Game templates, but after I put in the template, everything that comes after it appears in the box. Is there any way I can fix this. (The Draft is at User:BeanieFan11/Doane Tigers football, 2010–2019) Thanks. BeanieFan11 (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, BeanieFan11, and welcome to the Teahouse. Since nobody had picked this up, I had a look: it baffled me (I even looked at the HTML source). Eventually I looked at another article which used those templates, and found that the last {{AFB game box scoring entry}} needs a parameter LastEntry=yes, or it doesn't work. This parameter is mentioned on the template documentation page, but I think it could do with a large friendly warning saying "You must use this or the world will come to an end". Note, by the way, that so far your draft does not have a single reference which is independent of the subject, and so does not establish notability and has no chance of being accepted as an article. --ColinFine (talk) 12:45, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia History Questions

I want to know a few things:

1. What was the first Wikipedia page? 2. What was the first presidential election to be put on Wikipedia? 3. Who made Wikipedia? xdude (talk) 14:41, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Xdude gamer. Start by reading History of Wikipedia. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 15:06, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Xdude gamer. Please see List of presidential elections. If you mean US election, I believe the first was the 1788–89 United States presidential election.--Shantavira|feed me 17:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
No, I mean the first one ever put on Wikipedia.
My bets kind of fall on 2000. xdude (talk) 17:04, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Xdude gamer: that is not the kind of information that is particularly easy to find out – it might not even be possible to do so. There must be thousands of articles about presidential elections, and even if you limit yourself to the English-language version of Wikipedia you'd have a pretty stiff job going through them all. The Teahouse is for questions about editing Wikipedia, so it is not really the best place to ask this kind of question. --bonadea contributions talk 17:36, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Oh. Sorry. Just trying to ask questions. xdude (talk) 18:12, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
It's okay – sorry if I sounded dismissive. I think the Village Pump might be a better place for questions about the history of Wikipedia, though. --bonadea contributions talk 18:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Xdude gamer might find illumination in the article History of Wikipedia and others linked from it. For what it's worth, no such article appears in Wikipedia:First 100 pages. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.219.35.136 (talk) 12:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Swap page title with one of a page title redirecting to the first page

Hi. I have recently made some edits to CGTG-102 including the fact that its name has changed to ONCOS-102. However, I am unable to move the page as ONCOS-102 already existed, and now reedirects to CGTG-102. Is there a way to swap the page titles so that CGTG-102 becomes the redirect, and ONCOS-102 becomes the main page title.

Thanks!

Edit - Wikipedia:Moving_a_page#Swapping_two_pages Could do this but I think requires an administrator?

 YorkshireExpat (talk) 10:52, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@YorkshireExpat: Done. No history swap was needed, because the redirect did not have a major page history that needed preserving. (This could have been requested using {{db-move}} ({{db-move|1=page to be moved|2=reason}}), or by posting to WP:RM#TR). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 12:59, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Another attempt at autobiography

Hey, I am new to Wikipedia and today tried to publish an article about myself, but it declined, please help me Rshtun1993 (talk) 13:04, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

(Added a section title) David notMD (talk) 13:21, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Wikipedia is not a website host. Nothing in what you submitted (Draft:Rshtun Babayan) suggests you qualify as Wikipedia-notable. Rather, it is promotional of your business. Articles require refs written about the topic. David notMD (talk) 13:25, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Further, Rshtun1993, they require independent references. Nothing said, written, or published by you or your associates will count. --ColinFine (talk)

Translated Titles

Why would you ever include the script title as well as the translated title? When you enter the script title it just translates it for the viewer anyway so including the translated title results in the English title appearing twice. I've been messing around with how to correctly reference Korean articles and I just don't understand it. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:30, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure what you mean about |script-title= being automatically translated. It doesn't happen for me, but maybe it's a new feature or something done by the WP:VISUALEDITOR. Have you tried asking at WP:KOREA about the best way to cite Korean language sources? Perhaps a member of that WikiProject can help sort out the problem you seem to be having? -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:03, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: Lmao, I had Google translate on so everything on the page that was in Korean was being translated to English even in the source list. So it was just a dumb user error. I know that it's preferred that editors who know both languages do translations and I know absolutely no Korean so I'm going to try and be cautious about what I use the sources for, but would you have any suggestions as to how I could mitigate any mistakes I'm making? Perhaps I should ask at the Wikiproject to have someone proofread for me once I'm done working on the article? TipsyElephant (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Primary versus secondary sources

If I'm using a source that is published by a reliable secondary source but the content is an interview with the subject of the Wikipedia article is that then a primary source? If the source heavily relies on what the subject of the Wikipedia article said that seems less like a secondary source and more like a primary one. TipsyElephant (talk) 13:28, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: There's a nice essay about this at Wikipedia:Interviews. GoingBatty (talk) 14:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft Delete

Help me to delete this article Draft:Falguni Nayar, because it is not written in formal tone/ encyclopedia model. Kindly help me to delete that draft. Logical Puzzle (talk) 13:44, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Logical Puzzle: Welcome to the Teahouse! If the only problem with the draft is that it is not written in a formal tone, you could help reword the draft, or provide suggestions on the draft's talk page. If the draft does not become an article, it will be deleted after 6 months of inactivity. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:13, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
(e/c) Hi Logical Puzzle. Assuming this is not improved and resubmitted, the draft will be deleted after six months of inactivity under section G13 of the criteria for speedy deletion (CSD). Unless you find that a draft meets some other basis for speedy deletion (e.g., it's a blatant copyright violation from it's first revision and meets CSD G12, or is such a blatant advertisement that it meets CSD G11), G13 is the normal way drafts are deleted, if not accepted. The only other option is to list it for a deletion discussion, at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion (MfD), but generally speaking it's a waste of community resources to take up time on deletion discussions for the average draft, when it will be ministerially deleted in the normal course under G13.

I don't see anything unusual about this draft that would make it a good candidate for MfD, nor do I see any other speedy deletion basis that applies. And not incidentally, it's not that bad a draft. You say it's not written in the necessary "formal tone..." That's not a deletion basis and is exactly what the draft space is good for: a place to incubate a proposed article so things like lacking a suitable formal tone can be fixed. Meanwhile, I think your edits tagging it with numerous speedy deletion tags that do not apply, continuing to do so quite a few times, and blanking the content, are inappropriate and rather disruptive. Please stop doing that. Thanks--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:31, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Logical Puzzle temporarily blocked from editing the article in question. LP created account on 26 March, and all edits have been attempts to delete draft or cut content from the draft in question. David notMD (talk) 14:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

final check before submitting

hi and good evening I've been working on an article for a couple of weeks and I would like some help and advice to improve my article so it won't be rejected . I've read the manual script and I think all of the documents are cited and has links and references . In my previous article I used the words such as great and ..... numorous ... and now I've edited it . my I know is there anything that I should edit ? thanks for giving me your time best regards Neda Sajedi Neda.sajedi (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: draft is at Draft:Masoud Shafaghi Declined 24 March. Not yet resubmitted. As mentioned at the draft's Talk page, many of the refs are to IFIA website, and as Masoud is an employee of IFIA, these are considered primary refs, and thus not contributing to confirmation of his notability in a Wikipedia sense of the word. David notMD (talk) 14:04, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Neda.sajedi.
  • Comply with WP:PAID, since almost every draft similar to this one was written by someone who needs to.
  • I immediately found you had copied swaths of text from the subject's (your?) Linkedin page (and one other source). Remove all other copyright violations (essentially, any text you copied from a source, though that's an oversimpification – see your talk page momentarily for more detail).
  • Note that I have blocked your account since you re-added the copyright violations after I removed them. However, I blocked it for the shortest period possible (3 hours), and will undo the block once I have warned you on your talk page. I did so only to prevent you from adding back the copyvios again before I had time to warn you regarding them. If after you have been notified, you add them back, only then would I block you for longer.
  • Get rid of all content based on Primary sources that are self-serving, provide any evaluation, or that are used for interpretation, opinion, synthesis or analysis and are not "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge".
  • For anything left, that can technically be based on primary sources, see if you can replace with a secondary source anyway, and if you can, do so.
  • Reformat all the references from naked URL, or just titles, to ones transparently attributing the sources, such as by providing the name of the work, author's name, title, date and such other details as identify the source, depending on context.
  • Get rid of all hagiography like "Recognition of Shafaghi's outstanding achievements..." This is an encyclopedia.
Regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:09, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Note: User now indefinitely blocked for re-adding copyvios again, after warnings.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:09, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft Expansion

Hello, I've started an article on 'Sona' restaurant by Priyanka Chopra. Please help me to expand the article Draft:SONA New York.

Thanks in advance... YogeshWarahTalk 18:09, 26 March 2021 (UTC)

The draft currently has no references to reliable independent sources, such as are needed to establish that the restaurant is notable enough to warrant a Wikipedia article. The sources it does cite are all based on statements made by Chopra, and so not independent. If you haven't been able to find any acceptable sources, I doubt anyone else can. Maproom (talk) 19:38, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
After searching, and failing to find any reliable independent sources that discuss the restaurant, I've realised why: it hasn't opened yet. No wonder it has no independent reviews. I suggest that you wait until it's been open for a couple of months. It should then be easier to find the sources that Wikipedia requires. Maproom (talk) 16:07, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

What is wrong with this draft?

Can you specify the errors in this article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:European_Clinic_Maldives Nabyl8899 (talk) 17:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

(created section title) David notMD (talk) 17:57, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
The declining editor explained what was wrong with the draft. In short, it has no reliable, secondary sources. You can't use a .jpg on Commons as a source, nor the website of the organisation to show notability in Wikipedia's rather specific sense. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

How do I obtain a picture of a person for wikipedia without infringing on copyrights????????

How do I update this photo with out copywrite issues? I don't get this at all. dO i DO A GOOGLE SEARCH AND PICK ANY PICTUIRE? sOMEONE PLEASE LET ME KNOW. Beamer.Backdrop (talk) 04:59, 25 March 2021 (UTC)

@Beamer.Backdrop: You can take a picture yourself and donate it. You could also ask someone to donate their own photo - see Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. GoingBatty (talk) 05:29, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Beamer.Backdrop Please, no multiple "?", no ALL CAPS: people here are trying to help. No, you definitely cannot pick any picture. GoingBatty's recommendation is good. Please do not frantically read the opening paragraph and the first section; it's a page that you have to read and digest in its entirety. (For example, there's no point following the advice under "Granting us permission to copy material already online" if the material isn't yours: You have to understand the section "You cannot donate what someone else owns" as well.) Getting a photo of your biographee into your now-draft, later-article is going to be difficult (though not impossible). Unless you can photograph him, somebody else is going to have to negotiate Wikimedia Commons's formalities. I imagine that they'd be more willing (less unwilling) to do that once they know that there is an article. I urge you to put all your effort into improving the text of the draft and getting it approved; once that's done, you can work on adding one or more photos to it. -- Hoary (talk) 06:46, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
Okay thank you for your help. How can I prove I had someone donate a picture? Like I follow him on social media. If I reach out to his social media (and gosh, if he answers me) and if he sent me something, how do I prove this? Or maybe I can pull a photo from a concert?? Thank you — Preceding unsigned comment added by Beamer.Backdrop (talk • contribs) 17:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
@Beamer.Backdrop: see the second half of the first bullet point I wrote at User talk:Beamer.Backdrop#Teahouse replies. I suggested that this process is not worth your time because, as you touch upon, the steps are difficult and have no guarantee of succeeding. For instance, were he to reply on social media saying "you could use this image", that would not even come close to acceptable under copyright law. He would need to get in contact with the photographer so that they could fill out this form (in the simplest case). I just do not think this is the right avenue to explore. Biographies on Wikipedia don't have to have images, and many don't. — Bilorv (talk) 19:46, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

please help me i am trying to give the kathak dancer her due respect by adding her name under her image but the bot is removing it every 12 hours what should i do

 Himanshushukla433 (talk) 20:57, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Himanshushukla433 everybody wiki is not something we can add here. Fiddle Faddle 21:04, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I shall expand that, a bit. To state a fact, Wikipedia should have a Reliable Source, which is defined at great length in WP:RS. When something is said about a living person, the rule is most strictly enforced. Autobiography does not do the job. Something said in a blog or a wiki does not. For example, Wikipedia does not serve the purpose of a Reliable Source. Think if it were not that way. If the way Wikipedia knows something is true is, some other part of Wikipedia says so, we've got a circle unconnected to the real world. The site you are using, Everybody Wiki, is even worse, since for the most part nobody is checking and deleting unsupported statements. So, Wikipedia cannot say a thing is true just because that other Web site has a page that says it is. Jim.henderson (talk) 21:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

When you say “it wasn’t constructive” when I added some information to some articles, what do you mean by constructive? How do I make the information I add constructive?

 Epictrex (talk) 20:11, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Epictrex, and welcome to the Teahouse. You'll have to ask Donald Albury why he reverted your edits, but I'm guessing that it's because you added information and changed dates without providing any sources. You could reply to him on his user talk page, or on your own, pinging him; but since I've pinged him here, he'll probably see this discussion and answer you here. --ColinFine (talk) 20:24, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Epictrex, You have been adding fringe theories to articles without even attempting to cite reliable sources. I doubt you will find any source that the community regards as reliable that makes any connection between prehistoric cultures in Florida and Mayan civilization. If you think you have found a reliable source that does make such a connection, I advise you to introduce it on an article's talk page, and do not try to introduce such material into an article until and unless a consensus has been reached that such material and source(s) may be used in an article. - Donald Albury 22:05, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Help

Guys, I do apologise for the editing of said pages, but i really need some help here please I'm trying to make some changes to a few Wikipedia pages i.e. Top Gun Maverick, Snake Eyes G.I. Joe Origins and List Of Paramount Films 2020-2029 but there's a user called Zack41Attack who claims my sources aren't accurately I literally always double check before editing. This user also believes that these websites are unreliable sources. skydance.com/film/top-gun-maverick and deadline.com/2020/08/paramount-pictures-new-republic-pictures-10-picture-cofinancing-deal-top-gun-maverick-1203018250/ MOVIEFAN2001 (talk) 22:41, 27 March 2021 (UTC)


@MOVIEFAN2001:@FaarizPlayz: The movie studios’ own websites are considered primary sources and so you should avoid using them if you can find a better source. Also WP:AGF. TimTempleton (talk) (cont) 23:00, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Reviewers

Previous discussion : #Rejected article

WikiPedia, please provide better reviewers. Those reviewers are not telling what is causing the article to be rejected. They should leave better and more details telling me why they're rejecting. FaarizPlayz (talk) 22:55, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, FaarizPlays, and welcome to the Teahouse. I suggest you have a very careful read of What Wikipedia is not, because you clearly have no idea at all what Wikipedia is. It is a volunteer project: everybody who edits and manages it is here because they are choosing to spend their time helping to build an excellect encyclopaedia. That includes the reviewers, so Wikipedia has no way of "providing better reviewers". We don't have enough reviewers as it is, because reviewing is time-consuming and often difficult. The reviewers have told you precisely why your draft has been rejected: because promotion of any sort is forbidden on Wikipedia. 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. If such sources exist about you, then we could have an article about you. It would not belong to you, you would not control what was in it, and it would be based on what those sources say, not on what you say or want to say. --ColinFine (talk) 23:15, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, FaarizPlayz. The reviewer left the following comment: "Zero independent sources and no indication that you pass WP:GNG." Your references are to your own work. That is not acceptable. You appear to be writing an autobiography, which is strongly discouraged. Please read Your first article. Please also read the conflict of interest policy, and the notability guideline for entertainers. It is your obligation to show that you are notable and to write a draft that complies with policies and guidelines. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 23:22, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Re: Wikipedia: Content Analysis, "Additional annotation" to sources as suggested in "Wikipedia:Citing sources" does not seem to work.

Problem solved. I now see the pattern that after a "|" there has to be a parametername + "=". In "Wikipedia:Citing sources", where you write, "Sometimes ... it is useful to include additional annotation in the footnote, for example to indicate precisely which information the source is supporting", I recommend you explain to users HOW to do that. I used |id=. Something like |freetext=, |annotate=, |comment=, |remark=, or |rem= would be transparent and mnemonic, if they exist. I did not try guessing any of them, since |id= worked. You might have a different parameter you prefer, perhaps something undocumented at Wikipedia:Citation templates, but I can't imagine what would be wrong with using |id= even if this was not its original purpose. I hope this is okay. Note added next morning, as a tip for users: overnight "DUP-" warnings were applied to duplicate uses of any parameter (in my case, |url= and |id=) within a single <ref>, so the lesson is that a parameter name cannot be duplicated inside a given <ref>, yet it had seemed to work at first, so I wonder why it is secondarily forbidden. Surial57 (talk) 03:16, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

What if I find a reliable source to a “fringe theory”? Will my edits to the topic not be undone? Also, how do I correctly cite a source on Wikipedia? I tried to cite my source with proof that the ancient Mayans settled in Florida.

 Epictrex (talk) 04:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Epictrex, welcome to Teahouse. Have a look at WP:CITE, WP:REFB, WP:IC, and WP:YFA. These links describe how referencing is done. –Hulged ⟨talk⟩ 04:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Epictrex. When your edits are reverted, the next step is to discuss the matter on the article's talk page, which is Talk:Crystal River Archaeological State Park in this case. There is a lot of discussion on various websites about whether the Mayan people may have colonized Florida. We need to use high quality academic sources for controversies like this. Good examples are peer-reviewed articles in respected academic journals on archaeology, or on-topic books published by university presses. Do not repeatedly try to re-insert the content if other editors disagree. See edit warring. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 05:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Epictrex. You're doing fine. It's not a fringe theory that the Mayans visited Florida. I mean they had boats and its not that far. It's fine to include material about it! However, it has to be done right. So, you're talking about the Crystal River Archaeological State Park article. So first, while it is true that the Mayans may have visited Crystal River Archaeological State Park, there's no proof of it either. Maybe they did, maybe they didn't -- that's worth saying, but its all we can really say.
So to say the Mayans may have visited is not fringe. To state that there was a Mayan city there -- that's not supported by any evidence I don't think. There are four carved faces or something, that's not a city. That's why the other editor said if was "fringe", but the important thing she said is that you have to add references when you add or change something. Which is correct.
OK, so I see that actually there is some material about this already in the article, at the end of the "History" section:

The park is also home to a limestone slab, possibly a "stele", on which is a crudely carved human face and torso. This is odd because the slab is one that is not found on other mound sites except in locations such as the Caribbean, South America, and Central America. At this particular site there were at least four of these large stones placed by the inhabitants in their ancient time. This carving shows that the person represented possessed long hair in a plume over the left shoulder. There has been debate as to how strongly this inscribed stone slab was influenced by the monumental stelae of Mesoamerica. Although there may be some evidence for contact between the Huastec Culture of the Mexican Gulf Coast and the American Southeast, those claims which suggest the most direct connections are probably unfounded. The slab is today housed on the site within a metal cage.

And there are four refs in the paragraph. It says "Mesoamerica" instead of "Mayan" (which might be clearer) but it's already making the point you were wanting to make pretty much,
We could maybe rewrite the paragraph to make it clearer. But to say "the Mayans definitely visited this place" or "there was a Mayan city here", we'd need new references. You're not going to find references for that because a few stones doesn't prove much.
So... it's good to be enthusiastic about Mayan culture spreading. It's a fascinating subject. You might, if you look, find a new ref such that you can add "However, Professor Pinkcney Puddle of Florida University recently that the faces indicate that there probably were some Mayan settlers there" or whatever. If there's such refs out there, go get 'em! And then use them to support material you want to add or change. To see how you put in refs, you can start by looking at the refs that are already in the article and kind of copy that form. Happy wiki'ing! Herostratus (talk) 06:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm new.

Hello, I'm D, or dotu. I'm a new user on Wikipedia, and I've had some experience with editing on wikis, although not much. I want to mainly help fight vandalism, but I also want to help out in other areas of Wikipedia, maybe even creating articles later on. Where do I start? dotu (Dotumantaraye) (talk) 06:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Dotumantaraye: Hello, and Welcome to the Teahouse. When you want to help with fighting vandalism, Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit, and more speficially Wikipedia:Counter-Vandalism Unit/Academy may be of interest. For other taks, the WP:Task Center can serve as a starting point. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:53, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Want to create an Article about our University can anyone help me please

 KevinAmenya (talk) 10:36, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello KevinAmenya And welcome to the Teahouse! Start with WP:NSCHOOL. If you conclude "Yeah, I have those sources, no problem", move on to WP:YFA and WP:TUTORIAL. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:47, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft

How to delete a redirected draft page? Logical Puzzle (talk) 11:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Only an administrator can delete a page. So, I suggest you read through WP:DELETE to first figure out whether there's really a need for the page to be deleted. If there is, then the next thing you need to figure out is which of the the deletion process is the best way to request that the page be deleted. I've noticed that you've been blocked from editing Draft:Falguni Nayar for some reason. If the page you want deleted has anything to do with that draft, I would just leave it be and stay as far away as possible from anything to do with that draft or any pages associated to it until your block has run out. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

repeated recreation of an article

Next discussion : #Creation Protected Article

 TahiraY.Awan (talk) 12:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC) my article is restricted for a while due to repeated recreation what should I do?

