Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1104

John Infobox
John Infobox
Born	John Officeholder Person Infobox; May 5, 1950; Template City
Died	October 10, 2010 (aged 60)
Occupation	Actor
Years active	1970–1990
Mayor of Wikipedia
	In office; 1994–1998
Website	example.com

This is an archive of past discussions on Wikipedia:Teahouse. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current main page.

Archive 1100

←

→

Offer to rewrite a draft for money

I wrote a draft about my Father Richard Kerner who is a retired professor, and the draft has been in review since January 2021. I flagged that I was related to him, but that the page in English is mostly a translation of an already written article in French, by a person not related to him. Recently, my Dad received an email from a certain Tamsin S Amanda declaring they are an experienced Wikipedian:

"I am an experienced Wikipedian. I will do online research and rewrite the content in an encyclopedic tone, format the draft according to Wikipedia guidelines and get it approved, I will forward the final draft for you to review before submitting it."

My Father replied to thank that person, who then said:

"I will rewrite this declined draft according to Wikipedia guidelines and submit it for review. It will cost you Euro 280, pay me when the page approved and published. Regards, Tamsin S Amanda"

I understand that nothing prevents people from offering their services for a fee, but this looks very much like a scam. I should say that I support Wikipedia by making monthly donations. What is Wikimedia Foundation's position on such matters? JacquesKerner (talk) 21:39, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi JacquesKerner. It is probably is a scam – see Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning – but it might not be. There are a bunch of mostly incompetent, often predatory acting, but nevertheless actual services that do write Wikipedia articles for money. The result is often a pile of stinking garbage, done in violation of our policies, for far too much money, that most of us could do far better than in about an hour, and that get deleted, but that's not "technically" a scam, right? If it's not clear, I recommend staying far, far away. Oh, by the way, the first email content you excerpted is probably what they write to numerous people, so it's been groomed a bit. The second part is full of grammar mistakes because they had to actual tailor it to your father's message, betraying their lack of English competency, and thus assured lack of ability to write a truly competent article.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:50, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I really appreciate your quick answer! We'll just stay put and wait for a good soul to review the draft. Is there anything one can do to have such a draft processed in the following months? JacquesKerner (talk) 22:03, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@JacquesKerner: I think it is definitely a wise decision not to respond to the people asking for your money! I took a quick look at Draft:Richard Kerner – I am not a reviewer, but I am a reasonably experienced editor, and also an academic. My gut feeling is that he is notable, but I wonder if there might be more references by independent/secondary parties writing about him? That kind of source is often hard to find for academics, and it doesn't have to mean that the person is not notable according to Wikipedia's definition, but it would help. I don't know whether you have consulted this guideline – it tells you more about what makes an academic notable in the eyes of Wikipedia, especially when there aren't many secondary sources. It is possible that User:DGG might have more input on this, since he is very knowledgeable about the notability requirements for academics. Bonne chance! --bonadea contributions talk 22:17, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the guideline on academic notability, I will read it to better understand if Richard Kerner qualifies and if so, what to provide to support the claim. --JacquesKerner (talk) 22:28, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) @JacquesKerner: Anytime. Meanwhile, there's really nothing you can do much to speed up the review, but I can advise that it will surely be declined in its current state. We are looking almost entirely for content that is verified by citations to reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detail. The draft mostly cites primary sources, and most of the sources don't actually verify the content at all; they're databases, photographs, things like that. When you write "Kerner conducted his career as a professor and researcher at the University Pierre and Marie Curie", and then cite a source, the source should corroborate the information it is cited in relation to, directly. Here, you cite a page listing your father's supervision of many students' theses. One might induce from the fact that he did so that he must have been a professor at that university, but that's about it; utterly indirect and attenuated. This is to say, your father may be notable based on what you've said about him, and as we use that word here (despite that the vast majority of people in the world are not; I'm not), but the draft certainly doesn't demonstrate that, and relies on primary sources, used improperly.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:30, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