I suppose that you mean "An article about [subject] is impossible to create, because, I'm told, of repeated re-creation. I want to create it. What should I do?" If this is indeed what you mean, then you should do nothing. Give up. (Although you're welcome to edit on other, unrelated subjects.) Or do you mean something else? -- Hoary (talk) 12:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
FYI
 – User's only page creation is at User:TahiraY.Awan/sandbox, deleted per U5. Pinging Fastily. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:20, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

DOUBTS

Let me know whether Deepinder Goyal, founder of Zomato is a notable person? Help me please, I'm planning to write an article about him. Logical Puzzle (talk) 07:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, I can't be bothered to research somebody I've never heard of. Here's a better idea: You provide the links to what you consider to be the three most substantial sources (which of course must be reliable, and independent of him), and one or two people here will click on these links and comment on this man's "notability" for you. -- Hoary (talk) 09:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
You might like to read WP:NOTINHERITED, Logical Puzzle. If Goyal has only ever been associated with Zomato, it seems unlikely he will be independently notable, although he could be through philanthropy, books written etc. If you can find sufficient WP:SIGCOV sources that are not just based on interviews, you may be OK. As already suggested, posting these here, without any further text, would allow people to give you more advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

putting photos in wikipedia

(Added header) Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

How do I add pictures to Wikipedia? }} Sqlook (talk) 16:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, please read Wikipedia:Uploading images and Help:Pictures. Happy editing! Kleinpecan (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Duplicate topics

I have a question. Am I allowed to create an article on something already taken? For example, what if I wanted to write about an article on Canadians, but someone already rote about them? FaarizPlayz (talk) 16:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@FaarizPlayz: No. You cannot. But you are allowed to edit that article! versacespacetalk to me 16:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
What if there something is written on other type of Wikipedia but not this one. Because I have heard of different types of Wikipedias for example wikitubia. Cam I write an article written on there but not on this original Wikipedia? FaarizPlayz (talk) 16:53, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Wikitubia is not related in any way to Wikipedia. "Wiki" in its name refers to a specific type of software and a Web site – "a hypertext publication collaboratively edited and managed by its own audience directly using a web browser"; for more info on that, see meta:Wikipedia is not Wiki. Wikitubia:Rules says your channel should have at least 1,000 subscribers. If your channel meets this criterion, then feel free to create an article there; if it doesn't, consider creating an article on Minitubia – "an unofficial YouTube wiki run by the same people as Wikitubia", which is "dedicated to YouTubers with under 1,000 subscribers!" Kleinpecan (talk) 17:07, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@FaarizPlayz: Wikipedia is in no way connected to Wikitubia. versacespacetalk to me 17:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Waiting period for adding a new article that is time sensitive

Hello, I am a new contributor and have created an article for a specific soccer team's upcoming season (Union Omaha). The team's schedule for the upcoming season was only released this past week, and the season begins in less than a month, and I noticed that since I am a new contributor that my article submission may take four months to be approved. Is that a realistic estimate, or is it possible that the turnaround time will be much shorter?

Thank you in advance for any and all feedback. Nastybunch1117 (talk) 17:59, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Nastybunch1117: Articles are reviewed in no particular order, so it may be sooner. There is no need to rush. This is an encyclopedia, not a venue for promoting the team's upcoming season. RudolfRed (talk) 18:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Nastybunch1117: Also, you haven't submitted it yet. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:15, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
(ec) I forgot to mention. The draft at Draft:Union_Omaha_2021_Season is not yet submitted for review. add {{subst:submit}} to the top of the draft to put on the list for reviews. RudolfRed (talk) 18:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Projects, New Pages

Please share the list of wiki project, want to check if I can fit for something. Also, I feel good to create pages, please share if there is a list of notable pending topics or someone needs my help for research. 1друг (talk) 19:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:WikiProject § Finding a project and Wikipedia:Requested articles. Happy editing! Kleinpecan (talk) 19:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

OK Orchestra

I've come for less of an answer and more of an opinion. What do you guys think caused such a lack of interest for AJR's new album that no one even made an article for it? It's rapidly approaching a high chart position and there's definitely enough coverage for it. (I know the whole "Wikipedia is edited by volunteers so maybe no one got to it" shpeel) What do you guys think? versacespacetalk to me 16:01, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

AJR discography has it and says it was only released on March 26th (i.e. last Friday). Only a small number of fanatical editors are likely to dive in that fast for a whole new article! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
And note that Draft:OK Orchestra has already been declined three times! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
I declined the draft primarily because the draft says nothing about its charting. If it is rapidly approaching a high chart position, then when it does achieve a high chart position, resubmit it with a reference to Billboard. If there is a special notability guideline for any type of article, read it and focus on it. The musical notability criteria are largely about charting, so a draft musical article should discuss charting. If there is a special notability guideline, address it. Robert McClenon (talk) 20:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Drafts

is there any way to get your draft reviewed faster or do ya just gotta be patient? Gandalf the Groovy (talk) 15:34, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@Gandalf the Groovy: The draft template suggests adding WikiProject templates to the talk page, and you're already doing that. Other than that, you just have to be patient. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:50, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
and, Gandalf the Groovy, in practice, calling to attention in any reasonable manner can ofter help. Several editors assisted by making minor correction, and I accepted it. This doesn't mean it's perfect, but anything further can be done in mainspace. The first step, I thin., would be adding full information for the items in the Bibliography. Now that you know how to write biographical articles, just go ahead in mainspace. I suggest that there are probably many other writers in that period who do not yet have articles. WP is noted for its multiplicity of formal rules, but also for the many editors who help out whenever they see something they find interesting. DGG ( talk ) 20:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I want to create an article about Ajay Goenka

hi, i want to create an article about Ajay Goenka. i want an editor to see if this article will be accepted or not before i begin editing. i mean anyone can tell me if Ajay Goenka is a notable person or not. thanks in advance. Ismail2212 (talk) 14:26, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Ismail2212 . What would be needed to make an assessment of his notability—the evidence needed on which to ground an opinion as to whether creating an acceptable article would seem possible—is the existence of a number of reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat him in substantive detail on which an article could be written with verifiable content. Without knowing which Ajay Goenka your post regards (there appear to be multiple individuals with that name), conducting any sort of targeted search for the right type of sources, with a sufficient depth of treatment of him, seems a difficult task. Also, since you are the person who is interested in creating such an article, I think would be best if you did that legwork. Being aware of the standard, if you were to post back indicating the sources you have found, we could then take a look and advise further based on them. Please remember though: you're looking for sources of a very specific type. I emphasize this because we often see people advised to look for reliable, secondary, independent sources with substantive treatment, and in reponse we see a mix of sources that are one or more of "unreliable", "primary", "connected" ones, that "merely mention" the subject. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 14:47, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
thanks Fuhghettaboutit. I am talking about Dr.Ajay Goenka. i can provide sources like Google news, is that enough? can i create it in my sandbox then submit it for review before publishing? thanks!!😁 --Ismail2212 (talk) 15:23, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Your sandbox is fine Ismail2212 for a very preliminary draft that others can take a quick look at. Don't worry about making it comprehensive. Just add your own words to summarize what you find in four or so good (see above) sources. Or you can go for the full WP:AfC process and formally submit it when ready. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:56, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Ismail2212, nad welcome to the Teahouse. Google News is not a news source: it is an aggregator, which collects news items. Some of them are from reliable sources, some are not; some will be independent of the subject, some may not be. Your citations should in most cases not even mention Google News, but should name (and link to) the actual source, so that people reading can easily judge whether it is likely to be a reliable source or not. --ColinFine (talk) 18:27, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
@Ismail2212: is this the Bhopal paediatrician, or the one charged in relation to the Viyapam scam [3] (whatever that is)? Or are they the same person? I’d say, list the sources you could find, and write two lead sentences "Ajay Goenka is a ... . He is known for ..." If you have trouble stating what he's known for, then maybe he's not notable. Pelagic ( messages ) – (08:23 Mon 29, AEDT) 21:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Multiple accounts

Added header – NJD-DE (talk) 17:04, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

How to create more than 6 accounts on the website? NinjaStar871 (talk) 16:54, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Please don't. If you read WP:Sockpuppetry you'll see that having excessive numbers of accounts will likely lead to other editors assuming you have some disruptive reason for doing that. There can be valid reasons for having more than one account (see WP:MULTIPLE) but if you do that, you should say so on each account's User Page, naming the others. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
what on earth were you planning on doing with six accounts? Paul ❬talk❭ 17:53, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Could be for MON-SAT, and on the seventh day, NinjaStar871 will rest. David notMD (talk) 18:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
I notice that NinjaStar871 has created four sandboxes, and I wonder if they think that these are somehow separate accounts? If so, NinjaStar:no, you are using one account, and you have so far created four sandboxes in that account. There is no limit on the number of sandboxes you may create. However, before you create any more, I suggest you have a read of your first article, because your existing sandboxes are nothing like Wikipedia articles: an article starts by finding the reliable independent sources that have significant coverage of the subject (and if you can't find these, give up, because no article on the subject will be accepted) and then writing from what those sources say, not from what you happen to know about the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 21:36, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Help , I can't seem to be able to get them to accept my article

Can someone please help me get my article published on here. I've tried re editing it like 3 times and I'm stil not sure if I'm doing it right . 2604:3D08:127C:E300:28F9:5657:5A48:56F9 (talk) 18:51, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

The only contributions you've made with this IP address are to the Teahouse. What draft are you referring to? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to create a page for my favorite band called The Old Limp Dicks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Islandpunk69 (talk • contribs) 19:00, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Old_Limp_Dicks

Here is the page right here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Islandpunk69 (talk • contribs) 19:16, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Newbie in need of some basic help

FYI
 – Merging with above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey I'm new here and need help creating an article for one of my favorite bands. I've tried multiple times to do this now and can't seem to get it. Please help me. 2604:3D08:127C:E300:28F9:5657:5A48:56F9 (talk) 18:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello there, You can google or watch in detail on YOUTUBE.

Can anybody out there please help me create an article for a musical group.

FYI
 – Merging with above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm in desperate need of help creating a wiki for my favorite band. Any help would be greatly appreciated Islandpunk69 (talk) 19:02, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Old_Limp_Dicks

Here is a link to my draft page. Please someone edit for me — Preceding unsigned comment added by Islandpunk69 (talk • contribs) 19:17, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Sure, let me check 1друг (talk) 19:28, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Islandpunk69: Your fav band seems to be new. This doesn't have much reliable news coverage. I don't think this can be created. 1друг (talk) 19:37, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Islandpunk69: Agreed with 1друг, although I'll note that the band's age doesn't have anything to do with notability. This band just isn't covered anywhere in any reliable, independent sources (such as newspapers, magazines, books, etc.), let alone in substantial detail, as required by Wikipedia's inclusion criteria. Please see WP:TOOSOON for situations like this. I would also advise you not dedicate your entire user page to a link to the band's Facebook page, as it's toeing the line with our guidelines for promotional material on user pages. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 22:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

question about sandbox

When I post something to my sandbox page, anyone watching my page will see that too? Is there a way to make my postings to the sandbox not be seen automatically by anyone watching my page? Just curious. Thank you! warshy (¥¥) 18:21, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

I would think that someone would either have to REALLY LIKE you or REALLY DISLIKE you to bother to watch your Sandbox. Still it is part of W's public space. David notMD (talk) 18:28, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks. I am still not clear. My question is: if someone/anyone has my user page/talk page in his list of watched users for any reason, will he/she see any edits I make to my own Sandbox? I assume yes, from your reply but am not sure. And then the follow-up question: is there any way to restrict this visibility? Thanks a lot. warshy (¥¥) 19:52, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Warshy: If someone has your user page and talk page on their watchlist then it will not show edits to your sandbox. The sandbox is publicly visible but few or no people will see it in practice unless you ask them to. It's possible for others to put your sandbox on their watchlist but nobody will probably do that. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Confirming that it is possible to put your Sandbox on my Watchlist. That does not address ability to restrict watching, but I am guessing, not possible. David notMD (talk) 21:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
OK guys, thanks a lot! Prime Hunter's reply I believe answers my question, since I don't believe anyone on Wikipedia has ever or will ever bother to add my Sandbox to their watchlist. Thanks a lot again! Regards, warshy (¥¥) 23:00, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
In fact, correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't know how I would access anyone's Sandbox unless he or she invited me, right? I tried to look for a Sandbox on your pages, but could find none... Never mind if it gets too complicated. Thanks a lot for the patience with my ignorance! warshy (¥¥) 23:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Warshy: The bottom of user contributions has a "Subpages" link. For me it links Special:PrefixIndex/User:PrimeHunter/. Others may also notice sandbox edits in your user contributions (but probably not bother to view them). There are various other ways to come by your sandbox more randomly, for example userspace searches, edits in Special:RecentChanges, or if you put categories on the sandbox (as you actually did in 2017 where somebody else removed them). The only truly private way is to only preview sandbox edits and save them offline, but that gives some annoying extra work. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

New Articles

I created a new article about Ava Grace Cooper. I gave interview sources, her Instagram profile, and her IMBD link in the article but it says these are not good sources. Help Me! I want my article to be published. Erin.Sanders.2073 (talk) 17:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Erin.Sanders.2073 and welcome to the Teahouse. Basically, 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. None of the sources you have mentioned meet these criteria. --ColinFine (talk) 17:48, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Erin.Sanders.2073. The draft in question is User:Erin.Sanders.2073/sandbox/Ava Grace Cooper. Interviews are not independent and do not establish notability. Instagram and IMDb are not reliable sources, and her Instagram profile is not independent. YouTube videos are rarely useful. What you need to provide are references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to Cooper. Please read Your first article for lots of good advice. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Erin.Sanders.2073. In addition to what ColinFine and Cullen328 said, I'm very concerned about the copyright statuses of the two Wikimedia Commons images used in the draft. Media on Commons is uploaded under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license, and it appears your images are taken from the subject's Twitter account and created by a family member (thereby making the material owned by Ava Grace Cooper and/or the relative who took it) and from a Blogspot interview (no attribution given to the origin of the image on their webpage). Basically, unless you have the express, written permission of the owners of these (likely) copyrighted images, are the copyright holder of these images choosing to release them under a Creative Commons license, or know for a fact that these images have previously been released by their owners under one of these licenses, these images should be removed immediately. If one of the above criteria do apply, then more robust justification needs to be given in the images' descriptions. If you haven't already, please consult Wikipedia:Uploading images when deciding whether or not to upload an image to Wikimedia Commons or any of its sister projects, as what can and cannot be uploaded is usually very restrictive when it comes to copyright concerns.
However, I do want to temper all of what's been said here with a compliment: this article is formatted quite nicely. Were this subject to be able to pass notability criteria and were this article to use reliable sources in its citations, I believe the draft would take at most a few minutes for some finishing touches to be a decent article. Even if Ava Grace Cooper can't become an article just yet (see: WP:TOOSOON) because of notability criteria, WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers is a great resource if you'd like help creating a new draft of another actor/actress or if you want to go about improving existing articles; we love having new editors come aboard. It can be really discouraging to have your first draft rejected for notability, but just remember that notability is never a reflection on you as an editor; it just means that there's not enough existing reliable, independent material to create an article off of. If I roped the 1000 most experienced editors on this project into creating an article about Ava Grace Cooper based on existing sources, they literally couldn't do it. If they all tried collectively to draft an article, it would be a funny spectacle, sure, but it would be rejected basically immediately in much the same way as Pahunkat and Bkissin declined your draft. If you have any further questions or would like help in any of your future endeavors on Wikipedia, please feel free to ask here or to contact me personally on my talk page. 😀
PS: If you have any questions about what a "reliable source" actually is, Wikipedia:Reliable sources should have you covered. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 00:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Rejected article

FYI
 – Heading created by Tenryuu

Why Da fuck was my article reejcted? Its about my YouTube channel!!! FaarizPlayz (talk) 18:13, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

@FaarizPlayz: Welcome to the Teahouse. Your channel does not meet Wikipedia's notability standards. Also, writing about yourself is strongly discouraged. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:16, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
  • @FaarizPlayz, to expatiate on what Tenryuu already told you above, which was/is very much apt, The problem is joining the collaborative project with the primary aim of using it as a medium to promote yourself constitutes what Wikipedia is definitely WP:NOT. Furthermore please tone down the invectives, cursing isn’t welcome here either. Celestina007 (talk) 18:39, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
In addition to the above, you referred to the reviewing editor as a "bich" (sic) and told another they suck. That's not a great way to start. Please read WP:NPA PrincessPersnickety (talk) 21:37, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
@FaarizPlayz Wikipedia is an encyclopedia with articles about notable people. You do not meet the requirements, as those require other people having written published stuff about you. What you have created - your YouTube channel - counts zero for notability, regardless of how many followers. Sometimes the issue is just too soon (see WP:TOOSOON). David notMD (talk) 11:55, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@PrincessPersnickety: No [sic] necessary. This editor is clearly just following Mr. Mackey's advice.[sarcasm] TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 01:07, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

About Wikipedia (2)

How do I be a better Wikipedia editor Zahsj (talk) 00:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Please don't ask the same question twice. Kleinpecan (talk) 00:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Hello and welcome @Zahsj, your question isn’t one that has a fixed reply as different editors share different perspectives, but from experience, you become a better editor by first trying to understand fundamental policies and guidelines governing the project most of which are included in your welcome message, the one I just left for you here. You start by reading and trying to understand them, after which you proceed to practicing what you have read in your WP:SANDBOX(a space you are giving to practice your editing skills) then when you think you are ready, you proceed to editing a few articles on mainspace, usually by correcting typographical errors and optimizing the edit summary feature which basically requires you to summarize what exactly it was you edited or added to an article and when in doubt ask questions, just like you just did, naturally, overtime you become a decent editor. This is my answer to your question. Furthermore, I should also add that you are allowed to make mistakes and when confused, ask for help from other editors or as earlier stated, just ask a question here and an editor would attend to you. Celestina007 (talk) 01:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons Images and Their Usage on Wikipedia

I think I already asked this question once and didn't get an answer so if this is the wrong place to ask please direct me to the appropriate location.

I've been working on Category:Podcasting files and the subcategory Category:Podcast logos. I started improving the image data for podcast covers and making sure the non-free use rationales were accurate and complete when I came across a problem. I can't add files that are on Wikimedia commons to Category:Podcast logos (i.e. File:99pi.svg). Similarly, I was intending on creating a subcategory of Category:Podcasting files for images of podcasters or podcast company logos, but many of those images are on Wikimedia commons as well. Can I resolve this problem by clicking on "Add local description source," and if I do what would that entail? Is there a better course of action to resolve this problem? TipsyElephant (talk) 18:49, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi TipsyElephant. Don't add Wikipedia categories to Commons files and don't create Wikipedia file pages for them. Click the Commons logo at the top right of File:99pi.svg to see the Commons file page commons:File:99pi.svg. There you can add Commons categories. It's already in two podcast categories. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Creation Protected Article

Creation protected page TahiraY.Awan (talk) 18:33, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

My article has been protected from creation due to rapid creation. How long shall this take to recreate it again?

TahiraY.Awan, Draft:Karl Lillrud has been salted indefinitely because it has been rapidly recreated. Recreating it under a different title, Draft:Freelancer, will not help either - pinging Robert McClenon, is this eligible for a G4? Pahunkat (talk) 18:42, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
I can't answer the question about a G4 because it has already been deleted as G11. But sometimes efforts to game the naming of articles do not work. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@TahiraY.Awan:} Karl Lillrud is not notable (according to Wikipedia's definition of notability) and so there cannot be an article about him. Please tell your client/employer that. In the event that he becomes notable in the future he won't need to pay people to create articles about him – somebody who is not hired by him will probably create a neutrally written article (not an advert, like the recent efforts) about him at some point. He will not have any influence over the contents of such an article. --bonadea contributions talk 20:18, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
TahiraY.Awan, Pahunkat, when you typed "rapid(ly)", I think you both meant "repeated(ly)". Creating an article rapidly is fine, though very difficult. Creating the same unnacceptable article repeatedly is provocative, and can result in its being salted, as here. Maproom (talk) 22:24, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Already asked, and answered, at "repeated recreation of an article". -- Hoary (talk) 23:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

A Comment About Paid Editors and Volunteers

Maybe some paid editors think that the volunteers who maintain Wikipedia and try to ensure its neutral point of view are ignorant or stupid because we are volunteers. So maybe some paid editors, and employers of paid editors, think that it is easy to outwit or trick the volunteers by stupid tricks such as changing the spelling of a name. Some of us (the volunteers) are smart enough so that sometimes trying to game the system doesn't work. Sometimes the volunteers are two or three steps ahead of efforts by paid editors to game the system. Robert McClenon (talk) 22:46, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

David St. Hubbins once said "It's such a fine line between stupid, and clever." -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:03, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Extended confirmed users

Hello, my name is Duke Admiral. My account is over 30 days old, and I edit over 500 times on Wikipedia. But, I am not extended confirmed. What should I do to fix this and be extended confirmed users? Japan Railway (talk · contribs · count) 02:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Duke Admiral: It seems that WMFLabs lists you as extended confirmed. Perhaps there's another issue? versacespacetalk to me 02:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
User is in extendedconfirmed group: Special:UserRights/Duke_Admiral H78c67c (talk) 03:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Oh, really? I didn’t know that!Thank you!Japan Railway (talk · contribs · count) 03:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

AFD discussion

Let me have the AFD discussion of Akhilendra Sahu? Logical Puzzle (talk) 02:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Akhilendra Sahu - It's linked on the deletion log shown at that title as well. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 02:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
FYI
 – Moved from below. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:08, 29 March 2021 (UTC)


Let me know how to nominate an article for AFD discussion? Logical Puzzle (talk) 03:47, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Logical Puzzle: you can do it manually, but the easiest way is to download WP:TWINKLE and nominate an article by clicking the "TW" next to the edit button. Then fill out the form. versacespacetalk to me 03:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@VersaceSpace: Does twinkle works in mobile? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Logical Puzzle (talk • contribs)

@Logical Puzzle: Apparently it does - see Wikipedia talk:Twinkle/Archive 43#Twinkle on Mobile. (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.) GoingBatty (talk) 04:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Changing my settings

I am also needing a help about changing my settings. I can’t change my settings since I made a rename request. I want to fix this problem. Can you tell me how to fix this? Japan Railway (talk · contribs · count) 03:02, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Japan Railway: elaborate please. versacespacetalk to me 03:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
You need to use your new username: User:Duke Admiral. The old username is no longer valid since the account was renamed. Similarly, your messages here should have been signed with your new username, not the old one. --David Biddulph (talk) 04:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

where is the structure of the root hair cell?

 105.235.241.8 (talk) 07:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Please see Hair#Root_of_the_hair.--Shantavira|feed me 07:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi IP 105.235.241.8. The Teahouse is generally for asking questions about Wikipedia or Wikipedia editing. If you're not able to find the information you're looking for in root hair cell, then perhaps try the Wikipedia:Reference desk. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:37, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Making talk pages healthier, especially for newcomers

Is there a way to make talk pages healthier here, especially for newcomers? Some of the talk pages are so off-putting because of the way editors talk to others. Newcomers get the worst of it, from what I've observed. Or is the disrespect an expected part of the environment? I've read the talk page guidelines and the civility policy, but neither seem to have much of an impact on the unpleasantness occurring at some talk pages. New Sheriff in Town (talk) 22:09, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Howdy, New Sheriff in Town and welcome to the Teahouse. Personally, I think simply trying to set a good example in one's own communications is the best way to slowly lift standards of civility, and never to get riled up, nor tell the other editor that "Wikipedia ain't big enough for the both of us". Of course, it's hard to include nuance and subtlety in talk page posts via a keyboard, and many active editors find themselves inevitably having to leave short, sharp messages for editors when they make a mistake that needs correcting, before moving on to the next problem, and the next, and so forth. Here at the Teahouse we try to offer a friendly face when we answer questions, and I don't see that you've personally encountered any problems yourself. But I can see you are interested in subjects which can attract strong opinions, so perhaps you've seen some blunt speaking on those pages. Either way, welcome again to Wikipedia and enjoy your own Wikipedia Adventure. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:34, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello and thank you, Nick Moyes. I have been appalled by some of what I have seen. I plan to mostly stick to biology pages. After what I've seen at the more controversial pages, I'll try to leave those alone as much as possible. Even many pages people would conclude aren't going to be controversial turn out to be a hotbed of discord. I knew that female biology topics could be political, but the discord on the talk page can still blow me away. New Sheriff in Town (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Yes, New Sheriff in Town, people do get hot under the collar for all sorts of reasons but, being a collaborative project, it's important to be able to debate different perspectives without insulting the other person and thus to reach a consensus. Sadly, many editors seem to forget that, and descend to attacking the other person, not the statements they want to add or remove. Sometimes, it's the old hands (who ought to know better) who go straight for the jugular. Even today I found this happening in a minor way on my own talk page, hence this comment. Nick Moyes (talk) 283:22, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
Yeah, I've seen senior editors being the worst offenders. Thank you for taking the time to talk to me about this. I'll do my best to not get hot under the collar. New Sheriff in Town (talk) 23:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi New Sheriff in Town. I'm a little late to the thread, but I notice that the article you're referring to is a Featured Article that is being actively edited by a team of senior editors. That might not be the best place for a newer editor to start. From my own experiences, sometimes I'll make a one word change to a featured article and it'll get reverted. The senior editors that work on those articles craft every word carefully, to conform not only to our complex Wikipedia policies and guidelines, but also to the written and unwritten norms of the Featured Article process. I consider editing Featured Articles to be an advanced skill, and you might have a better experience editing in a less stringent area. Hope that helps. –Novem Linguae (talk) 11:06, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Novem Linguae. It's a featured article, but some felt it wasn't the quality article it once was. So it's been undergoing what you guys call a review. Featured article or no, I feel confident in saying it's no excuse for how multiple editors there have been treated. From their own mouths with takes like this one (which was toned down afterward) and what is said in the thread as a whole, it hasn't been a pleasant environment. That's why those like me who are knowledgeable in the subject area are discouraged from taking part in discussions there. So are non-experts, even though an essay from you guys says Wikipedia doesn't give experts special treatment, and I don't see any experts in the subject area there. A newcomer can help out with advice or opinions on the discussion page. The newcomer doesn't need to edit the page outside of that. Still, if what the newcomer has to say will be dismissed or seen as lesser than because they're new, it's really discouraging. I didn't want to point to that thread because it's not the only page I've seen which colors the Wikipedia environment as rife with discord, but also because I'm not interested in hearing from those who have been rude there. So please don't call them here. I said my piece there. I said others and I observed that discussion page and other discussion pages to get a sense of how editors here collaborate. It's not one of the pages I was very interested in editing, but I know a couple of people who were considering contributing there and turned away when they saw the arguments there. Thank you for your opinions, but I don't want to linger on this. In addition to the crash course I've been given by others about Wikipedia, I've been reading up on Wikipedia's ways when time allows, and I will push forward with heavier editing once I feel more confident about doing that. For heavier editing, I will be starting with the circulatory system article and have said on the discussion page there that I will be expanding two sections. New Sheriff in Town (talk) 05:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
New Sheriff in Town, roger that. Thanks for the response. I hope your editing goes very smoothly and that you have a good experience. –Novem Linguae (talk) 06:02, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
New Sheriff in Town thanks, interesting conversation! I'd like to add to the title of this section "making talk pages healthier, especially for newcomers and for women". Aggressive writing on talk pages is one of the factors that has contributed to Gender bias on Wikipedia (check out the recent discussion on the talk page there; the most controversial thread has already been archived for now). I don't know if there is something wrong about the way I write on talk pages or how I edit (or are people getting tenser because of Covid lockdowns?) but just recently I've copped quite a big of flack, mostly from experienced, long-term, male (?) editors (who sometimes refer to everyone else as "he" instead of "she" or "they"). I assume there are probably PhD theses out there somewhere that have analysed how people use talk pages, who gets aggressive when and why. I very much like the policy of WP:NOBITE. - Anyway, thanks to the friendly helpers at the Teahouse and let's keep supporting each other! EMsmile (talk) 08:29, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
No. That kind of gender stereotyping is not helpful. Editors are editors. Male editors are editors. Female editors are editors. Genderqueer editors are editors. In each of these gender groups, and all others, the difference between individuals is going to be a lot more important than any similarities – especially since within each group, there will not be one single similarity that is not also shared with all other groups. In other words, a talk page discussion that is "healthier for women" is either going to be better for all editors, or better for some women and worse for others, and the mere wording is going to alienate a substantial number of female editors. --bonadea contributions talk 09:33, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Bonadea. Even though I requested that editors from that page not be called here, you made this post. Why? I didn't want this thread to become a part two of that one. For reasons I've said there and in this thread, I didn't reply there. I replied here (and only because Novem Linguae replied to me and I felt okay about expressing my feelings on that reply here). Now I feel unsafe in this thread. I posted to the Teahouse for uninvolved opinions from friendly editors. I don't want this thread to be a mouthpiece for why editors might behave in very subpar ways toward others when the page is a featured article or serve as an extension to say why an editor there may have been treated the way they were treated there. That will only lead to that editor arguing with the one saying that about them. I have gotten plenty of advice and insight already (thanks to friendly editors above and email), and this thread wasn't meant to be about just one discussion page. This isn't a knock on you, EMsmile. Your comment before this post is appreciated, and I can see from the article and talk page you pointed to that many agree with you about Wikipedia suffering from a male-female gender gap and partly due to bias. Still, count me out for saying anything more in this thread. New Sheriff in Town (talk) 09:45, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
When a discussion on one very high-profile and visible talk page links to a different talk page and criticises specific editors, it is a matter of basic courtesy to also create a link in the other direction. In some cases such a link is required – that is not the case at the Teahouse, but there is no reason not to connect the discussions, especially since the article talk page shouldn't be used to discuss editing behaviour anyway. --bonadea contributions talk 10:32, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the note, bonadea; I think a careful review of the entire talk page by anyone concerned will be revealing. Meanwhile, WP:FOC is a key aspect of Wikipedia editing that can be pointed out. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:29, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi bonadea, in theory you might be right ("Editors are editors"). In practice, research has shown that - in general - women might be more averse to "aggressive discussion styles" than men. See e.g. here. I copy some bits from there: "Former Wikimedia Foundation executive director Sue Gardner cited nine reasons why women don't edit Wikipedia: Aversion to conflict and an unwillingness to participate in lengthy edit wars; Some find its overall atmosphere misogynistic; Wikipedia culture is sexual in ways they find off-putting; Being addressed as male is off-putting to women whose primary language has grammatical gender; Fewer opportunities for social relationships and a welcoming tone compared to other sites." That's what I was referring to. Of course many males find that kind of stuff also off-putting, whereas some female editors don't mind and are perhaps even more aggressive than the average male editor. But overall, the research has shown those kinds of trends. It's normal, that a working environment where 80% of editors are male, there would be a certain tendency towards certain communication styles that are more prevalent amongst men. (sorry - probably the teahouse is not the right place for this kind of discussion (?); if so, I'll be quiet now. :-) ) EMsmile (talk) 15:11, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
All very interesting, but presumes to know whether the most offensive posts on that page are from men or women, so while an interesting discussion, not very relevant to that particular article talk page. At THAT article, we have a male engaging to help address a topic related to females (as one of the few Wikipedians competent to do just that), and it is not hard to see how he was treated (see WP:BLUDGEON); I leave it to you to guess which posters are male and which are female. And to speculate on whether anyone would ever want to put themselves through that again. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:26, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
EMsmile, no, I am not talking about theoretical constructs, but basing what I say on current research on empirical sociolinguistics (and not on a Wikipedia article). women might be more averse to "aggressive discussion styles" than men is true, but it is equally true that men might be more averse to "aggressive discussion styles" than women, depending on the context. There is a very slight correlation between gender and discussion style, which varies depending on the context, but the variation within gender groups (not only men and women but all other genders) is so much greater that we can say with complete confidence that there is no causation. And as Sandy Georgia points out, we don't know the biological sex or social gender of other editors in the vast majority of cases anyway. What is offensive is people such as the person quoted above presuming to be a spokesperson on what is "off-putting to women", or making it sound like women are incapable of intellectual pursuits – poor little flowers, they wilt without social interaction and we must protect them. How can she talk about aversion to conflict as if that is not significantly much more dependent on culture than on gender? Did she just shoot her mouth off without first consulting any research at all? Kind of sad, for a representative of an encyclopedia, and very sad indeed that her blog is used as a source in the article. --bonadea contributions talk 15:57, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
Bonadea, the Teahouse is supposed to be "A friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia." New Sheriff in Town said, "I didn't want to point to that thread because it's not the only page I've seen which colors the Wikipedia environment as rife with discord, but also because I'm not interested in hearing from those who have been rude there. So please don't call them here. I said my piece there." But you pointed the editors New Sheriff in Town has some unease about interacting with to this thread. And by doing so, you brought the same tension from there to here, which is unhelpful. That's not beneficial to New Sheriff in Town. One of the editors (above me) has even made this about the feelings of the editor others have felt uncomfortable talking to (with an inaccurate claim of WP:BLUDGEONING for good measure). Experienced users in this thread looked at New Sheriff in Town's edits and easily connected the two threads. So it's very likely that those at that page who read New Sheriff in Town's post looked at New Sheriff in Town's contribution history and would have seen this Teahouse section. What your post there did, though, was invite them here. Now this thread has become a gender debate. Unless we assume that most people on Wikipedia take on a male identity for appearances' sake, there's really no reason to doubt that most of Wikipedia is male and the reasons given for this when the data on it has been strong and stable. The data has also been strong and stable supporting the sobering point that the Internet is overwhelmingly male and the reasons for this.[4] So it's not just a Wikipedia thing. Sue hasn't said anything the women themselves haven't said. If we're going to talk about Sue Gardner, I say we point her to this discussion (through my notification and maybe through email). Sue, here's more material for your research. Count me out of commenting more in this thread too. ApproximateLand (talk) 22:35, 24 March 2021 (UTC)
I agree with your points, ApproximateLand. The tone in this thread has changed which is a pity. It's gone back to that conversation at menstrual cycle which is unnecessary as this is a broader issue, not restricted to a particular article or particular editors. Regarding genders, I don't make assumptions who is who, it usually comes out quite naturally during the conversations (and if it doesn't I don't assume anything). I give you here an example that I experienced on the India talk page (see here) (I gave the same example on the talk page of Gender bias on Wikipedia, now archived): An experienced long term male editor addressed another editor several times as "he" even though the other editor pointed out several times that she is not a he. She said: "If you don't know somebody's gender, why not use the singular they?". He replied: "You could have simply said you are female. It is important to acknowledge that in an enterprise that is pretty much all male." My reply was: "I find that very offensive. You are implying that the onus is on us (yes, I am also female) to state that we are female in order to avoid being called "he/his" because you say it's an all male environment. [...] ." - This kind of stuff still happens far too often. And I agree that cultural differences are also important. It could well be that many people from Asian or African cultures don't enjoy the aggressive, argumentative style that people from Europe and North America are used to, and therefore rather stay away. So maybe the title of this thread could be "Making talk pages healthier, especially for newcomers and for people who prefer peace and calm". EMsmile (talk) 01:51, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
P.S. bonadea If you have time/energy please go ahead and improve the Wikipedia article on Gender bias on Wikipedia if you have more reliable sources than what is used there at present. I have no doubt that the article could be improved further to make it more accurate and comprehensive. EMsmile (talk) 01:54, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
I have absolutely zero insight into issues of gender bias at Wikipedia. If I gave the impression that I think I have any knowledge about that, I apologise. I have never carried out any research on the subject, nor am I qualified to do so, and I have no idea of whether there is in fact valid research in the area. But thank you for informing me of the fact that I am allowed to edit the article. As for misgendering others, that is indeed very rude regardless of who does it, but that is something that needs to be brought up with the individual who does it. That there are people who refuse to acknowledge the fact that English can use singular "they" only shows that those people don't know how language works – but again, that's an issue with those individuals. And @ApproximateLand: that was an excellent example of mansplaining, regardless of what your gender is. (I am not asking. It is none of my business.) I believe I explained my rationale for linking the discussion. Sue hasn't said anything the women themselves haven't said. There is no group of prototypical women who are able to say What Women Think. Sure, reporting on the results of a survey is all well and good, but we cannot extrapolate from that kind of survey to a very large population and pretend to know anything about that population, that is very poor research practice. It would be even worse if we started to generalise from the population to individuals belonging to the population – that's how systemic repression begins. It would also be very poor research practice to look at one discussion between four or five anonymous people, who probably but not certainly have different gender identities and cultural backgrounds, and cite it as representative for the discursive practices of an entire speech community. (If you want to investigate discourse practices you need randomly sampled data, absolutely not cherry-picked discussions.) --bonadea contributions talk 23:29, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Btw, focusing on shared characteristics as in the suggestion "Making talk pages healthier, especially for newcomers and for people who prefer peace and calm" is more constructive, I think. New editors do generally have things in common, and it is for instance important not to "welcome" them with an acronym salad or jargon that seems designed to exclude them. (That is also part of the advice for teahouse hosts.) Some newly registered editors will have read up on some policies so as to recognise the codes, but avoiding abbreviations doesn't make a post less helpful to those individuals. People who prefer peace and calm will very often have a difficult time at Wikipedia given the large number of disruptive trolls who get their kicks out of harassing other people, but the trolls will never care about policies anyway. What constitutes constructive and polite/civil discussion is not universal, and I sometimes think that a brief tutorial in the fundamentals of civility in English might be useful. Many editors who are not native speakers of English are being chastised for being "rude" because they use politeness strategies that are appropriate in their own language; this often leads to very upset emotions and angry exchanges, since the editors feel that they are being attacked even though they are being polite, and the English speakers have no idea of this! (Of course each individual is different when it comes to their cultural/linguistic background as well, and saying "person X will use this mode of discussion because his native language is Y" would be as offensive as saying "person X will use this mode of discussion because she identifies as female". But unlike gender groups, it is possible to identify actual statistically significant trends among second language speakers from different backgrounds, and unlike gender groups, there are clear reasons why a fist language will often affect a second language in a particular way.) --bonadea contributions talk 14:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi bonadea, I'd be interested to learn more about the cultural and language differences about polite use of the English language etc. I'm very interested in assisting more editors from developing countries to edit on Wikipedia so I feel that this information would be useful for me. Is there a Wikipedia article on this topic that I should read? Or perhaps it's included in a Wikipedia article, e.g. The term Decolonization of knowledge might be the place where some of this could fit? If there is no Wikipedia article yet, perhaps there is a Wikipedia policy page or a Wikipedia essay page where it is explained / discussed? Or failing that, perhaps you could give me some links to the relevant literature (freely accessible please as I don't have access to a university library). - This thread will probably be archived soon but I'd like to continue. Where is the best place for that? Your or my talk page maybe? (by the way, claiming that someone was "mansplaining" is in my view not a nice comment to make here; it would have upset me if you had said that about me). And I think you cannot use it unless you know the gender of the person because it is defined as: "is a pejorative term meaning "(of a man) to comment on or explain something to a woman in a condescending, overconfident, and often inaccurate or oversimplified manner") EMsmile (talk) 00:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
EMsmile, do you think it appropriate here for you to be mentioning a very old post from Fowler & fowler at Talk:India (something long ago dealt with) and not pinging him or notifying him that you are talking about him behind his back? Is that what you consider to be the spirit of Teahouse? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
There was no need to ping that person because it was just meant to be an example, not a rekindling of that earlier case (not that long ago - 4 months ago). But fair enough, I should have made it an "anonymous" example, so have removed the name now in my post above. Sorry, my mistake. I could have quoted other examples as well. EMsmile (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Using a fellow human being as “just an example” to buttress an argument, without giving them the right of defense while not providing the rest of the context and talking behind their back, is not making Wikipedia healthier for anyone. That you think to do that (“just as an example”) is a concerning indication of your understanding of how a collaborative community optimally functions. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 09:45, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Arbcom blocks, block [5] [6]. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:24, 23 April 2021 (UTC)

Arbitrary break

Before this thread gets any longer, I suggest moving the discussion to WT:TPG, WT:BITE, WT:WER or some other page where any changes being discussed might actually be able to be fully fleshed out and perhaps even ulitmately implemented. While it's not necessarily wrong to discuss things such as this here at the Teahouse, at some point the discussion moves beyond what anyone here at the Teahouse can resolve and the thread just keeps getting longer and longer over time without ever becoming close to being resolved. The points being raised above are probably things that do deserve further discussion, but there are better places than the Teahouse to do that. So, for those that wish to continue the discussion, pick an appropriate page and use Template:Moved discussion to and Template:Moved discussion from to let others know about the move. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Yes, good idea. Which other place would you say is ideal for this type of general discussion on "Making talk pages healthier, especially for newcomers and for people who prefer peace and calm" (or similar title, focusing perhaps more on cultural differences in discussion styles)? EMsmile (talk) 05:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
In case you missed it the first time, I suggest moving the discussion to WT:TPG, WT:BITE, WT:WER or some other page where any changes being discussed might actually be able to be fully fleshed out and perhaps even ulitmately implemented. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Moved to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Editor Retention § Making talk pages friendlier for editors with certain characteristics or preferences?

Edit removed due to "vandalism"

Okay so, I tried to edit the Wikipedia article on Simon Beck, a Liechtenstein athlete who competed in the 1968 Olympic Winter Games in Grenoble. All I did was edit his date of birth due to it being inaccurate in the article (I know this because I'm his grandson), however someone removed the edit and warned me about removing my editing permissions if I continued to edit it, as it didn't seem to be constructive. Can someone please elaborate why that was the case? Arayyyyy (talk) 09:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Arayyyyy Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The edit was removed because it was not sourced to a published reliable source. For verification purposes, we cannot simply accept your word for it. If you have something published with the proper date on it, please provide it. 331dot (talk) 09:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
I see that the edits for which you were warned were made by an IP address before your account was registered. If you do find a published reliable source to support a change, please bear in mind that the format of the date should be as described in Wikipedia's Manual of Style. --David Biddulph (talk) 10:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Module: Infobox

I've noticed on certain British BLP pages in the infobox there is a value titled: "module". Why? How is this encyclopedic? When referring to WP Help: Infobox under "What should an infobox not contain?" there is the guideline: Trivial details. I could understand if the subject was historic in nature such as Queen Victoria or Oscar Wilde and the sound byte was found within the article; but a BLP such as: Victoria Coren Mitchell is hardly a subject to include such content. I removed one found here: Miranda Hart. Before I remove this one, wondering if I'm missing something of importance. Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 16:51, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Maineartists. Template:Infobox person specifically says that the module {{listen}} can be used within it. For a broadcaster like the examples you cite, I should have thought that a short extract of their voice is not trivial information but in fact rather important. If you disagree for any given BLP, you should take the issue up on the relevant Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:09, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Mike Turnbull Hi. 1. I'm hardly foreign to the Teahouse to be "welcomed", but thank you. Second, "can be" and "should be" are vast when it comes to the plethora of variety when found within the spectrum of Template:Infobox person. Third, there is nothing distinctive about either example that was presented in my OP that would warrant a "module" inclusion; especially since the linked BLP is a writer and professional poker player. My question was far more universal in nature; rather than a dismissive cliche that is not helpful at the Teahouse: "... you should take the issue up on the relevant Talk Page". All that being said, could you please explain the "why" to this statement: "I should have thought that a short extract of their voice is not trivial information but in fact rather important"? Are you actually suggesting that each BLP / subject on WP receive a module {{listen}} simply because it is offered within the value template of an "All Parameters" infobox? Maineartists (talk) 21:40, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
I think that our difference in opinion about the inclusion of a voice extract for Coren Mitchell just reflects our different emphasis on what is significant (rather than "trivial") in her case, Maineartists. You may think her notable for being a writer and professional poker player but as a Radio 4 listener in the UK, I think of her primarily as a recognisable voice. So, to answer your question "[am I] missing something of importance" then, in my view you are: many BLP are notable in part because of their voice. This is certainly true for actors like Judi Dench or Fiona Shaw or Miranda Hart and for many radio and TV newscasters, for example. So while I agree with you that not every BLP needs a {{listen}} template, many articles here are improved by having one, just as they are improved by having a photograph of their subject (which Coren Mitchell's currently lacks). Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I am struggling with publishing an article about a french personality

Hello, I wrote a draft about a french personality, Eric Mickeler, a world-renowned dinosaur specialist, and have submitted it for review, but have not had a reply... I do not know what went wrong...Can someone please help me. Thank you. TBoavida (talk) 10:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

You didn't submit it for review, but another editor has now added a template giving you a button to submit it when you are ready to do so. --David Biddulph (talk) 11:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

List of Trains using St. Louis Union Station

I cobbled together a list of the passenger trains that used St. Louis Union Station after finding out there wasn't one. It's a word document and not in Wikipedia format and I'm a bit of a luddite but if anyone would like to make it right for Wikipedia I'd be happy to pass it on. Murv2 (talk) 12:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Murv2: The infobox at Union Station (St. Louis) has a very long (probably too long) list of train services already. Does your document duplicate this information? If not, and your document has proper sourcing to reliable sources, you may choose to be bold and do it yourself, or leave a message at the talk page describing your proposed changes in depth. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 12:30, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

There is a lot of info in there, but this list does not contain the same informtion. It inclueds the railroad, name of train and final destination. This list would provide a crossreference to the wikipedia list of passenger trains railroads running to St Louis Union Station specifically. I'm not interested in learning to edit Wikipedia but thought there was a need. I'd be happy to share the document if there were people interested in editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Murv2 (talk • contribs) 18:12, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@Murv2: You may try to reach out at Talk:Union Station (St. Louis) and/or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains and see if there's another editor willing to help. Do be mindful of WP:INDISCRIMINATE. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

What happens if I find two equally reliable sources that clash, saying different information?

I can’t find any Wikipedia information on this in the citing sources page (or I’m just wording it wrong) can anyone link me to a helpful page or just explain it please? (I’m sure this has been asked thousands of times) LongWinterBranches158 (talk) 22:58, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

See if you can find a third reliable source that verifies one statement. CanadianOtaku Talk Page 23:26, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, LongWinterBranches158, and welcome to the Teahouse. I would take these incidents on a case-by-case basis, and I'm not sure if there are guidelines for this, but my general steps for resolving this would be:
  • 1) Check for a more authoritative source that may tip the balance in favor of one of the sources. For example, when I was editing an article about a 19th-century politician, sources called his wife "Betsy", "Bertha", and even "Martha", but US census data confirmed it was actually "Betsey".
  • 2) Check what other similarly reliable sources have to say. If those largely outweigh one source, go with that.
  • 2b) If this is a historical article and you're using historical sources, it may be best to leave an explanatory footnote to let readers know "Hey, there was some disagreement about this in reliable historical sources, but here's why X is actually true and not Y."
  • 3) If one or both of the reliable sources are especially new such as very current news sources, I would wait to see if a correction is issued for either of them.
  • 4a) If you can't find anything else and are completely torn on this, refrain from adding the statement to the article and instead post the information to the article's talk page for future readers who may eventually have access to better, newer information than when you were editing.
  • 4b) Even if you aren't torn on this and do decide to include it in the article, it may still be helpful to leave your rationale on the talk page, especially if the consensus among reliable sources isn't overwhelming.
That's just what I would do, though, and a more experienced editor may have a better method. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 23:32, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
LongWinterBranches158, what are the sources in question? It will help me give a better judgement call if I know what I'm working with. Bkissin (talk) 13:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Help with my article Before resubmitting

hello. I've been working on an article for a couple of weeks and I would like some help and advice to improve my article so it won't be rejected for a second time. The first time it was rejected was because it wasn't written in the formal/neutral tone. I then went and read all Wiki's articles about writing in neutral tone and believe I've fixed the issue. However, I really want to know if it's good to resubmit again and if I took all forms of bias out. Will someone please check my work?

Thanks, and have a good day. Draft:Savanna Karmue

Tracksthegeneral (talk) 05:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral Tracksthegeneral (talk) 05:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Tracksthegeneral: Nope, still reads like a promotion that's trying to paint her as a "great person" instead of describing who she is neutrally. Wikipedia articles are written in a fundamentally different tone than what you would read in a magazine or website. Don't say "she also became concerned with childhood obesity", but describe what she did about it. All the inspiration stuff needs a rewrite. The appearances at various conferences/ball games don't really matter unless there was a significant impact documented in a reliable source. I know that this NPOV stuff is hard; if you're confused about what a neutral article looks like, I recommend reading other biographies of activists, especially those recognized as a good article or featured article. ◢  Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 13:17, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ganbaruby: I fixed all of the "promotional tone" and was straightforward with the topic. Does it sound good now? Draft:Savanna Karmue Tracksthegeneral (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral

Adding a Wikimedia Commons image to a Wikipedia article

I was reading the article on the Italian destroyer Carabiniere and noticed it had no image. I looked on Wikimedia Commons and found an image of the ship. Would I be able to use this image on the corresponding Wikipedia article and if so how would I do it? Thanks. Bitcoiler (talk) 15:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Caption for image, such as "Dachshund puppies" (aww)
Hi Bitcoiler. Any images hosted at the Commons can be used here natively. An example of basic image markup is shown below, which results in the image to the right (which I have forced to a smaller size than the code below would otherwise provide, using an additional "|#px" parameter that you can view by seeing this post in edit mode).
[[File:Longhaired Dachshund puppies.jpg|thumb|Caption for image, such as "Dachshund puppies" (aww)]]
Sometimes images are added to an existing infobox template, in which case usually there's no image markup, and you can leave off "file:", e.g., you would add to an infobox just |image = name.jpg (possibly in conjunction with |caption = ...). See more at Help:Pictures, Wikipedia:Image use policy, and Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:41, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Ask

Moved from WT:TEA
 – —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello. I want to create an article in the main space and was told that I need to stay here for 4 days and make a few edits, that's right.But I still can't do it.I am a professional and have been using language wikis for several years now Masterwebwiki (talk) 14:13, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Your account is only three days old. Maproom (talk) 15:50, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

User:Maproom Thank you. I’m wrong, it happens. If anything, I’ll write here.They write in the profile that they joined 4 days ago Masterwebwiki (talk) 18:27, 28 March 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.255.130.194 (talk) 18:23, 28 March 2021 (UTC) Time has passed for me, why can't I create a page? Please tell me the time when you can give access Masterwebwiki (talk) 15:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Masterwebwiki: you need 10 edits as well to be autoconfirmed.
I'm moving this to the actual Teahouse page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:41, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Getting a picture

Hello, everyone! Someone requested a picture for my new article on Isaac Saul, an American journalist. I've been struggling to find one that's not copyright-protected, but I did notice that he creates videos and uploads them online as part of his news site. If I took a screen shot of him in one of this videos, would it be okay to upload? And if not, does anyone have any tips on how I could get a picture here?

Thanks, Kokopelli7309 (talk) 14:32, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Kokopelli7309, and welcome to the Teahouse. Due to the nature of US copyright law, Wikipedia has fairly strict fair use criteria. Unfortunately, this idea fails the first critierion:
  • "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose."
Whereas, for example, I couldn't just replace the box art for Pokémon Red and Blue with a free equivalent and have them serve the same encyclopedic purpose, a picture of Isaac Saul could theoretically be created which is free and does serve the same encyclopedic purpose, namely "showing readers what Isaac Saul looks like". As far as tips on getting a picture go, the Village Pump over at Wikimedia Commons is a great resource. However, this could be fairly difficult if not impossible, and an image of a subject isn't seen as a necessity if it can't be reasonably obtained (see, for example, our Featured Article on the northern voalavo), so don't feel pressured as though there's some huge, glaring issue in your article just because of something that's essentially out of your control. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 15:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Kokopelli7309. I would add that if you can't find an image online that has affirmative, verifiable evidence of being released into the pubic domain, or that had been granted a suitably free and compatible copyright license, there is the option of reaching out to a copyright owner for a release with suitable formalities. See Wikipedia:Example requests for permission. Also, you might find some useful material at Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1089#Finding images. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

The demographic of manga Pokemon Adventures

Just want to ask for help. Regarding the classification of Pokemon Adventures, it should be both a children's and a shonen manga.

I have discussed on the discussion page, but no consensus was reached. The other party insisted that according to the serialized magazine, this manga should only be classified as children's manga. I don’t know if I digress too much on the discussion page, causing the other party maybe to think that I am distorting the facts and ignoring my arguments.

But I also listed many Japanese bookstore websites that classified Pokemon Adventures as a shonen (少年) manga (actually more than what I listed). And the series was also serialized on Sunday Webery an online platform that apparently focuses on serializing shonen manga. And Sunday magazines (the famous shonen manga magazine) has held 55 serial manga projects for the 55th anniversary (2014), Pokemon Adventures Omega Ruby & Alpha Sapphire is included in them, as I posted on the discussion page. (It was serialized on Club Sunday at that time, an online platform operated by Sunday magazine (Sunday Webery is, too))

Even Japanese, Chinese, Thai, French and Italian, etc Wikipedia classified Pokemon Adventures as a shonen manga for many years (and these pages are constantly being edited.) (this not as a only point of view that I quoted.) And Japanese discuss this manga on the 5ch shonen manga branch for many years. https://medaka.5ch.net/test/read.cgi/ymag/1602078249/l50 2001:B011:C007:1EAA:53D:5182:4E1D:4DDB (talk) 15:08, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

@2001:B011:C007:1EAA:53D:5182:4E1D:4DDB: I note that the article is currently in the categories for Shōnen manga and Children's manga. The ongoing discussion on the talk page will be the best place to try to gain consensus for keeping that categorization. You may also leave a note on the talk page for WikiProject Pokémon, where presumably there are subject matter experts. gobonobo + c 22:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
OK, thanks your help. 2001:B011:C007:1EAA:F13B:1A69:7F3A:B345 (talk) 16:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

How to make a WikiProject (e.g. Typo Team)

I've been thinking for a bit, and I would like to create a WikiProject. I just don't know how.

Do I just sort of make one on the sandbox and it gets accepted or another thing? xdude (talk) 13:46, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

You'll find more information on this in WP:WIKIPROJECT, though a WikiProject about fixing typos would seem to be redundant to WP:GUILD. -- Marchjuly (talk) 14:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
It already exists. See WP:TYPO RudolfRed (talk) 17:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

BLP?

Hi.. someone mentioned “BLP violation” during an ANI discussion. I am very confused.

Where can I find a list of all wiki violations so I can educate myself?

Thanks a lot! 2600:1700:49B0:8110:FCF6:7B06:38B8:D957 (talk) 16:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

BLP refers to WP:BLP, one of WP:s policies. WP:COPO may also be of help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:26, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, 2600:1700:49B0:8110:FCF6:7B06:38B8:D957, and welcome to the Teahouse. As Gråbergs Gråa Sång noted, a "BLP violation" is just a generic catch-all term for a violation of our policy on biographies of living persons, commonly shortened to "BLP". If you really want, Wikipedia:List of policies has basically everything you need to know about violations, but in my opinion, short of reading the lead sections of guidelines like reliable sources, neutral point of view, biographies of living persons (only relevant for editing biographies of living people), civility, and notability (this last one is only applicable if you intend to create articles, approve or review created articles, or participate in deleting articles), you'll be totally fine just learning through experience instead of trying to cram every guideline and policy into your head all at once. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi! Wikipedia has policies and guidelines. One of the places to start, if you want to study them, I reckon, would be, Template:Wikipedia policies and guidelines. When you violate one of the policies or guidelines, someone could say you just committed a "[Insert shorthand for the policy or guideline]-VIO". Mostly, I find it used with the biographies of living people policy, WP:BLP, and copyright, so, WP:BLPVIO and WP:COPYVIO respectively (as you see these two terms are actual redirects to the relevant policy pages); there may be other similar ones that I don't know about or remember right now, and even if there aren't, someone could make them up on the fly when talking in wikipedia jargon. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Wikipedia abbreviations for more than you want to learn. If something sounds like a Wikipedia abbreviation then enter it in the search box after wp:. This usually leads to a page about it, e.g. WP:BLP. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:59, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Question about review status

Hi,

I have a question about review processes for drafts. I asked someone who works with me on the page to submit the draft, but I cannot find anywhere the proof of submission (it doesn't say anywhere that it's submitted for review). Where can I see if my page is in process of reviewing? I wouldn't want to submit it a second time, but I don't want to let it be if it hasn't been submitted.

Thank you, rbvp2000 Rbvp2000 (talk) 23:06, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Read what the declining reviewer said on your draft, Draft:USC_Philologos_Society. CanadianOtaku Talk Page 23:29, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Declined, then Rejected, in January. Has not been resubmitted. David notMD (talk) 18:01, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Transferring article from the main page to the sandbox

I was still editing my article I thought I was doing it on my sandbox so I submitted through the main page I want to take it to the sandbox because I believe it was not ready for other editors to see it as I was still working on it. Lorato Othusitse (talk) 17:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lorato Othusitse, welcome to the Teahouse. I guess you refer to Rose Seretse. It's only two hours old but other editors have already worked so much on it that it's no longer "your" article. I will not move it to a sandbox now. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@PrimeHunter: Can you not move it to draft since it is at AFD now? Or is it a requirment that AFD process be completed with a closure of Draftify? RudolfRed (talk) 18:18, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Oops not AFD. Speedy delete tag, which seems harsh for something that creator wants to work on. RudolfRed (talk) 18:19, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Drafitiying Page

Can I draftify the pages if the topic can be notable but not ready for the mainspace as no sources are there from a long time. Example: The_Greater_Key Sonofstar (talk) 18:21, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

The short answer is "no", at least not for the example you cite. Per the WP:DRAFTIFY policy, moving an article to draft space is allowed either as a result of an AfD, or for newly created articles, as a part of new page patrol. The article in question, The Greater Key, is not new, it was created in 2009. You can either add some sources to the article yourself, or PROD or AfD the article. Nsk92 (talk) 18:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Concerns regarding article description edits not appearing/not being logged in the "History" of an article

Hi! Thanks in advance to anyone that can help. Several months ago, I realized that after adding a description to an article, I frequently would not see a change in the app - I assumed this was a technical glitch. However, after frequently checking an article for several months without seeing an update on the app, I discovered my "change" hadn't been saved. I was shocked to see in the browser version in the "History" tab it appears I never made an edit at all on this article - despite me still seeing the exact change, date, and time of this addition in the mobile app "Edits" section. Checking several articles now, I have a recording of my change in the mobile app, but it is not showing as changed on the mobile articles themselves, nor on the website or on the History page for each article. Examples:

  • Article description on Hatsune Miku - my edit is dated Dec 31, 2020 02:26
  • Article description on Flavivirus 5' UTR - my edit is dated March 11, 2012 00:46
  • Article description on Peak 5390 - my edit is dated Dec 2, 2020 23:57

There are also examples where my description additions were definitely added + are showing in the mobile version and using the "Short description" label in the article source on the browser, in addition to my "Edits" area on the mobile app having logs of them, but they are not showing on the "History" tab of the browser version. An example would be Phil Knight.

Even more confusing, the app is claiming that each of these edits (the ones that are not showing) has a certain number of views - again, edits that don't appear to have saved in any capacity. I'm starting to wonder if any of my 300+ contributions were completely useless, and am hoping I am missing something here. I can confirm I am correctly signed into this account via the mobile app! TheMusicGirl (talk) 06:05, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Flavivirus doesn't have anything before Aug 2020 or anything after Sept 2020, and there's no indication it was deleted or moved elsewhere that I can see. The other two, I don't see any evidence this account, or an IP, committed any edit in that time frame (I am assuming the time given is UTC). —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 06:16, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@TheMusicGirl: I'm pretty sure using the app to set descriptions actually sets them on Wikidata, instead of locally. Check out d:Special:Contributions/TheMusicGirl. Elli (talk | contribs) 06:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@TheMusicGirl: The English Wikipedia has chosen to not display Wikidata descriptions. See Wikipedia:Short description. Your Wikidata description at Phil Knight (Q557305) was imported (copied) to the English Wikipedia by another editor.[7] PrimeHunter (talk) 09:38, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@TheMusicGirl: to be really clear, because I've seen other editors caught by this: (1) the app changes the description at Wikidata, not here, and your changes are logged at Wikidata (2) Wikidata descriptions are not automatically shown in the English Wikipedia, so the changes you made won't appear here unless you also manually add them to the relevant article. Peter coxhead (talk) 10:14, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Jéské Couriano: @Elli: @PrimeHunter: @Peter coxhead: thank you all for your prompt and informative responses! I am now looking over the Wikipedia:Short description page and what you are all saying makes sense. I'll be honest - I wish I had known this (it looks like the change was just made last year) so that a lot of my worries would not have been so strong. While I see why they did it, I think it's a bit misleading to have the link to change the description (Wikidata) in the exact place where the short description (Wikipedia) shows with no indication it's actually on another page and doesn't actually impact the one you are reading at all. Is there a place to discuss suggested changes to the app like this, to indicate this more clearly? I've been trying to find it using Google and the Wikipedia:Request directory but cannot find something that seems to meet my needs. Thank you all again!
@TheMusicGirl: You might want to look at this. Zoozaz1 talk 03:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
At Phab:T257867, Tsevener says "This fix is in TestFlight build 6.8.0 (1798)." Hopefully that might mean close to release. Are you using iOS or Android, @TheMusicGirl? The parent task is Phab:T248457. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (05:35 Tue 30, AEDT) 18:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Pelagic: Thank you so much for this!! Unfortunately I am on Android, and double unfortunately I don't have understanding enough to know what the link you provided means 100%, but it sounds like a potential fix is possibly on the way? Thank you to @Zoozaz1: as well!

Why cannot Wikipedia cite itself from say another page or language?

Why cannot Wikipedia cite itself, from say another page or language? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crocusfleur (talk • contribs) 11:21, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

A simple answer is that as anyone can edit Wikipedia, the Wikipedia articles are not considered verified. The solution: if there is information in a Wikipedia article that you want to use, copy the content AND the references supporting that content (remembering to acknowledge in the Edit summary where the information was copied from). Or, copy the refs and paraphrase the content, again acknowledging source for the references. As for other languages, Wikipedia English has different standards for what are considered reliable source references, so referenced content in a non-English Wikipedia may not be valid in English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 11:50, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
To add to that answer, this would essentially be a circular reference, i.e. "This is right because I say it's right". Circular references are basically useless when it comes to verifiability. —A little blue Bori v^_^v Takes a strong man to deny... 20:09, 21 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks! I am currently working on a draft about Reveley Island, a small island off the coast of Western Australia, because information for that island is only on the Swedish Wikipedia, and the Cebuano Wikipedia because of Lsjbot. I was denied, because I cited from said Wikipedias. What was written in those articles was valid information, so it's a pity I could not use that. Crocusfleur (talk) 14:46, 22 March 2021 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crocusfleur (talk • contribs)

@Crocusfleur: If foreign language articles have valid information which is verified in the sources they quote (which is a pretty standard rule right across Wikipedia), then you can make the addition of the information here on English Wikipedia and cite those sources. We allow foreign-language sources, even for articles on English-speaking countries like Australia. If you translate large portions from these other Wikis to add here, then you need also to read WP:TRANSLATE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:35, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
  • @Crocusfleur: Please don’t copy-and-paste Teahouse threads which have already been archived back on to the main Teahouse page. If you have a follow-up question, please start a new thread and provide a link to the archived thread instead. If you don’t know how to link to the archived thread, just mention that your previous question has been archived already. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:14, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Hi, Crocusfleur, Cebuano and Swedish wikipedias are (in)famous for mass-creating articles based on raw data sources. Ljsbot is an automated program. So the info isn’t even crowdsourced, it’s botsourced! I wasn’t able to find much from a quick web search, other than GPS coords [8] and that it's near the Berkeley River [9]. I could also infer from the DPAW site that it’s part of the North Kimberley Marine Park. Unfortunately, I wasn’t able to decipher how ceb and sv derived the dimensions and land area. — Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:31 Tue 30, AEDT) 19:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Editing with new published attribution

Hello,

On Friday I attempted to edit a line that referred to a former U.S. Ambassador and the owner of one of the country's largest automotive dealership groups as 'an American automotive salesman.'

That term does not adequately describe someone of this individuals's stature and standing in community.

I attempted to change it, referencing his being described in a November 20th edition of a respected Detroit area magazine as a: "Business executive, civic leader, and philanthropist."

Because I am a Wikipedia novice I could not tell whether the changes were 'accepted' so I tried 3x.

Upon connecting with an editor in 'Talk' I was informed that that reference was too long and asked whether 'Business Executive' would be acceptable. I said yes.

I am trying to determine if that is still under review or whether that has not been accepted (and if the latter, why --- what I should do next).

Thank you for reading. Help appreciated greatly!

Don Dontanner (talk) 19:09, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: David T. Fischer --ColinFine (talk) 19:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Dontanner. Your most recent attempt was reverted with this edit. If you click here to see the version of the article you created, you should realise why - you broke some links. Putting the text "business executive, civic leader, and philanthropist" inside double square brackets will create an internal link to an article by that name, but of course Wikipedia doesn't have an article with the name Business executive, civic leader, and philanthropist. If you want to link to each of those terms separately, you'll need to use the code [[business executive]], [[civic leader]] and [[philanthropist]] (though apparently we don't have a civic leader article). Cordless Larry (talk) 19:33, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) Hi, Dontanner, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please don't get disheartened. Wikipedia works by consensus. According to WP:bold, revert, discuss, anybody may revert anybody else's edit if they don't think it is constructive, and the thing to do then is to open a discussion: you have now done so, but you haven't pinged either Viewmont Viking or Super Cyclonic Storm Corona, so they may well not have seen your posting. (I have just pinged them, so they should see this discussion and go to the talk page). --ColinFine (talk) 19:37, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Article moved

Header added . FaarizPlayz, please start a new section when you post on the end of the Teahouse. ColinFine (talk) 20:15, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Nathan2055 I understand my article is being moved. My article shouldn't be removed because my article isn't just about screenplays. It's also about stage plays. My article has some things the screenplay article doesn't have such as: Info about 3-act structure and history of screenplays. FaarizPlayz (talk) 20:05, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

FaarizPlayz You created an article without submitting it for review. It was draftified by Nathan2055 as not ready to be an article. Now at Draft:Scripts (writing). Has been declined. Reasons given by reviewer. You resubmitted without making any changes, so expect it to be declined again.

Mobile Editing

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T278568

I've noticed that when I'm editing on my phone that it's impossible to use the visual editor for categories when the title of the article is too long. The button to publish comes after the title and instead of wrapping around once it reaches the end of my phone screen it just goes right off the end and it's impossible to tap. I was wondering where I should mention this for someone to look into fixing. I know I can just type the category, but I thought I'd mention it anyway. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, TipsyElephant. You may want to consider using the fully functional desktop site, which works perfectly well on mobile devices, and does not suffer from the numerous bugs that affect the mobile site and the visual editor. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:38, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
@Cullen328: How do I change to the desktop version? TipsyElephant (talk) 16:27, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
TipsyElephant, while in mobile mode, scroll to the very bottom of the page. You will see a link to click to enter desktop mode. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 16:47, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
TipsyElephant Hi , welcome to Teahouse. It's simple to do that. After typing category just hold your phone horizontal on landscape . You will see button. Research Voltas (talk) 18:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
@Research Voltas: Turning my phone sideways does absolutely nothing (it just stays vertical), and even if it did I'm guessing that really long title would still go off the screen because whoever programmed it didn't account for long titles. I was originally wondering if there is someone who deals with the backend who would be able to fix the problem that I should get into contact with. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:24, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
I rethreaded the conversation above, hope that's okay. Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:33 Sat 20, AEDT) 19:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
TipsyElephant, when I go into mobile VE, I just have the toolbar buttons with Publish Changes across the top, no page title. Are you talking about the "Add pagename to new categories" screen? We could file a ticket on Phab:. User:Whatamidoing (WMF) might be able to advise who looks after the mobile categories feature, though she’s fairly busy with the talk pages project at the moment. Pelagic ( messages ) – (06:33 Sat 20, AEDT) 19:33, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, Pelagic. The mw:Mobile visual editor belongs to the Editing team, and I'd be happy to file a Phab ticket (unless someone else gets there first).
@TipsyElephant, can you give me a link to the article where you encountered it, an example of a category that's too long, and some idea of what your phone/screen size is? They'll want to be able to see the problem for themselves, so that they can figure out whether their solution actually solves the problem. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:19, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
@Whatamidoing (WMF): so the problem isn't that any category is too long. The problem is that when a title of an article is too long it pushes the publish button off the right side of the screen. For instance, really long article names like The Carl Donnelly and Chris Martin Comedy Podcast make it impossible to add a category. I've found that article titles that are about 25 characters long render the button useless. I can just barely add categories to The Dead Authors Podcast, but I'm unable to add categories to The Anthropocene Reviewed. I'm currently using Android on a Moto G7 Power and as I've previously mentioned turning my phone sideways does not change the view, but even if it did I'm guessing the text still doesn't wrap around for really long titles. It's also worth mentioning that even medium length titles result in the publish button being only partially visible. For instance, titles around 17 or 19 characters cause the right side of the button to be pushed off the end of the screen. When adding a category to The Daily (podcast) the letter "h" at the end of publish is not visible. TipsyElephant (talk) 02:06, 21 March 2021 (UTC)
@TipsyElephant, I think I'm missing something. What device are you using? Which site (mobile view vs desktop view) are you using?
Your original comment says that you're concerned about the mw:mobile visual editor, but I can't see any edits labeled "Mobile edit Mobile web edit Visual edit" in your contributions. This edit seems to have been done in the mobile wikitext editor.
Also, I don't think that the mobile visual editor lets you edit categories at all. It has a character formatting menu (A) and a Link button and a Cite button in the main toolbar, but no button for categories. I wonder if you would be willing to describe for me, step by step, exactly what you're seeing and clicking on at each step. That would help me figure out what's going on, so I can get this bug report filed (because it is definitely a problem). Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 20:48, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
@Whatamidoing (WMF): I select the mobile view. I do not hit the edit button at all so I guess it's not the mobile view or the source view, but I wasn't sure what else to call it and it's definitely not source view. There's a categories button at the bottom of the article. If I select that button it shows me categories ("content based" or "organizational") that the article is already in and then I tap on the "add to category" button in the top right of the screen. I then "search categories" and select the category I want, but to finalize the category I need to press a button that says publish in the top right, however, this specific page always says "Add <article name> to new categories". So when the article name is really long it pushes the publish button located to the right of "Add <article name> to new categories" off the side of the page. TipsyElephant (talk) 01:05, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Huh, I've never seen that tool before. I can reproduce the problem you're encountering. Let me go track down which team's working on that and get a bug report filed for you. Thank you for giving me the step-by-step description, @TipsyElephant. Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:37, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for following up on this, @Whatamidoing (WMF). — Pelagic ( messages ) – (07:20 Tue 30, AEDT) 20:20, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
I also realised that using a phone can make editing difficult and frustrating therefore it is better to use a laptop or computer Lengeloi (talk) 19:35, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Citations in Articles

If I embed a link within my copy to the source, does that count as citation? Meredith LeJeune at Thought Bubble Communication (talk) 20:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Meredith LeJeune at Thought Bubble Communication, welcome to the Teahouse. There's more guidance at Wikipedia:EASYREFBEGIN for how to properly cite statements in an article. Basically, wrap your citations in ref tags. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
First, please read and follow WP:COI. Your new user name does not eliminate the conflict of interest concerns. Since you work for for a public relations firm that specializes in "influencer relations and social media" https://www.thoughtbubblecommunications.com/ you appear to be a paid editor, and per WP:UPE are required to declare who is paying you, who the client is, and any other relevant role or relationship.
The problems with your article (and there are several) can be dealt with once you have done so. Meters (talk) 20:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

??? ....

Previous discussion : #Article moved

@Collinfine I don't know what do you mean. FaarizPlayz (talk) 20:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@FaarizPlayz: Please stop creating new headers. CanadianOtaku Talk Page 20:56, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@CanadianOtaku WDYM? FaarizPlayz (talk) 21:04, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

C means that if you are responding to a comment (in this instance by CollinFine), then stay within the section his comment appeared in rather than click on New section. David notMD (talk) 21:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Moved text below from end to here

When will my article get read? FaarizPlayz (talk) 21:42, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@FaarizPlayz: The yellow box at the bottom, which appeared after you resubmitted your draft, says it could take months. The review system is not a queue, so could be as short as days, as long as months. David notMD (talk) 21:47, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Removing Information

There is a section of an article that should not be there because it does not comply with one of Wikipedia's verification rules, I have discussed this on the article's talk page. A consensus has been reached that the information cannot be verified and should not be in the article. So who will be responsible for deleting this information? Can I delete the information or would someone else on Wikipedia have to delete it? JSeb05 (talk) 22:14, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Jseb05: if consensus has been reached you may delete the section. versacespacetalk to me 22:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Jseb05: While VersaceSpace is correct above, if the talk page section you linked is the only discussion about the disputed section, then that is not consensus. While I can't speak to all of the points you brought up, I would not at all say that the points you made are so strong as to consider this an uncontested minor change. Alyo (chat·edits) 22:36, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft Approval Help

Hi Teahouse! Looking for some help with my article that's been in draft space since December. I've made suggested edits and have cleaned it up for clarity and relevance. Can someone please guide me if there's anything else I should do to get the article approved?

Thank you for any help! Jcollinsycc (talk) 19:41, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Some reviewers tend to avoid articles where the user is being paid. Theroadislong (talk) 19:45, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you, Theroadislong. I do understand. I've disclosed everything on the Talk page of the article, as well as my own. Not sure what else to do in order to indicate that everything is above board. Jcollinsycc (talk) 20:12, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
It is in the pile (it's not a queue), and in time will be reviewed. David notMD (talk) 21:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Jcollinsycc, Hello, this may be frustrating for you but doing everything by the book(playing by our rules) although commendable, doesn’t automatically translate to afc reviewers being obliged to answer your request(s). You probably already know this but if I may; articles on the AFC “queue” are reviewed randomly, so you may get your article reviewed in the next minute, next month, or in the next three months, but a guarantee is, in the end it would be surely reviewed. Urgency on your part would only irritate AFC reviewers. Celestina007 (talk) 21:39, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Celestina007 and David notMD, I appreciate both of your replies and understanding. I’ll be patient! Jcollinsycc (talk) 22:49, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Autosuggestions

I don't really know why but when I click the search bar, the site autosuggests with things I have searched on other websites. Is there a way to remove or get rid of them? Palmer Perspective Podcast (talk) 23:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Palmer Perspective Podcast: Welcome to the Teahouse. That sounds like your browser's autocomplete/autofill settings, which would differ by browser and would be outside of Wikipedia's scope. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Tasha Tee draft a created won't appear online

I have done everything and edited but i still can't post it and don't even have the more option as posting pit live is locked.


bibish13 Bibish13 (talk) 21:25, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Bibish13: you can submit your draft for review at this link. However, it will be declined due to it having no references and not following the WP:MOS. versacespacetalk to me 21:28, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Bibish13, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you haven't "done everything": you haven't begun to understand what it takes to create a Wikipedia article. You are like somebody who says "I want to build a house. I'll just make something that looks like those houses over there" without knowing anything about surveying the land, how to build a house that doesn't fall down, or what the local building regulations say. That is why I always advise new editors to spend a few months improving existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before they attempt the extremely difficult task of creating a new article. Please read your first article; but you should also look at NOTPROMO. --ColinFine (talk) 21:43, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Your draft Draft:TASHA TEE has not been submitted. There is a blue rectangle to click to submit. As mentioned above, no refs = automatic decline. David notMD (talk) 21:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Are you claiming you took the photo? If not, likely copyright protected. David notMD (talk) 21:52, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
(They uploaded three more photoshoot images from different decades. Clearly under copyright and the user doesn't own them. Nominated for deletion at Commons here if anyone wants to comment.) — Bilorv (talk) 21:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Bibish13, what @ColinFine told you is a pertinent analogy that summarizes everything for you in the best easy-to-understand manner. Furthermore, @David notMD, may have taught you how to submit the article, but please do not submit that article anytime soon. Celestina007 (talk) 22:00, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

May I suggest that you read Wikipedia articles about other singers, such as Ricardo Lemvo, Salif Keita, and Davido. (Click on the names to be taken to their articles.) Study what is written about their careers, and other aspects of their life. Go to the bottom of the articles and look at the references used to verify what has been written about them. Then go back to Draft:TASHA TEE. Have there been newspaper or magazine articles about Tasha Tee? (Not just mentioning her name, but the entire article is about her.) You should look for at least 3 articles to show that people not connected to her think that she is important enough to write about. Everything that you write about her needs a reference to verify that somewhat else says that its true. It may be that Tasha Tee isn't yet ready to have a Wikipedia article. In that case you will need to wait until more has been written about her in magazines and newspapers. Karenthewriter (talk) 00:16, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

JugoBeat Cs7 what

Hi, I don't understand why they are deleting the article about JugoBeat, the information is reliable.. Thank you Meri222 (talk) 13:40, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

JugoBeat doesn't have any sort of think to pass WP:MUSIC and so he is not notable enough to be featured on Wikipedia.
I hope this helps! xdude (talk) 13:48, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Meri222: Courtesy link to WP:MUSIC, a shortcut to the notability criteria for musicians at Wikipedia:Notability (music). GoingBatty (talk) 01:01, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: draft:JugoBeat Elijahandskip (talk) 13:42, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Exchanging editing services on Wikipedia

Hi, I have 2 bio pages for my physics scientists that I cannot revise / correct due to COI. I'd like to exchange services with another Wiki editor. How can I find an editor to help me? I posted revisions on the "talk" pages in January, but no one has stepped forward to fix them - except when I tried to do so myself in December. Thanks! Martine Martine. 00:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

You properly declared PAID for David Gross and Mark Bowick. And made entries on the Talk pages, requesting changes. David notMD (talk) 01:23, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@MartineWhite: There is a very large backlog at Category:Requested_edits, so just be patient. RudolfRed (talk) 01:27, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, MartineWhite. First of all, you should be using a specific template, as described in Edit requests. That will draw the attention of a much larger pool of editors than the small number of editors who watch those pages. Secondly, your edit requests are far more complex than the vast majority of editors will be willing to take on. You have been proposing many, many changes in a single lengthy complex request that requires a volunteer editor to carefully read many sources, evaluating the reliability and content of each. Instead, make a series of much simpler edit requests. Let the volunteers take on a bite at a time, instead of asking them to consume every bite of a multi-course meal when they are not hungry. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 01:53, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I have made a request edit as a new editor in Feb and again today. I've been following all the advice given me along the way. This would require only 1 hr of work, and for a level-5 start class bio for a Nobel Laureate... The changes are citations that are simple to verify. I don't see how to make it any easier. I've deleted the request to add honorary doctorates, per the advice of a previous editor. Lots of editors stop by and make 10 second changes but no one adds citations for me. In March, I worked on an APS editathon for female scientists for 4.5 hrs - surely there is someone who needs 1-3 hrs of work who is willing to exchange time with me.

Draftify deleted articles

Hello. There were recently some AfDs about Argentine films from the mid-20th century. I have got a book about them and would like to see if I can make them over and restore them. Where do I find someone to draftify the articles associated with the following?

Thank you. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 14:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Post a message on the talk page of the administrator who closed the AfDs and explain what you want to do and why per WP:CLOSECHALLENGE. Perhaps they will draftify the article for you. — Marchjuly (talk) 14:22, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: And if they don't reply to my comment on their talk page in over two weeks? That's where we are now. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 17:14, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
My apologies DiamondRemley39. I didn't realize you had already done that. All editors (including administrators) are WP:VOLUNTEERs and sometimes they get WP:BUSY. I posted a message on TheSandDoctor's user talk page about your Teahouse question; so, perhaps they will see it and respond about "Ritmo nuevo y vieja ola". There is, however, a message on their user page stating "This user is busy in real life and may not respond swiftly to queries." In addition, if you click on the "Edit" tab for their user talk page, you see a notice at the top that suggests trying the Teahouse, the Help Desk or IRC chat if you're looking for a speedy reply. The Teahouse and the Help Desk are pretty much the same, but I think IRC chat might work for you. You can also try leaving a general message about this at WP:AN to see if another administrator can help you. The "El Habilitado" was deleted by a different administrator; so, you youhaven't done so already, try posting a message on their user talk page asking for the article to be restored as a draft. Once again, if a few days pass without a response, you can try IRC chat or AN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:35, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@DiamondRemley39: You should have no problem with the second one, since a soft deletion was specified by the closer. Just make a request at Wikipedia:Requests for undeletion, and the article should be restored to mainspace, without the need for draftification. Then you can work on it. Deor (talk) 16:58, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Deor: Thanks, just did so. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 17:14, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@DiamondRemley39, Deor, and Marchjuly: Apologies for the delay in my response. Yes, I have been quite busy unfortunately. I have draftified the first two. If JJMC89 doesn't object, I can restore that one as well. If a hand is needed with any others I have closed, I can see about draftifying them too. Other admins should be consulted for their closes, but they arent the only ones who can restore. --TheSandDoctor Talk 04:34, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, all. I didn't want to point out that TheSandDoctor hadn't gotten around to it because I didn't want to sound whiny. Just wanted to get the ball rolling. As TheSandDoctor is so busy, I'd like to about conflicting information. In our thread in their talk page, they say to not move either article to the mainspace without x,y, or z checking. But Deor says it should be okay to do that with El primer beso as that deletion was treated as an expired prod. Which is correct? I want to do things right but avoid putting more people to work than necessary. I just requested that JJMC89 draftify that one. My questions at the Help desk are ignored more often than not, so I prefer the Teahouse. I have not heard of IRC chat before and will have to learn about what that is, Marchjuly. Thanks for your help. DiamondRemley39 (talk) 15:23, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: It really depends on the type of close. Soft delete is indeed handled like a prod, but normal delete needs to be handled more carefully and ideally be looked over to ensure that it is improved sufficiently and notability demonstrated so as to avoid potential instant re-nomination and more work by the community in a new discussion. In general, I believe that getting a second set of eyes on something that was previously deleted at a discussion prior to moving to the mainspace is a good idea in a lot of circumstances. Please do feel free to ping me any time and please do in relation to this thread. See WP:IRC for more about IRC in the wikimedia context. --TheSandDoctor Talk 01:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@TheSandDoctor: I think you mistakenly replied to me with your above post. The question was posted to you by DiamondRemley39; they just thanked me at the very end of their post. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@Marchjuly: Ah, you're right. Misread that. Thanks (and thanks for pinging DiamondRemley39). --TheSandDoctor Talk 02:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Error in Title. how do I change the title of Padel Tennis World Championship

Hi,

the page Padel Tennis World Championship has wrong titel. It should be changed to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padel_World_Championship

All the information in the article is related to the sport Padel, not Paddle Tennis, See definition here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Padel_(sport) or in short written as: "Padel is a racquet sport. It is different from the sport known in the US and Canada as paddle tennis."

Since I can't correct it can someone else? just take away the word Tennis. since that implies a different sport. Franke74 (talk) 12:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Franke74, welcome to the Teahouse. You can submit a move request at the link provided, so long as it is uncontroversial. If it is, you're going to want to discuss it at the article's talk page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:30, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Franke74. I think there was some confusion early on as to whether the article was about Paddle tennis or Padel tennis and someone tried to correct that and settled on the name "Padel tennis". See Talk:Padel (sport) for more details. When the primary article about the sport was WP:MOVEd from Padel tennis to Padel (sport) back in 2013, this page probably slipped through the cracks. I will move it to Padel World Championship per that discussion. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:32, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Marchjuly - thank you. Now it is correct.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Franke74 (talk • contribs) 05:04, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

AFD discussions

How to get the Deletion discussion of Rahul Sharma, founder of Micromax? Logical Puzzle (talk) 06:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Logical Puzzle: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Rahul Sharma (businessman), the discussion is closed though. Elli (talk | contribs) 06:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Has my draft been submitted?

Hi, has my draft been submitted for review? Mamiecolfox (talk) 08:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Mamiecolfox: welcome back to the Teahouse. No, Draft:Aigana_Gali is not submitted for review, and if it were submitted now it would not be accepted. A large part of it is promotionally written, and there are a number of references to a pdf with no information about what it is (it's actually an exhibition catalogue). To find out how to cite sources correctly, you can have a look at Help:Referencing for beginners. It also looks like large parts are copied straight from the sources, with only minor rephrasings, and that unfortunately makes it eligible for speedy deletion since it constitutes a copyright violation. There are other issues as well, but those are the main problems with the draft right now.
Do you have a connection to Aigana Gali? Please have a look at this information. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Seeking assistance to improve my article

Hi,

I submitted an article Draft:Indira Parikh for review. This submission was declined. The reason given was: "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." I have tried to rework the content to ensure that it does not come off as something that is not within the framework of Wikipedia. I have also included independent, reliable, published sources. I would like some assistance in knowing what more I can possibly do in this case. I would appreciate your help! Thank you!  Vmanonymous (talk) 06:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

The draft says: "Seeing her passion to learn, the Dean at the University of Chicago waived off her husband’s tuition fee so that he could pay for her education." Something about that got my antennae twitching. A reference sent me to an unspecified part of a 66-page PDF: an Indian management magazine that I must say looks to me like a collection of hagiographies. (Can we really take this rather fawning material so seriously?) Anyway, at the bottom left of page 32, of the 66, I read: "He waived her husband's tuition fee, so that he could pay for her education." So, putting aside the question of the value of the source, you've quoted it verbatim (plus "off", minus a comma). Doing so requires the use of quotation marks. What else in this draft is taken verbatim from sources? -- Hoary (talk) 08:50, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I deleted that sentence as unnecessary detail to describing her education, but Hoary's query still applies. The Current Research Project wording is very close to the source reference. David notMD (talk) 09:00, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm currently working on the Azilestes article, and I'm trying to get it to GA status. However, (and I know this isn't necessary for GA, I'm just a stickler!) I can't find any information on image copyright for the website the paper is on (https://sciencepress.mnhn.fr), so I don't know whether I can include an image or not. Can anyone help in some way? Thanks! Borophagus (talk) 09:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Borophagus That website says "© 2015 MUSÉUM NATIONAL D'HISTOIRE NATURELLE: ALL RIGHTS RESERVED", which means all content included images is copyrighted. Wikipedia only uses free images for the most part, so it doesn't look like they could be used, unfortunately. Joseph2302 (talk) 10:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Ah, I thought so. Thanks anyway! Borophagus (talk) 10:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Draft copy

So this all started way back on December 18, when I created a draft called Draft:Technical Sports Racing. It got rejected, and so I improved the article and re-submitted it on December 20. I didn’t care about it much until earlier this month when I got a talk message saying that my article was rejected, mainly because someone had created a copy called Draft:Technical Sports Racing2 and I had received a warning about gaming the system. My main priority is not getting the article published, but about the warning. What should I do? Vamsi20 (talk) 21:06, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@Vamsi20, could you provide a link to the warning? in any case, if an experienced editor has warned you previously about WP:GAME then chances are you actually were afoul of that, as to what to do about the warning, don’t engage in activity that may constitute WP:GAME and you should be okay. Celestina007 (talk) 21:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
It's in my talk. I believe it's the penultimate message, and no, I didn't engage in activity that constituted WP:GAME or get any warning about gaming the system before. Vamsi20 (talk)
(you edited this comment out,for some odd reason)
Vamsi20, it's possible that the warning arose from confusion on the part of other editors regarding Draft:Technical Sports Racing2, which started as an article in mainspace and was draftified as not ready. Sometimes, authors of declined drafts will use a sockpuppet or meatpuppet to resubmit their draft as an article, bypassing AFC. That is gaming the system, and attracts negative attention.--Quisqualis (talk) 21:29, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Vamsi20, Linking generally saves us time, but I see you make reference to this message by Robert McClenon. I completely agree with them that what you did do definitely is attempting to game the system, please do not attempt such again moving forward. Celestina007 (talk) 21:51, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
I disagree, @Celestina007. After looking at the articles' histories and users' contribs, this looks nothing like gaming to me. Pelagic ( messages ) – (21:25 Tue 30, AEDT) 10:25, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Oh, right, someone else created a copy of the draft and now everyone thinks that I made the copy even though I did not. Vamsi20 (talk) 22:32, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, @Vamsi20. At the newer draft (26 Mar), @Shadowrvn728 said in the edit summary that they translated it from w:it. Did your Teahouse question (21 Dec) about translating from Italian refer to using the same article for your Racing section (19 Dec)? All three seem similar at a cursory glance. Pelagic ( messages ) – (21:21 Tue 30, AEDT) 10:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

How to speed up rereview for an article?

Hi folks, just submitted my first article last week. It was declined because some parts didn't have citations so I fixed that a few days ago and re-submitted. Would really love to put up more articles of renowned poets from the Philippines here, and I'm only at my first. :-/ Is there a way to speed up the second review for this? >> Draft:Joel M. Toledo How long does it usually take? Thanks in advance! Beyondthepale12 (talk) 10:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Well, firstly, congrats on your first article! Honestly, it looks good as it is so far, but maybe some additional information about his life would help?Borophagus (talk) 10:14, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Beyondthepale12. There’s really no way to speed up an AFC review, and the best answer I can give is that just it takes as long as it takes. The template at the bottom of the draft says a review could take four months or more, but it’s possible that a reviewer will get to it earlier. You can, however, work on multiple drafts at the same time if you like and then submit each of them when you think they’re ready.
I have a question about File:Joel Toledo in Singapore, 2014.jpg which you uploaded to Commons. Did you take this photo yourself? I just a little curious because the photo’s description states it was taken back in 2014. Was it just some random photo you took or do you know Toledo personally? — Marchjuly (talk) 10:25, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi again Beyondthepale12. Just some suggestions about your draft.
  1. Please look at MOS:NOTUSA.
  2. Please look at MOS:LEAD because your draft is lead heavy (i.e. top heavy). It’s kinda like a sandwich that’s made up of two thick slices a bread with very little in the middle.
  3. Please look at WP:ELPOINTS, WP:EL#cite_note-7 and WP:CS#Avoid embedded links because you shouldn’t be embedding external links into the body of the article like this.
  4. Please look at WP:ELNO because you added lots of external links to the “External links” section which means there’s a good chance that some are superfluous.
  5. Please look at WP:ORDER because the “References” section should come before the “External links” section.
These are just some things I noticed that you can work on while you’re draft is awaiting another review. Fixing them won’t speed up the review process and ensure that the draft is ultimately approved, but it will bring the draft more in line with MOS:MOS. If you haven’t done so already, you might also want to take a look at WP:BIO, WP:YFA and WP:ERB for some other information that you may find helpful. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Help correcting erros in a draft

Hello. I have submitted my draft about Erick Mickeler a french personality and dinosaur specialist. Some references were missing, which I have already added...However, I still need to correct some errors such as "check date values in access date" and "missing or empty title". How can I edit these individually??? It seems so simple, but yet so complicated, I am struggling with this. Thank you. TBoavida (talk) 11:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi TBoavida. The errors you're seeing have to do with the formatting of the citation templates being used for the references. You can find out more in Help:CS1 errors or by clicking on the blue "help" links showing up in the "References" section of the draft. Basically, you'll have to find the references in body of the article via the edit window fix the parameter errors in the citation templates. Often it's something quite simple like a misspelling or transposition of numbers, or simply adding the name of the source being cited for the title parameter. You might also want to take a look at WP:ERB for some tips of how to cite sources and format references. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:21, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

New Article and Editing on Wiki

Thanks for inviting me to the Tea House. I'm loving Wikipedia.

My account is just 3 days old.

  1. How do I submit my article to the live space so its visible to all?
  2. I have photos from our official photographer but Wikipedia keeps showing error messages when I try to upload/submit them. How can I bypass this problem?
  3. Lastly, how do I create/add a template/box showing details like name, occupation, siblings, spouse on the right side of my article?

These will be helpful so I can contribute more and also help edit some of the content I have seen so far. Mister Ishmael (talk) 17:42, 27 March 2021 (UTC)

Mister Ishmael Your draft, at User:Mister Ishmael/sandbox appears to have a copyright conflict with https://www.accessgambia.com/information/oko-drammeh.html and also possibly with https://thepoint.gm/africa/gambia/article/profile-of-oko-drammeh-gambian-music-promoter. In addition none of the content has in-line references. I leave your other questions to other Teahouse hosts. David notMD (talk) 18:02, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Mister Ishmael, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's nice to be able to welcome new, enthusiastic editors to Wikipedia. Unfortunately, you have chosen to underake the hardest task here - that of creating an article about a subject you are connected with, and with no prior editing experience or understanding of what is and isn't allowed. It is often best to spend some time making small edits to existing articles and gradually building up experience - rather like driving a car for the first time.
In its present form, your article at User:Mister Ishmael/sandbox stands little chance of being added to the encyclopaedia, although it is possible that the subject might be meet our notability criteria. You clearly indicate that you are connected with the subject, so please declare your Conflict of Interest, as described here. But if you are being paid, or an employee, then you must follow the guidelines at WP:PAID to disclose your connection. Please don't try to bypass the issue over photographs - if you did not take them, then you have no right to release them for commercial re-use. Only the copyright holder of the image can do that. Focus more on making the article more like a readable encyclopaedia page, and less like a biased, promotional CV. Try The Wikipedia Adventure to gain more experience of editing and ensure you stay Neutral at all times. I could say more, but I am being called to dinner! Kind regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 18:08, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Indeed, Mister Ishmael, I echo what Nick Moyes said. Your question is a bit like saying "I'm new to building, but I've built a house and I want to know how to put the windowsin and the roof on". Unfortunately, until you have learnt the craft of building, and surveyed the land to make sure that it is fit to build on (= investigated whether your subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability), your house will probably fall down around you! --ColinFine (talk) 18:54, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
All content must be supported by in-line references (placed in the text), or else the draft will automatically be Declined. David notMD (talk) 11:45, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Mister Ishmael: I don’t know about Gambia or USA specifically, but in many jurisdictions photography gets an exemption from the general work-for-hire rule. Unless it’s explicitly stated in the contract, the photographer retains copyright even if they were already paid to take the photos. Most likely, to avoid deletion, you will need him/her/them to send a release to OTRS, upload it themselves as "own work", or show a contract that assigns copyright to yourself. For the technical issue you mention in point 2, we would need to know some detail about the error messages to help with that. Pelagic ( messages ) – (22:53 Tue 30, AEDT) 11:53, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi,

Can you please guide how to add informative article links on Wikipedia in the reference section. Please suggest @GreenMeansGo. Rashmi1704 (talk) 11:57, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Rashmi1704: A helpful introduction to referencing on Wikipedia can be found at Help:Referencing for beginners. However, blogs are not normally considered reliable sources for use on Wikipedia, and are only very rarely appropriate when the author is a widely recognized expert in their field, and no better source is available. Hope this helps. GMGtalk 12:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Question about draft

I've a query regarding https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Shri_Kuldeep_Nikam Persistent Guy (talk) 09:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

What's the query? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:28, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

New to wiki editing

Hello I am trying to upload new information on the artist page that I manage and have received this response Your edit to Jaz Coleman has been removed in whole or in part, as it appears to have added copyrighted material to Wikipedia without evidence of permission from the copyright holder. If you are the copyright holder, please read Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for more information on uploading your material to Wikipedia. For legal reasons, Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license. All such contributions will be deleted. You may use external websites or publications as a source of information, but not as a source of content, such as sentences or images—you must write using your own words. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously, and persistent violators of our copyright policy will be blocked from editing. See Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources for more information.

Is there anyway I can see what is being highlighted as copyright? My artist does own the copyright to the material I'm listing. Here is the page- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jaz_Coleman Thank you! CP696 (talk) 12:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@CP696: Welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, Wikipedia has to delete copyright violations if no appropriate licence is provided, as the above text states: Wikipedia cannot accept copyrighted material, including text or images from print publications or from other websites, without an appropriate and verifiable license.
Also, if you're representing Coleman, you're going to need to disclose your paid relationship on your user page; you may use {{paid}} to do so. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 12:32, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Uploading images

I'm a longtime editor looking for some assistance adding images to articles. I understand the basic differences between free and non-free, and to a lesser extent, when to upload an image to Wikimedia Commons as opposed to Wikipedia. However, I'd like maybe a quick walkthrough on an image I'm looking at on Flickr (how to assess its license, the uploading process, etc). We can take that to my talk page. I've glanced at the various help pages, but it's still confusing to me. Any assistance would be greatly appreciated! -- GoneIn60 (talk) 14:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

OK, I'll start a thread on your Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Start

How should a new editor start, what contributions should he make? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 15:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: there's a lot of things you can do. Consider finding pages about things you enjoy and editing them for small mistakes, then when you rack up considerable experience, start reverting vandalism, expanding pages. Make sure you source every claim you make in an article. WP:The Wikipedia Adventure would be helpful if you're looking for a detailed guide. versacespacetalk to me 15:16, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi ExclusiveEditor. The Wikipedia:Task Center is a good resource for finding things to work on while getting one's bearings here. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:06, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Admin blocked page

Long before, based on @Hoary: help I submitted Draft:Adda52 to AFC but this is admin blocked, do I need to do something else?? 1друг (talk) 19:03, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Note: The page in question, Adda52, has been salted as a repeatedly created article that fits a criterion for speedy deletion (A7). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:56, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@1друг: other editors have decided that the topic is not notable and does not belong in Wikipedia at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adda52, and that your draft does not show significant changes since that discussion. As I said at User talk:1друг#Article creations, Companies are definitely not the area to start with—this is one of the hardest topics to get an article approved on, in no small part because most editors will treat such articles with extreme skepticism as most authors of such drafts have a conflict of interest and just want free advertising space on our site. — Bilorv (talk) 21:41, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
@Tenryuu:, I just read about A7, also I want to share that @VersaceSpace: rejected this because it was deleted before. Fun fact, everyone deleted this under G4 because it got rejected in 2017 and later blocked. Please check the sources which I added. These are the sources of 2018 to 2021 of top journals of India (So old discussion doesn't apply). Kindly, comment on the sources and explain how it not notable. For A7, Please confirm from any poker fan about Adda52, everyone knows about it. @Bilorv:, thanks for guiding so long, I really appreciate your detailed reasoning. 1друг (talk) 08:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi 1друг. Instead of discussing this here at the Teahouse, maybe you should try discussing it with the administrator who last deleted the article at the AfD per WP:CLOSECHALLENGE. --Marchjuly (talk) 08:21, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Marchjuly, Thanks for the suggestion. I asked but he said even if he wants to he can't as he is no loner admin, now I don't know what to do. 1друг (talk) 08:31, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
1друг, The reason for being unable to re-create the article, "Repeatedly recreated A7 article" is incorrect. Adda52 was never speedy deleted via WP:A7 - "no indication of importance". Rather, it was deleted via a full deletion discussion, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Adda52 which I closed as "delete"; however looking at the debate, it seems to have been something of a marginal case. I would advise you to carry on working on the draft, then if a reviewer accepts it for review (it is currently rejected), the protection can be lifted at that point. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 09:13, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Ritchie333, thanks for letting me know about it. Please explain 1. carry on working on the draft: Is that mean, I need to add more content or sources? As per my basic understanding, I thought I am done because the sources are pretty good. 2. It's rejected in AFC because it was deleted in past, not because of my draft. 1друг (talk) 09:44, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@1друг: Richie333 is the administrator who deleted the article at when it was discussed at AfD. The foremr-administrator you asked about this did delete the article and then WP:SALTED the title, but he was just deleting a re-created version of the article. Anyway, I suggest you follow Richie333's advice and continue on improving the draft and then submit once again to WP:AFC for review when you think it's ready. You can also try asking for other feedback about the draft at WP:AFCHELP. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:57, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
@Ritchie333: Can you tell if this latest draft is an improvement over the one you deleted and the one that eventually ended up being salted? It's possible that the AfC reviewer (VersaceSpace) is seeing the log, but is unable to see the version that kept being deleted because they're not an administrator. VersaceSpace's account is still relatively new (they started editing in December 2020); so, they might not know the full back story behind this draft. Rejecting the submission outright might've been done more because of the tainted history of the draft, then the quality of the current version. -- Marchjuly (talk) 11:58, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Marchjuly, The draft is quite different. Specifically, the deleted version only goes up to 2017 and hence doesn't discuss the Public Gambling Act ban, which is a major contribution towards notability. As a rule of thumb, I like drafts to have about 1,500 bytes of prose (Draft:Adda52 currently has 930) before submitting. You can install the Wikipedia:Prosesize gadget to determine article size. Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 13:24, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you Ritchie333. -- Marchjuly (talk) 00:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@1друг: As you can see from Ritchie333's reply above, the draft is apparently quite different from the one which was deleted via AfD; so, perhaps if you're able to find more sources for it and develop it a little more (particularly more on it's background), then perhaps it will have a better chance of passing through AFC the next time you submit it for review. You might even want to clarify this on the draft's talk page so as to let others know this is a much different version from the one that was previously deleted. (Maybe even provide a link to this discussion.) Of course, none of this will guarantee for certain that the draft will be ultimately accepted, but it might help the next AFC reviewer understand that you're submitting it in good faith based upon recent coverage found in reliable sources. Just a stylistic note, you probably should avoid using slashes in section headings and in article prose per MOS:SLASH. This might perhaps be more personal preference than not, but some readers might find slashes confusing. Good luck on your draft. Marchjuly (talk) -- 00:44, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks to all, based on the discussion, I am concluding that I need to update more sources, increase the number of words, remove slashes from the heading, and update the talk page. I might do this on weekend. Is there any other way also to create it, without submitting it to AFC??? 1друг (talk) 16:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

 Westernews (talk) 16:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Westernews: For what reason are you attempting to link your site to Wikipedia? Wikipedia does not approve of linking to personal sites, which you seem to have done at Joint Admissions and Matriculation Board. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
If it matters, WP uses Nofollow Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:25, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Source reliability

So, I added a source for the release date of the Switch release of SnowRunner but I have to ask, how do I know if the source is reliable or not? I just wanna make sure I provided a reliable source so that it won't be removed and I know that I found a good source. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:25, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

There are super clear guidelines for your to become familiar if you want to help edit Wikipedia. Start by WP:RS and WP:IS. They are important and easy reads, that you need to be very familiar and comfortable with. Enjoy ! Ferkijel (talk) 14:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) I looked at your recent change to the article, and it would seem to be a reliable source for gaming news. When searching Nintendo Life on Wikipedia, it redirects to Gamer Network#Partnered websites. I think it passes the litmus test. For future reference when in doubt about a source, ask on the talk page of the article and/or the relevant WikiProject. Other active editors in that realm will be more familiar with the kind of sources that are acceptable for that subject matter. Another alternative is beginning a new discussion at WP:RSN, but I would definitely try the WikiProject first. --GoneIn60 (talk) 14:45, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Ok good to know. I kinda guessed it was a reliable source because 1, Nintendo Life used to be a magazine and 2, it's very well known for being the place to go for Nintendo related news (besides the Switch's "news channel"). Just wanted to double check and make sure it was good for wikipedia. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 17:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Good morning, how do i go about updating information?

 170.94.19.232 (talk) 16:47, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

WP:TUTORIAL and/or WP:ADVENTURE can be a good start. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:20, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
References required. David notMD (talk) 17:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

How to respond to comments made by admins of wiki

Hello So new to this platform and have been sent some messages regarding edits to a page I've made by x2 different admins. Can anyone suggest how I can respond to these comments? Thanks in advance! Cheers, Carla CP696 (talk) 17:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

CP696 Not admins, just other editors. To the first, your content reverted because it appeared to be copied from a copyright-protected website. Don't do that again. Secon, you also added information that may be true, but did not provide a reference. Don't do that again either. Third, editor asking if you have a personal connection, paid or not in any way compensated, to Jaz. If not, state that on your Talk page. If true, adhere to WP:COI and WP:PAID. David notMD (talk) 17:56, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Help disambiguate

This draft needs to be moved/renamed to disambiguate it from other temples in other parts of China with the same name. Please ask for advice at the Teahouse on how to disambiguate this draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 15:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Huayan_Temple Jianghaiyang (talk) 16:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Well first, you just asked on Teahouse so there's no need to ask again. Second, you can put in a move request to move the article to a different name. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:31, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Signature with no associated text added by...

 Educational Human (talk) 19:58, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Educational Human. You successfully edited this page, posting just your signature at the bottom of it, with no question. Do you have a question? If so, click the edit link, just above, and then post below my response on a new line. In order to indicate your post is a response to mine, type two colons before your questions (::), which will save as an indentation increased one level from my response to you (don't place any spaces at the start). You would end that question with your signature again, e.g., by typing four tildes (~~~~), or placing them using the signature button, , located above the edit window. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:08, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

P.S.: if this is about your deleted draft Draft:Weird Syndrome, Wikipedia is not a place for frivolous jokes.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Delete article?

FYI
 – Header added by Tenryuu.

How do I delete my article and re-do it? FaarizPlayz (talk) 18:24, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

You don't delete your article. You didn't write the article. Your edits were already reverted by other editors. You could ask them for help on fixing your mistakes. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
FaarizPlayz Blaze's answer is incorrect. You did create the article that ended up at Draft:Scripts (writing). Parts were deleted because they had been copied from other sources - a copyright violation. A request was then submitted to delete the draft (I cannot see if by you or another editor), and the draft was deleted. You can attempt to create a new draft, but please avoid copyright infringement, and as you were advised while it was still an active draft, much of the content you wanted overlapped with the existing article Screenplay. David notMD (talk) 20:29, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I have no Idea where to talk about this

 45.27.160.52 (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Talk about what? You didn't specify anything. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:55, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
You want to talk about this? We have a page at our sister project: Wikt:this.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
That's TWO not helpful replies. Appears you edited Gohan and then reverted your own edit. What you did is now gone from the article. It remains, however, at the View history record of changes to the article, identified as by your IP address. With rare exceptions, all edits are preserved in chronological order. David notMD (talk) 20:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Sources in drafts: Part III

I have decided to continue with the doubts under this section, as the last section I made was archived months ago.

First of all, I wanted to ask to use two references to the same book, but which are located on different pages. For example, I have the idea to improve the draft about André by "reusing" a book reference (specifically The Art of Pixar Short Films) in order to fill a claim about his cameo appearence in Red's Dream. However, the citation is located on page 63 (which depicts a screenshot of the aforementioned 1987 short film showing the clock that this character appears seen from afar) and not from page 12 to page 16 as the other citation located on the "Concept and creation" section does.

As seen that visual references are allowed and The Art of Pixar Short Films is a reliable source, the citation which used the mentioned book and is located on page 63 may not only fill claims in the draft's "Appearances" section with references, but also adds source on "The Adventures of André and Wally B." section of the list of Pixar film references.--André the Android(talk) 19:23, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

You can use {{rp}} to add the page number next to the footnote (actually that wouldn't work well here, given the named ref for the page span), or you can more formally use short citations for this. See WP:CITESHORT and Help:Shortened footnotes – or you can even individuate the uses, a bit redundantly, with the normal cite method, by adding essentially a whole other citation for the second use of the same source, but specifying the other page number being used that time, e.g., the named reference "<ref name="alvy ray smith"... would remain—with its "pp. 12–16"—and you would recycle that reference with a different name (say "<ref name="alvy ray smith-63>", and change the page parameter in the cite text to |page=63. Transparency for verifiability purposes is of grave concern, while a small bit of repetition is of minor concern. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@Fuhghettaboutit: Ok... I will try it.
Besides, I tried to find any sources by googling either "André Pixar character personality", "André Pixar character hat" or simply "André Pixar character" and most of the results have nothing to do with the character who first appeared on The Adventures of André & Wally B., but this does not mean that I will give up. Therefore, I have thought to add a little more information while reusing one of the references (specifically a book published by University of Illinois Press which speaks about John Lasseter), as it states that "This André was more clownish [...] Lasseter's comical character reveals as much about his own emotionally driven and whimsical aesthetic as it does about the working environment forged by Smith and Catmull."
What do you think about adding this information and the page 63 of The Art of Pixar Short Films used as a visual reference for one of the sections of the list of Pixar film references?--André the Android(talk) 21:01, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Question About Wikipedia Ukraine

Hello Everyone, I have submit a page for review, including tags. Having read the standards and guidelines, I think the page below for Max Polyakov qualified but wish to be certain before embarking on another draft page. What do you think? Better to check here than get it wrong, yes? Thank you for this community.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Max_Polyakov Kickzzz (talk) 18:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Apologies for my confusion but, your title for this is asking about the Ukrainian language Wikipedia, while your question talks about a page you submitted for review. Also, for help in your language (which I'm guessing is either Ukranian or Russian), go here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Local_Embassy Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:55, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Blaze's answer is not useful. You created and submitted a draft - in English - submitted to English Wikipedia - about a person who is Ukrainian-American. Some, but not all, of the references are in Russian or Ukrainian. This is allowed. David notMD (talk) 20:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
The section on using non-English sources has more to say on the matter. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:42, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

can someone please help me I've been asking how to add a picture to an article can someone please help me Alisha rains (talk) 21:08, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Alisha rains: Welcome to the Teahouse. There's guidance on how to upload images at Uploading images, but before you do, you may want to check out the Image use policy page first. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
And see Help:Pictures. -- Hoary (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
FYI
 – Merging with above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I'm trying to become a host but I seem to have problems while trying to please help Alisha rains (talk) 21:11, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

It's been a while since I was inducted, but if you're referring to becoming a Teahouse host, editors are usually asked to have reached extended confirmed status (i.e., an account that is at least 30 days old with at least 500 edits) before applying. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:39, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
When you're a Teahouse "host", you do on this page what anyone else can do: attempt to answer questions helpfully. So there's really no point in being a "host". Simply attempt to answer questions helpfully. (If you have some other kind of "host" in mind, please specify.) -- Hoary (talk) 21:46, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Help with my article before resubmitting

hello. I've been working on an article for a couple of weeks and I would like some help and advice to improve my article so it won't be rejected for a second time. The first time it was rejected was because it wasn't written in the formal/neutral tone. I then went and read all Wiki's articles about writing in neutral tone and believe I've fixed the issue. However, I really want to know if it's good to resubmit again and if I took all forms of bias out. Will someone please check my work?

Thanks, and have a good day. Draft:Savanna Karmue

Tracksthegeneral (talk) 04:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral Tracksthegeneral (talk) 04:26, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Didn't you post this about a day ago? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:33, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu: Hello, I'm aware that I did, but believe that no one saw my last comment so decided to post again. I changed my article and applied the recent advice another user gave me to my article. I wanted someone to please look over it so I am asking for more help :). Thanks for understanding! Tracksthegeneral (talk) 22:07, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral

Quick question about Articles of Creation

After an article is rejected, will it be deleted if it wasn't SUBMITTED again in 6 months or if it wasn't ACTIVE (users not editing it) in 6 months? Thanks! Tracksthegeneral (talk) 22:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral Tracksthegeneral (talk) 22:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tracksthegeneral. Draft articles that have not been edited at all for six months are subject to deletion. If the draft has recent edits, it will not be deleted for that reason. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 22:24, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know, Cullen328! Tracksthegeneral (talk) 22:34, 30 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral

Can we extend articles?

If an article is too short, could we extend it with more information? Nightcoal50 (talk) 22:28, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Nightcoal50 Yes, if you can cite WP:RS that verifies what you add. If it's an article about a living person, make sure that you are familiar with WP:BLP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:41, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@Nightcoal50: I'll just comment that extending/improving existing articles is what most of the editors do here. For a newcomer, trying to start a new article from scratch can be daunting and prone to problems. whatever you add to any article in this encyclopaedia, none of it should be from your own personal experience. It all needs to be verifiable, if challenged, by someone on the other side of the world going to other properly published sources (online books, published books, journals, mainstream newspapers etc), but not blogs, social media, fan wiki sites etc. If you fancy a fun, self-guided tour to help you learn the basics of editing (and collecting 15 different badges as you progress) do try out The Wikipedia Adventure. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Article about 'Saraf Furniture'

I had submitted an article and it was deleted under Section G4 for speedy deletion on the basis of a discussion which was done in September, 2018. The article submitted in 2018 was not prepared by me. I had submitted the link to a forbes article of the company that was published on 27th January, 2021, without even viewing the facts and only relying on a previous discussion. The article was deleted under Section G4 for speedy deletion. Whom do I write for recovering the article?

Thanks. Adv.devanshmalhotra (talk) 02:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Adv.devanshmalhotra: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you try to recreate the article, you will see the correct person to contact to recover the article is Fences and windows. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:52, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I'm not going to restore that version, the sourcing was promotional including the Forbes piece - it was marked as an advert. Fences&Windows 23:15, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Finding things

How do i find things to fix and edit quickly, besides going through a lot of pages until i find one? (which isn't very fast) Wiki lover 211 (talk) 21:56, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

It's very easy. Find an article that's more than a stub. Go through the references, one by one. Almost certainly you'll soon find references to non-existent pages, to unreliable sources, to sources that fail to say what they're described as saying, etc. Edit and fix these, slowly, after careful deliberation. After all, you love Wiki! -- Hoary (talk) 22:00, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
PS If a linked-to page doesn't exist, start by searching for it (I mean, feeding its title, etc, to Google, Duckduckgo or your search engine of choice.) The page may still exist but have a different address. If that doesn't work, feed the link to web.archive.org/. Click on what this finds, and check that the version it has archived is actually helpful before linking to it. You may have to view several versions before you find one that's worthwhile. -- Hoary (talk) 22:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Wiki lover 211, it's great that you want to help out! There are lots of internal pages that list articles with issues. You could explore the backlog category for example, or articles for improvement. › Mortee talk 22:48, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
I learned from some replies to other questions above about the Task Center which looks great for this kind of thing › Mortee talk 23:19, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Any ideas?

Any ideas on what I could write about on Wiki? Maybe not here because people might take the ideas you give me? And if any ideas you give me gets taken, I will cry. And I cry acid. *Not really* FaarizPlayz (talk) 22:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

If you don't know what interests you, you can hardly expect that others will know what will. Also, please cut out the childishness. -- Hoary (talk) 22:12, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@FaarizPlayz: Welcome to Wikipedia and thanks for wanting to add to it. There is quite a list at WP:RA. You can grab any of those and start working on a draft. See WP:YFA for guidance. RudolfRed (talk) 22:13, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@FaarizPlayz: you would be best advised to stick with improving content on existing articles until you gain more experience. I don't feel you have the right attitude or maturity yet to create new articles of your own. But I'm happy to be proved wrong. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:03, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@FaarizPlayz, Seconding @Nick Moyes, creating new articles are quite daunting so instead of doing that, you could visit {{Open task}} and work on correcting some spelling errors and bad grammar in the listed articles. Celestina007 (talk) 00:32, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok. FaarizPlayz (talk)

Quick question

Can a sandbox talk place also be a sandbox place? amonguslover (contact me here) 00:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Amonguslover. A sandbox talk page is for discussing the content that you are trying to develop in the associated sandbox page. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 00:12, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@Amonguslover: If you ask because you would like multiple sandboxes then just create them at other names, e.g. Special:MyPage/sandbox2, Special:MyPage/sandbox3, ... PrimeHunter (talk) 00:44, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Quality revision

What's a "quality revision" in PCR? Firestar464 (talk) 07:36, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Firestar464 I think we need some context please. What do you mean by PCR or do you mean WP:PCR? I don't see the phrase "quality revision" there.--Shantavira|feed me 11:37, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Shantavira Yes, I mean WP:PCR. I can't find it; that's why I asked. Firestar464 (talk) 12:00, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@Firestar464: Where do you see the terminology "quality revision"? GoingBatty (talk) 20:32, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
Nvm. I figured it out. Basically auto-accept vs. approved. trout Self-trout Firestar464 (talk) 01:12, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Is there a way to turn off edit notices?

I am seeing a huge and annoying pop-up from Template:Editnotices when I edit a Featured Article. Does anyone know how to get rid of these things? Best, Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 17:38, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Clayoquot. The little v at the bottom right leads to Template:TFA editnotice which shows how to hide it. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:53, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Thanks, but the edit notice that I'm getting is from Template:Editnotices/Page/Menstrual cycle so I don't think suppressing the TFA editnotice will work. Clayoquot (talk | contribs) 22:49, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
tbh, that editnotice should probably be moved to a template with a standardized class, so it can be hidden. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:35, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

How do I see the edit history of a USER

I want to know how I can view a user's edit history, not just like history of a page or whatever. I want to be able to see the history of all the edits they make on the multiple different articles. I'm pretty sure this is possible in some form. Thank you :) !!! Leela Roha (talk) 01:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Leela Roha: for your second question, go to Special:Contribs and type in the desired username. To see your own contributions there should be a button at the top of the page named "contributions". versacespacetalk to me 01:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Leela Roha is a sock puppet of PeaceLoverStephenTrue1111 and should be blocked indefinitely.—J. M. (talk) 01:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Would you please confirm by identifying the sock puppet investigation? I see that PeaceLover is blocked but not mention of a SP. David notMD (talk) 02:07, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
There is no investigation yet as this is a new account created just minutes ago. But this is a very clear WP:DUCK. I can open an SPI page, that's no problem (the problem is that SPI cases nowadays often take weeks or even months before anyone replies). I also don't think it is wise to give the user advice on how to follow people's edits because that's basically what they've been doing (i.e. trolling selected editors) and one of the reasons why they're blocked from editing.—J. M. (talk) 02:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
OK, so I started a formal SPI. I just hope it won't take several weeks again, as it usually does in the last 12 months or so (many administrative areas on Wikipedia have been seriously understaffed in recent months, and SPI is often close to being abandoned).—J. M. (talk) 03:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Is this image good for Wikipedia File:Tlnovelas_logo_2021.png

Is this image good for Wikipedia File:Tlnovelas_logo_2021.png SparklesonApple (talk) 02:02, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

If it really is the logo of Tlnovelas, and if the Wikipedia of some language or other has an article about this, then I suppose so, yes. But here's an oddity. You wrote "Uploaded a work by Televisa Networks from https://www.televisa.com/tlnovelas with UploadWizard" (or anyway provided information from which that statement was generated), yet when I view https://www.televisa.com/tlnovelas, all I see is text. I don't see this or any logo. Is there something wrong with my browser? -- Hoary (talk) 02:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
I notice that there's a broken image on that page. Maybe it's that? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:15, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

United States or U.S.

I’m confused about how to write infobox birth and death locations in the United States. I understand the city and state are to be linked to their articles, but on most articles about people that born/died in the country, it’s just “U.S.” with no link to the article. It seems pretty standard for other countries, past or present, to link to their article, is there something specific about the US with this? Why not write out “United States” with a link? SoulMaster38 04:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, SoulMaster38. If you have a reliable source that verifies that the person died in Saugatuck, Michigan for example, then that is more encyclopedic information than either the United States or U.S., which is a vast country that almost all English language readers know a little bit about. Any reader curious for more information can click the link to find out more about the specific location. Sending the reader to the United States article would rarely be perceived as helpful. That's my view of the matter. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:36, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I’m asking about using “U.S.” without a link in conjunction with the state and city. For example, in John F. Kennedy it describes his birthplace as “Brookline, Massachusetts, U.S.“ “U.S.” does not link to United States, and this seems to be the universally used format for all birth or death locations in the USA. Would it not be more universal in conjunction with almost every other nation, if such a place were described as “ Brookline, Massachusetts, U.S.”? SoulMaster38 04:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

There is some guidance at MOS:US on "United States of America" abbreviations. Linking is similarly discussed at MOS:OVERLINK. It says major countries aren't usually wikilinked, the reasoning is the same that Cullen explains above. It is thought that readers are served by less links not more, and that these should be links to topics directly connected to understanding of the current subject, excluding those things that most people are likely to already know something about and/or can just know to specifically search for them on their own. I could wake up one day and think about reading the country article on USA and search for it, but I am unlikely to look for Brookline except when it comes up during something else, like as the birthplace of JFK. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Incorrect Merge

I accidentally chose the wrong article to propose That's What He Said Podcast be merged into and I haven't learned how to end a merge discussion yet. Would someone be willing to close the discussion so I can recommend it be merged with the article about the host? Otherwise could you at least provide links to the right place where I can look into how I would go about resolving a merge discussion. TipsyElephant (talk) 16:05, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

I think an admin will close the discussion if they find it irrevlevant or something. As far as I know normal users cannot close discussions. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:32, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@TipsyElephant: Just as an update, I've gone ahead and closed the discussion. As demonstrated, non-admin editors can close discussions if they know when to close and what the consensus (if any) of the discussion is. There's a lot more information that goes into closing at Wikipedia:Closing discussions. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 06:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Edit Tab

No edit tab, only edit source tab

Hi! I'm new to Wikipedia and have just finished the editing training. I'm just wondering why I don't have the 'edit' tab, but I do have the 'edit source' tab? Thank you :) Child of Prophecy (talk) 08:12, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Child of Prophecy: you need to enable Wikipedia:VisualEditor. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
(though my personal opinion is that you're better off just learning Wikitext) Elli (talk | contribs) 08:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hide page title

Hi. I am making a main page alternative and want to hide the page title and the bit which says 'from wikipedia the free encyclopedia', like the actual main page. Thank you Ihfshkahduahkjevrwgaljekdvhrwlhefjkd (talk) 07:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Ihfshkahduahkjevrwgaljekdvhrwlhefjkd, I don't think that's possible, the main page is basically fixed. I'm sure other editors know more than me. Nice username by the way. GeraldWL 07:17, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Edit: Actually, that is a smart idea for a main page. You can request refurbishment at Talk:Main Page. GeraldWL 07:18, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thanks Gerald. Must be a special software thing just for the main page Ihfshkahduahkjevrwgaljekdvhrwlhefjkd (talk) 08:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ihfshkahduahkjevrwgaljekdvhrwlhefjkd: you could probably do this with user CSS, though that would only apply for you, of course. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

2 questions

How do I expand a stub article and why had Suggestbot not give me my list of suggestions yet. I asked for them on March 10, and it's almost April, and I had still not got my editing suggestions. JennilyW (talk) 01:09, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@JennilyW: the smartest way to do this would be to identify all of your available resources and gather them together. Read all the resources, identify whether or not they are reliable, and extract information from the sources into the article. By doing this, you're making the article longer, and therefore, it will not be a stub.
Here's an example: Let's say there's an article for a rapper named "Teahouse". The article has three attached sources, one about him, one about his new song, and one about his upcoming album. The article, as it is, only documents the existence of the rapper and his most popular song. To make this article not a stub, you would look at your sources and expand the article based on those sources.
As for your other question, perhaps you inputted the template incorrectly? I'm not sure. Maybe try again. versacespacetalk to me 02:25, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi JennilyW. I have also found that SuggestBot appears to be stalled and have commented about it on User talk:Nettrom (the editor responsible for the bot). He has not yet replied. Currently, the bot request is the only thing on my own Talk Page, so anyone can see the presence of its template (via the source editor). SuggestBot worked correctly for me on March 5th. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:05, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Aromanians; Aromanian language

I am a new editor and would like to make some changes to the respective pages. Legione-Romana (talk) 09:28, 31 March 2021 (UTC))

Legione-Romana, you are welcome to improve either or both of the articles Aromanians and Aromanian language. Be sure to cite reliable sources, of course. -- Hoary (talk) 11:07, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I introduced the same InterWiki link, Piscicelli , in two different Wiki pages:
https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ducato_di_Napoli, where it works, and
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Giacomo_Piscicelli , where it does not work ("Page does not exist").

Please suggest what I should do. --Floridasso (talk) 08:56, 31 March 2021 (UTC) Floridasso (talk) 08:56, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

You didn't use what's normally called an interwiki link. Instead you used a regular Wikipedia link, pointing to something within the same Wikipedia. Used within it:Wikipedia, your link "[[Piscicelli (famiglia)|Piscicelli]]" leads to the it:Wikipedia it:Piscicelli (famiglia), which exists; used within en:Wikipedia, the same little piece of code leads to the [en:Wikipedia] Piscicelli (famiglia), which (unsurprisingly) doesn't exist. -- Hoary (talk) 09:23, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Tahnk you Hoary,
I did as suggested in the Interwiki page.
--Floridasso (talk) 09:50, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Floridasso. The way you formatted the interlanguage link is not really the recommended way of doing so any longer per WP:ILL#Inline links (links in the text of the article); so, I've reformatted the link for you. -- Marchjuly (talk) 12:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Are Netflix, Hotstar Considered as reliable source?

Are Netflix, Hotstar Considered a reliable source? One Page Creator undid my edits for Priyanka_Choudhary. I removed this link https://www.hotstar.com/in/tv/savdhaan-india-fir/15034/weddings-and-blackmails/1000255432 Sonofstar (talk) 07:19, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Sonofstar. Netflix and Hotstar may be somewhat reliable sources but they certainly are not independent sources because both companies are in the business of selling video content online. Acceptable Wikipedia articles should mostly summarize what reliable, independent sources say, and sources that are not independent do not establish notability, and their use should be kept to a minimum. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 07:30, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Sonofstar, in that very case, Hotstar is reliable to show the main cast of the series, as WP:PRIMARY. GeraldWL 07:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
So as it is reliable but not independent, can we add this or such links in the page?? Just asking to avoid mistakes in future. Seems like here we can but it depends also sometimes. Am I right? Sonofstar (talk) 08:55, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Sonofstar. Yes, you can cite non-independent sources as references, but only when the information they are being used to support is such as can be cited to primary sources. --ColinFine (talk) 12:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Johnny Mcghee

Hi - I have received some great help here before for the draft about Johnny Mcghee Trumpeter. I have now edited it down and addedwith citations and evidence. However; I have had the photograph I uploaded queried again by Timtrent but did not know how else to respond to them directly.I hope this works! I have the photograph from a private album and went away and checked with a lawyer about the copyright and there is no issue due to it's age and permissions and so there are no copyright issues.I photographed the original with an iPhone - is there anyway I can upload the image more directly as I understand why that may have caused a problem.Many thanks 15700cathy 15700cathy (talk) 11:51, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi 15700cathy. The file you uploaded to Commons is being discussed at c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Johnny McGhee Trumpeter.jpg. You can post a comment in that discussion if you like. If you'd like to leave a message for Timtrent, you can do so at c:User talk:Timtrent. As for the copyright on the photo, you might want to take a very careful look at c:Commons:Hirtle and c:Commons:United States because this photo doesn't look old enough to be within the public domain simply because of its age; moreover, "copyright expired album" doesn't really mean anything and doesn't help clarify the provenance of the image. Furhtermore, you can't really claim the file is your "own work" if you didn't take the original photo. Photographing the original with your iPhone doesn't make you the copyright holder as explained here. Try to think of it like this: you borrow a book from your local library and then you use your iPhone to take photos of each page of the book. Doing such a thing wouldn't make you the copyright holder of the book. Another example would be using your DVR to record a movie that you want to be able to watch at some other time. Doing such a thing wouldn't make you the copyright holder of the movie. The only ways the copyright of the original photo would likely be transferred to you is if there was a copyright transfer agreement between you and the person who took the photo, or if the person who took the photo left you the rights to the photo (i.e. you inherited it from them) when they died. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:02, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Why is there anything to do with the worst films to be considered?

Oi! Oi! I need an edit of this! AdwenKnowItAll (talk) 13:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@AdwenKnowItAll: Your edit was reverted because you "introduced multiple grammatical errors" per the edit summary left by the editor who reverted you.--Shantavira|feed me 14:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Arlington National interment

What is the longest time period from date of death to being interred at Arlington National Cemetery? Any information on the deceased available? Deacon3111 (talk) 15:15, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@Deacon3111: the Teahouse is for questions about Wikipedia, not questions about topics we cover in articles. You can ask some questions at the reference desk, but all "behind the scenes" pages are primarily designed to be used with improving Wikipedia articles in mind. You could try reading any references cited in the Wikipedia article you are talking about, to see if you could find an answer there, or there are lots of question and answer websites on the internet where you might be able to ask your question. — Bilorv (talk) 15:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Question on Notability

Hi, I would like to know if this article meets the guidelines for Wikipedia. It is on a book called The Heartfulness Way, so the real question is, if this book is notable enough to have an independent article?

Based upon my limited knowledge, and reading the WP:BK guildelines, I think it meets the notability criteria on following accounts - 1) it has been a subject of several newspaper articles and independent reviews, 2) it has been part of bestseller list 3) it was unveiled by The President of India who talked about it.

Good amount of info is available on it in the public domain, if some of you can make your independent assessment and share your opinion here, it will help me learn how to decide whether a topic is notable or not. Ensconce (talk) 14:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

NOTE: The link provided above goes to article about the book has since been deleted and turned into a redirect to Kamlesh D. Patel, who is one of the authors. The proper place for a discussion is on the Patel Talk page. David notMD (talk) 14:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

(See Talk:Kamlesh D. Patel#Possible notability of The Heartfulness Way.) — Bilorv (talk) 15:33, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Why aren’t there any pushpin maps for Brazilian states?

When I go to template maps I preemptively put in ‘Mato Grosso’ or ‘Brazil Mato Grosso’ even though I know it doesn’t work, only Brazil as a country works, which is confusing because Brazil is a very big country, with probably the most Portuguese speaking users on Wikipedia, so why haven’t they been made yet? Is it because villages in Brazil are not considered notable and what is borderline notable is the separate municipality maps for Brazilian states? They should add them. And I had a look around the templates, there are literally none, surprising. LongWinterBranches158 (talk) 23:54, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

@LongWinterBranches158: I'd assume they simply haven't been created yet? Wikipedia feels somewhat thorough so omissions can be surprising - but often, omissions are just that. Feel free to contribute them! Elli (talk | contribs) 05:59, 30 March 2021 (UTC)
@LongWinterBranches158: There are certainly some pushpin maps for Brazilian states, though some of them have rather nonintuitive names (see, for example, Module:Location map/data/Brazil Minas Gerais state, Module:Location map/data/Brazil Rio de Janeiro State, Module:Location map/data/Brazil Rondônia, Module:Location map/data/Brazil Sao Paulo, Module:Location map/data/Amapá). There is a file of a Mato Grosso location map, but no one's apparently used it to create a template or module to display pushpin maps. You can see how to create one at Template:Location map/Creating a new map definition, or if that's too much for you, ask at Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop for someone to create one. Deor (talk) 17:53, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

How to place a picture correctly (simple question)

I added photos to wiki pages like Freddy Carter but I can't seem to get the placement right nor do I understand how to get rid of the borders. I wanted to add a small subline stating where it was from, but it seemed to show with the subline and messing up the photo. How do I correct the pic?? Teria0000 (talk) 17:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Teria0000. The copyright status of the photo of Freddy Carter that you uploaded is dubious. It was first published in a copyrighted magazine and you credited it to Joseph Sinclair. Are you Sinclair and if not, why are you uploading a copyright protected photo as if it was your own work? Cullen328 Let's discuss it 17:54, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
I fixed the box issue for you but the bigger issue is the copyright problem. There is now a deletion discussion on Wikimedia Commons regarding that photo. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Missing article on the xC programming language

I am considering starting an article on the "xC" programming language. This is a language related to the occam (programming language) both in theory and in the design process and some of the people involved. xC is a proprietary language, with a free toolset (xTIMEcomposer) by the company XMOS.

I am a retired programmer who use the xC language a lot, and also blog about it. But I also have a disclaimer there that contains "I have no affiliation with any of the companies or persons I mention in my notes. I have no ads, there’s no money involved, no gifts are accepted. No donations, no affiliate advertisements, no rewards and no supporter support! It’s entirely a hobby with no income of any sort. Just fun and expenses." So I have nothing to do with XMOS except for the few support mails.

I am also affiliated with the local university NTNU in Trondheim, Norway: where I work with real-time / concurrency programming related matters, mostly as a censor.

I consider that the xC language really is in need of a Wikipedia page.

How do I proceed to make sure that such an article has enough notability for Wikipedia not to want to delete it later on?

I would consider the fact that it is proprietary as the biggest obstacle to finding independent sources, but it certainly is visible in the Tiobe index at https://www.tiobe.com/tiobe-index/programming-languages-definition/. Plus, when the occam page managed to get this notability, it should be possible to also find such sources for xC.

I am a little uncertain about "xC" or "XC", I'd have to query about this. XMOS seem to use it spelt either way.

I was thinking to start it at first and add { {compu-prog-stub} } to it. That would be needed. Making such an article not being a programming manual is also challenging.

PS. I discoverd that there was no xC page when I added it to the LLVM page the other day. Øyvind Teig (talk) 14:35, 28 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Aclassifier, and welcome to the Teahouse. As with all Wikipedia articles on any subject, the first and most important question is whether or not the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, which mostly translates into: Are there enough reliably published independent sources about it? Being propriertary is not an issue, but if that means that there is little about it that is not written or published by the team or the company who produce it, then it will not be notable, and there is no point in your spending any time trying to create an article about it. --ColinFine (talk)
Thanks ColinFine. I had noticed about notability, I guess that's why I asked. There are quite a lot of available documentation on the xC programming language. However, finding reliable sources from outside of XMOS is challenging, I guess. I can query about this at the XCore Exchange Community forum, and see if I can get any help there. Is there any way to "protect" an article for some time (perhaps with the { {compu-prog-stub} }) to see what might come up by other authors? Or maybe alternatively suggest a source list here? –Øyvind Teig (talk) 21:11, 29 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Aclassifier. Rather than thinking about "protecting" an article, I urge you to use the articles for creation process and create a draft. As long as it doesn't contain copyright infringements or personal attacks, a draft can stay there as long as you keep working on it, and when you think it might be ready to be accepted as an article, you can submit it for review. See your first article. --ColinFine (talk) 22:22, 29 March 2021 (UTC)

I have now discovered that there is a very nice article on XC, as seen on XC (programming language) at "campusafrica" (whatever that is). It says it is a copy of an originally published Wikipedia version, still seen at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/XC_(programming_language)?oldid=901782500. I did not find any trace of any deletion process. Could anybody help on finding out what happened to this page? I see that it only has reference to two very XMOS close sources, which may be hard on the notability requirement. (I see that it has not been updated with the combinable or distributable task types feature, indicating that if this were a page as of now, it would need editing.) Could there be any way to relist this page as a "draft"? In my opinion it's really too bad that this language does not have any Wikipedia page. Now there only is this redirect. (So there may have been a rather good reason that I didn't notice the lack of a page before recently). –Øyvind Teig (talk) 17:00, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Aclassifier: the page was redirected, you can see the history here. A lot of the information there doesn't belong in Wikipedia, but you could restore parts of what was there to the article. Though, since there were not sufficient independent reliable sources, it's possible it would get redirected. You could copy parts to Special:MyPage/xC to work on, just make sure you mention "copied from old version of 'XC (programming language)'" in your edit summary. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:40, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@Elli: Thanks! Some investigations into the history of that page and I agree with the comments there. It indeed had “multiple issues” like “more citations needed” and “original research” missing (from March 2020). Also a comment that the article was too much of a programmer’s manual. There also was a conflict of interest (COI): self promotion issue with it. I cannot "invent" any of the missing references, I could do a rewrite - but since Wikipedia seems to have a stringent notability requirement it's probable that even a much shorter and more lexical page might be redirected again. But without links to the web.archive.org etc, it might look "better" at least. I blame myself for not having been on the field when the page was in crisis, but not done is not done. But then I probably might not have been able to save it. "Testing" where Wikipedia's limit goes with respect to notability against the fact that the xC language (in my opinion) has the potential to become rather important with some of its ideas, in the future. As an intellectual piece of work, Wikipedia should in my opinion have xC shown. Would there be any notability vs. "intellectual importantness" tradeoff? I foresee the answer: it's again not notable enough that I think its intellectual properties hold, some other out there in the academia should have seen that as well. But then, it is proprietary, a property that often doesn't trigger academic work. Especially in the latest years, where getting funds seems to be more dependent on ratings of which publications/conferences a publication is (or is not) published. May be this is a problem that should be discussed by Wikipedia, as the line of reasoning has elements of biting itself in the tail. Proprietary not a problem in itself (above), but then maybe this starts the problem? Which end up in Wikipedia and the public loosing intellectial heritage. I personally don't think this is an "aside", it's probably a quite central problem. –Øyvind Teig (talk) 08:18, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@Aclassifier: it's an interesting problem, but the issue is that "importantness", aside from notability, is really quite subjective. An alternative way to think of Wikipedia's policies about notability and reliable sources are that they are there to prevent editing disputes. If we allowed original research, for example, we'd have people disagreeing on what is true - so instead we just go by what reliable sources say. Indeed, with notability, it's the same - what we should include isn't something easy to determine, so we just go off of what reliable sources say.
Though, I think you're making notability too much of a barrier. A few news articles about investment in the programming language, why some people use it, etc, and you have notability (assuming they're, well, independent, paying for news to write such an article is not allowed, obv).
Basically, if with independent sources, you could write a decent article, it's probably notable. And that's exactly the reason the policy exists in the first place. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@Elli: much to think about! As much I'd love to refer to my own blogs about xC (and a fringe presentation for a conference in 2018, plus one to appear in April) I would have to present this problem on the xCore Exchange forum. My stuff is too informal. –Øyvind Teig (talk) 08:39, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@Aclassifier: feel free, if you can find some media coverage perhaps it would qualify. Elli (talk | contribs) 08:42, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I have done some searching and indeed found relevant academic papers. Like in the ACM Digital Library and The Internet Archive Scholar. –Øyvind Teig (talk) 18:18, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Advice

I made a draft for an article about the henry stickmin series. What should I add AM3M3B0I (talk) 17:26, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, AM3M3B0I. Your draft is unreferenced, and unreferenced drafts are never going to be accepted. Please read Your first article for what is required. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:44, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Popularity of Wiki Pages

Is there a way to know how popular a wiki page is or how much traffic it gets? AbuRas1 (talk) 18:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@AbuRas1: If you click "page information" in the side bar it will show you number of views in last 30 days. RudolfRed (talk) 18:30, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, AbuRas1. Yes, in desktop mode, every article has a "Page information" tab with lots of statistics. There is a link to an interactive page views tool. Here is an example for Abraham Lincoln. You can see that his article has been viewed almost 400,000 times in the last three weeks. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 18:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@AbuRas1: The bottom of "Page information" and the top of the "View history" tab both have a page views link to the same site. User:PrimeHunter/Pageviews.js can save you a click by placing the link on the page itself. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:05, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
View history and then selecting Page views has recent days as the default, but clicking on the contents of the dates box allows you to select, month, this year, last year, or customize dates. David notMD (talk) 20:17, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! PrimeHunter and RudolfRed — Preceding unsigned comment added by AbuRas1 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

How to go about adding a description of the gameplay to a game article

So I want to add information on the gameplay of the game SnowRunner to the article (as currently it doesn't really have any besides just a basic overview of what it is) as I think I would be able to do this well since i own the game (hopefully I won't have a conflict of interest). How exactly would I go about doing this? I know that it would have to include references (Myself not being a reference cause that would be rather stupid). Would it be better to go about making a draft of what i want to add first? Apologies for so many questions. I'm just trying to improve the article. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:10, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Blaze The Wolf. Please read WP:GAMEGUIDE, which explains why this idea is not appropriate. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 20:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Cullen328, reading WP:GAMEGUIDE and the relevant article, I think there's a little more gray area than that. The article is currently stub-class (the lowest quality assessment), so it needs lots of expansion. Blaze The Wolf, you can look to featured video game articles for an idea of what's appropriate to add. The key point from WP:GAMEGUIDE, though, is that you don't want to go into excess detail or turn the article into an instruction manual. But adding a basic high-level overview of the gameplay mechanics, especially anything notable about them that has been covered in external sources, would likely be a plus. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 20:29, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
@Blaze The Wolf: However, Blaze, if you are interested in writing an in-depth game guide, our sister project Wikibooks has recently voted to allow video game strategy guides for "significant games", which under their guidelines would include SnowRunner. Also, SnowRunner can absolutely include a 'Gameplay' section, as pretty much any good video game article does. As you and Sdkb noted, however, it wouldn't be a guide, and the information would need to be cited to a reliable source.TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 20:33, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Rod Brown Denver Broncos

A picture of a white man is on this article and he is not the Rod Brown American football player from Gainesville Texas. Can this be deleted. If you want a picture of the real Rod Brown for this article. I can send you one. 142.147.51.21 (talk) 21:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

There is no photo at Rod_Brown_(gridiron_football). If you saw the photo in Google, then that is an issue with Google's Knowledge Graph and out of Wikipedia's control, but you can report the problem to Google. RudolfRed (talk) 22:01, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Help with Determining Next Steps on Editing

Do I need permission from editors who have been commenting on my potential edits to try again? My previous edits did not go through for, in particular, a link issue. Dontanner (talk) 13:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Dontanner. Wikipedia wants us to be WP:BOLD, but sometimes when we're bold another editor disagrees with us and WP:REVERTs (either total or partially) the edit we made. When that happens, the best thing to do is to try and figure out why our edit was reverted by WP:DISCUSSing things on the article talk page per WP:BRD. Of course, things can be much more complicated than that, and the reason for reverting our edit might not be a good reason at all. Even in such cases though, it's better to try and resolve things through discussion unless the revert reinstates a serious violation of some Wikipedia policy or guideline like a copyright violation or a WP:BLP violation. If all you do is simply revert the reverter and restore you original edit without a really really good Wikipedia policy-based reason for doing so, there's a good chance that you'll risk an edit war which nobody wins. What you're going to need to do is try and establish a WP:CONSENSUS for the changes you want to make on the article's talk page. This seems to be pretty much the same advice given to you above in #Editing with new published attribution, but there's no much more to do then be patient and give other a chance to respond. It's quite possible they haven't noticed your message yet. Maybe try leaving a Template:Please see on their user talk pages so that they know that you'd like to discuss things with them on the article's talk page. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:41, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the response!— Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1700:73b9:100:549c:24da:5ceb:c45d (talk) 22:44, 31 March 2021 (UTC)‎

Entry for Leviticus Nightclub

I just submitted an article but it was rejected because it did not have legitimate sources. My sources were Ebony magazine and the NY Amsterdam News. Aren't these outlets legitimate? Newton Figures (talk) 19:06, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Newton Figures. Currently, your draft User:Newton Figures/sandbox has no references and will not be accepted. Please read Referencing for beginners and Your first article. Cullen328 Let's discuss it 19:43, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

In my previous question, I meant to mention Black Enterprise as one of my sources instead of Ebony magazine. Newton Figures (talk) 19:08, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Still, no evidence that you have tried to create references. How are you mentioning 'sources'? Wikipedia requires not just that you found sources to confirm content, but that the sources also be incorporated into the article as references. See Help:Referencing for beginners. David notMD (talk) 20:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Regardless of whether you have sources, you haven't included them in the draft. It's like the difference between having clothes and wearing clothes. DS (talk) 23:02, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Help with my article infobox

Hi, could someone please help me fix the syntaxes in the infobox on this article? Thanks! Draft:Savanna Karmue

Tracksthegeneral (talk) 06:11, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Tracksthegeneral, I don't see any problems with the infobox. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 06:34, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Dodger67, someone already went ahead and fixed it after I asked. Thanks though! Tracksthegeneral (talk) 07:35, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral

@Tracksthegeneral: I suggest cropping the photograph so we can see her face, or using a different photograph - see Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Images. GoingBatty (talk) 17:04, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thanks for input, how do I crop the image? Tracksthegeneral (talk) 17:14, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral

@Tracksthegeneral: You could crop the image on your computer or phone and then upload the cropped version. GoingBatty (talk) 17:47, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Will do, thanks! Tracksthegeneral (talk) 18:58, 31 March 2021 (UTC)Tracksthegeneral

There's also Croptool, for images that are on Commons. (Toolforge is owned by the WMF) DS (talk) 23:21, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Reorganization

Hi Thank you for inviting me to the Teahouse. My Question - If a {{Cleanup reorganize|date=March 2021}} is placed and I have already cleaned up the article, when will it be removed? Palakasan (talk) 02:09, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

You can remove it yourself. See Help:Maintenance template removal for more info (or click "Learn how and when to remove this template message" in the template above). Kleinpecan (talk) 02:14, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Abusive behaviour!

Hi, I did my first edit today on Wikipedia and I have already had an unpleasant experience with the user Super Dromaeosaurus. I think that they are not here with the purpose of improving any page's content but to promote their biased viewpoint on the subject and reverse anything that does not suit them. They have just reverted all of my edits. What should I do? RegardsLegione-Romana (talk) 13:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC) Legione-Romana (talk) 13:38, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi Legione-Romana. What you should do it try and remain cool and assume good faith. If you make an edit to an article that is subsequently reverted by someone else, don't immediately assume the worst. You should instead try and understand why the edit you made was reverted by looking for an edit summary explaining why or by discussing things on the article's talk page per WP:BRD. Wikipedia has lots of policies and guidelines so perhaps there's a pretty good reason why this other editor reverted you. So, follow Wikipedia:Dispute resolution and try and focus on the content of the edit being discussed and not what you think the motives of the other editor might be. -- Marchjuly (talk) 13:56, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
(edit conflict) : Welcome to the Teahouse, Legione-Romana. The editor Super Dromaeosaurus who reverted your edits stated in their edit summary "I'm sorry, but lots of this is unsourced and WP:OR". This doesn't mean that your additions were incorrect, merely that they could not be verified. A core principle of everything we write in articles is that readers can see where we got the information from — and one of the issues with Aromanian language is that it is inadequately sourced. It can be a shock for new editors to discover that Wikipedia cares less about what is true than it does about what is verifiable, preferably in a WP:SECONDARY reliable source. Things that may be true but don't have such sources are often the result of what we call WP:OR, that is "original research", which is not allowed. The simplest way forward is to ensure that what you add to articles has in-line citations backing up the material. Please don't be put off: you can use the Talk Page of any article to discuss with other editors how to improve articles and discuss your sources, in line with another policy summarised at WP:BRD. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:03, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, I notify that the reason why I reverted most of the changes this user did is because some seemed unneccessary (such as rewriting of paragraphs) or because they consisted of unsourced information (link of the edit). I couldn't revert that one individually so I had to use Twinkle (a tool for reverting multiple edits) to revert all of them and restore then the positive changes the user did [10]. I left a message in the user's talk page. Super Ψ Dro 14:05, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Aromanian language

 Courtesy link: Aromanian language

FYI
 – Merging section with above and transferring header link to a courtesy link. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:35, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I repeat that the user 'Super Dromaeosaurus' is not here with the purpose of improving any content but to enforce their biased opinion. I doubt their integrity. Specifically, first of all, they are lying. They reverted all of my edits not just part of them as they pretend above. They have restored exactly the previous version. Secondly, they have justified the revert by citing a lack of sources for my edits. In that case, I ask them, do they have any source for the information that they are enforcing? RegardsLegione-Romana (talk) 14:17, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

I did revert all your edits because I couldn't revert individually the one that concerned me (this is what shows up if you try to revert it [11]). However, I then restored the positive edits. You can see what did I exactly revert and restore here. And no, the version to which I have restored it is not cited either, but I have also said that there were slight neutrality problems in parts of what you rewrote, so the previous version is preferred. I have detailed more about the reason for my reverts in those parts in your talk page and I offer you again help if you want to re-add information if you feel that the current one should be changed. Super Ψ Dro 14:33, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

New editors (you) should not accuse other editors of abusive behaviour or lying because of a disagreement about content. Wikipedia has guidelines that are not obvious to new editors. One is that content requires references. There are many articles, especially older ones, that were never adequately referenced. Regardless, nowadays, changes, even to previously poorly referenced content, requires references. Talk pages of articles are the right place to work on achieving consensus. David notMD (talk) 22:27, 31 March 2021 (UTC)

Legione-Romana, the first time you brought up the matter of editing these articles (in an earlier Teahouse thread), I said that you were welcome to do so, but added "Be sure to cite reliable sources, of course." That's what you must do. And David notMD's right: do not impute motives to other editors or attempt psychiatric evaluations of them unless you can provide clear evidence for what you're saying (and examples of behaviour that's merely compatible with base motives or psychopathology are not sufficient). This isn't just for new editors; it applies to old ones too: several times a week, I deal with work by editors whose contribution histories are easy to explain if they're writing for hire, very hard to explain otherwise, but I very rarely accuse anyone of editing for money. -- Hoary (talk) 02:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Change Redirect

How do you change or request a change of a Redirect?--Pibal373 (talk) 03:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC) Pibal373 (talk) 03:04, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@Pibal373: Welcome to the Teahouse. If a redirect brings you to a second page, there is a small string of text at the very top that will say (Redirected from [page]). You can click on that to bring you to the redirecting page, where you can edit the link to the appropriate target. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:09, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Contributing to a page through Wikiproject

Hello,

I am trying to edit NOYB, but before I do so I wanted to get feedback on TALK:NOYB. Upon going to the talk page I found it was claimed by multiple wikiprojects. Upon joining wikiprojects for organizations, I cant seem to figure out how to contribute or request feedback on my potential edits, and additionally, im confused on how to actually submit the edits once I get feedback. I found the talk page for the organizations wikiproject- should I post my ideas for edits there? If there isnt a response over a few weeks can I join a different wikiproject and post to that talk page? How do I get approval to make edits?

Thanks for the help! MrSirGuyFriendBuddyOlPal (talk) 06:30, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@MrSirGuyFriendBuddyOlPal: hey, I'd recommend just going ahead and making the edits - see Wikipedia:Be bold. If you really don't feel confident in them, then you could post them at the article's talkpage, or the Wikiprojects' talkpages, for example at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Organizations. Seriously, though, I would just suggest making the edits to the article first. Joining Wikiprojects is entirely unnecessary and you are already approved to edit the page. OwO (what's this?) 07:16, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Curious Emergency shutoff... button of (any?) Bot

Uh... idk what to ask like how does it look like after one presses the emergency stop like does it do anything or does something instantly notice a change if so what change or changes... and how would one know if it A were inadvertently pushed/pressed both if done by themself as well as if another had inadvertently done such as described, also what would show up or whatnot like would anything change as to regards/for regarding display etc? Also is there a way to TRY using an emergency shutoff w/o it being unknown potentially whether it is disturbing— not like morally wrong but like effecting something etc in an unintended or inintentional/unexpected way or having the potential for perhaps interference... should one just use the sandbox and/or like genuinely pretend imagine that it is an emergency shutoff and that by editing the sandbox Its really pushing/pressing/hitting etc the button for shutoff/emergency shutoff? Kinda not tryna get banned is why kinda... reluctant? Hesitant? Idk what it is— to try doing so/such... oh if one is reading this lets both try so that no matter what if something goes wrong we will just be above to say that well we'll just have to hope for the best :D and that way neither one gets punished via means of being deemed that that renders it impossible to or be capable of doing something that is not ok. Oh btw what is the reference saying "do not..." beneath this paragraph to tildes... like that's name of a computer code/format/language right? And am now realizing idk if what this is doing is helpful, about to be mistook as or taken as vandalism, or just plain not doing anything or getting anywhere so if successful.. is this how to ask questions on here? &Jvc why the name teahouse... no reason it just reminds of or makes think of the "turbo time" pr something something teahouse whatever that is/was off of a show that was maybe still on called jhony test.. anyways yeah tysvm for reading this long af ya prolly gonna think this is practically a religipusly associated to the book or books known as the bibke or bibles... bible length of a barache barage? Of... idk just babble so trailing off now kinda like tina/bobs burgers Carpetlice (talk) 04:21, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@Carpetlice: In 99% of the bots I know, the emergency shutoff button only works for Administrators anyway, because it contains a link to Special:Block under the hood, a page only working if you are an administrator. For all other users, those buttons have no effect. And yes, the button is realy only for emergencies, because odds are that your disrupt the bot at what he is currently doing. These buttons will stop the bot right awawy, as a nature consequence off the block appliied to the bot account, meaning you will probbably catch it somewhere between two edits which were intended to be run both. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:46, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Some bots, like User:AnomieBOT, also have shut-off pages for each task that anyone can edit (for example, User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/TFDClerk). However, please don't do this if there isn't a need to shut the bot off. OwO (what's this?) 07:19, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Richa Jain

hey my friend made a page exactly same to my page on richa jain his page was declined so i thought i would make it but whenever i am putting it out for a review i am getting the message that one page is already under review but i contacted the guy who made the page his page was declined than why my page is not getting rewieved please help  Himanshushukla433 (talk) 04:47, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@Himanshushukla433: welcome back to the Teahouse. When you create a new section in the Teahouse, please keep the subject line/heading short, and write your question below the heading. I have fixed it for you above.
As the reviewer explained on your user talk page, Draft:Richa Jain exists and can be edited by anybody, including you. The draft has not been submitted for review since it was last declined, in fact it hasn't been edited at all since then, but when a draft has been declined there is no need to create a new draft about the same topic. If a draft is rejected, rather than declined, it means that the reviewer has determined that there can't be a Wikipedia article about that topic, but that hasn't happened with this draft. It looks like your sandbox draft is basically a copy of Draft:Richa Jain, and so it has the same issues (so it would be pointless to review it until those issues have been fixed). As I was typing this, the creator of the draft blanked it, which is inappropriate – I have restored it.
Important: since you are in contact with the person the draft is about, you have a conflict of interest. Please read the information at Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. If you have more questions about that, you can ask them here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 07:49, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Help Create a Page

Please help me create a page Editormian (talk) 07:39, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Editormian Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating a new article(not just a "page") is the hardest thing to do on Wikipedia. It takes much time and practice. New users who dive right in to creating new articles often end up disappointed and with hurt feelings as something that they spent hours on is mercilessly edited and even deleted by others. I don't want you to have any bad feelings, so I would 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. I'd also suggest using the new user tutorial.
If you still want to create a new article now, you should read Your First Article, then visit Articles for Creation to create and submit a draft article for review. This way you find out any problems first. 331dot (talk) 07:53, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

Starting a project (not WikiProject)

Can a user start a project, not a wikiproject but a project like making a list of basic and notable questions with simple and reliable answers, if yes then where to start, should I start it on subpage of my userpage or other, also what are the guidelines. ExclusiveEditor (talk) 05:07, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: Is this for your own personal use? You could start a subpage in your user space. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:14, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

No it is not for my personal use, I am creating a list of basic questions with reliable answers for new editors on Wikipedia.ExclusiveEditor (talk) 06:15, 1 April 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: writings about Wikipedia are allowed in your userspace, of course. If you think it might be useful to others, then you could put it in project-space (Wikipedia:Essay title), just make sure to tag it with {{essay}}, {{Information page}}, or something similar. I'd recommend starting it as a subpage of your userpage, though. OwO (what's this?) 07:17, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
@ExclusiveEditor: One thing you should not be doing is copying posts created by other users. User:ExclusiveEditor/ExclusiveHelp/Page1 has a couple of entries signed by other people, but those people have never edited that page. If you think somebody has explained something really well, or given particularly good advice, you could link to that post from your help page, but not copy their words and signature. You also cannot copy text straight from other Wikipedia pages without attribution; see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for more information. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 08:43, 1 April 2021 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive_1102&oldid=1088801983"