ANNNNNND, Declined, for lack of secondary source references. By the way, references used in Wikipedia articles other than English often are not considered reliable source, secondary references in English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 22:33, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

Of course he's notable, and I would not have declined the article, but just adjusted it a little. He clearly will pass WP:PROF on the basis of the impact of his published works if the article is properly written, and would I think meet the notability standard of any WP. However, the different WPs go about writing articles on scientists a little differently, and this will need a little adaptation to meet our usual expectations. Since I have done this for similar articles a great many times, I will do it for you in the next few days, and then accept it. (This will be considerably easier for me than explaining just what is needed). The reviewer was apparently not taking account of our standard for academics: WP:PROF is quite separate from the general guideline WP:GNG, which requires substantial 3rd party reliable published sources. All that is necessary is 1/ to have some reliable source for the basics of the career, and it does not even have to be third party, (Ref 5 is the right kind of source for this--such institutional statements, even though not technically independent, are considered reliable) and 2/ evidence of meeting one or more of the provisions of WP:PROF. The normal way for doing this for scientists active in the last 50 years is through the citations to their published peer-reviewed papers, as found in google scholar or the equivalent, though there are various other methods. (the draft does not cite these publications exactly, and this will have to be done--it isn't difficult. Many other WPs assume anyone who wishes will be able to find them in the usual academic sources; we tend to assume that our readers need everything written out for them.

The basic difference for academics between English WP and most other WPs is that enWP actually wants to see the evidence of citations, or the special criteria such as a distinguished professorship. The other WPs assume that anyone in this person's position of being a full professor at a major university (in his case, an extremely major world-famous university) will necessarily have met them, as the standards of such universities are higher than anything any WP demands for notability. For reasons that I can explain but not justify, English WP does not make this assumption; however, for 13 years now I have worked mainly in this field and never seen an article on someone in such a position at a university the quality of his deleted, unless there were some other reason, such as their being in a subject that some WPedians have in the past not taken seriously, such as those that in previous generations were typically the province of women, or because of some other prejudice.

I confess that I thought of demonstrating this by accepting the article as is, and seeing if anyone would try to delete it, but this would not be fair to the subject or to you, to subject you to an unpleasant experience in order to make my point. I will instead do what I have done many hundreds of times here, which is standardize the article to our expectations. Other editors do similarly in other fields--the goal of AfC is just to make an acceptable article, that can be further improved in mainspace.

More generally, this is one of the problems of our AfC system. A substantial number of draft declines are done over-hastily or ignorantly. We do try to pick up the most erroneous ones and instruct the reviewers, but as generally at WP , there are only a few of us willing to do this, and too many incorrect reviews to keep track of. Myself, I try to check all the declines for academics that I can, but I get to less than half of them. I usually find a substantial number that shouldn't have been declined or could very easily have been fixed, and I fix or accept as many as practical, but I cannot properly work on more than 1 or 2 a day.

This happens in all fields-- academic articles are only a small part of it-- and our erratic reviewing provides an opportunity for the illegitimate paid editors to try their scams. They are almost always unambiguously scams, for the editors know very well that most of the time they will not be able to improve the articles sufficiently for them to actually stay in WP (either because the articles are untenable or because they haven't the skills or resources) They will sometimes by accident pass AfC, or they will have a confederate accept it for them, or they will use one of the tricks to avoid going through AfC, and hope to collect the money before the community has the necessary discussion for deletion. (They will sometimes then under another name pretend to be an administrator who can restore it--for more money.) Furthermore, even if they do improve the articles, they almost never make the necessary declaration about paid editing required by our terms of use; work submitted in violation of this will generally (although not automatically) be deleted, and they know this perfectly well., although they will often pretend to their victims they are following the rules. We have no direct method for stopping them, and can only discourage them by trying to spot their work and delete it. It shouldn't of course be necessary--everyone who submits an article in good faith should have it properly reviewed, and guided to fix it, or courteously explained why it would not meet our standards, but we have too many submissions--many of which are in fact absolutely hopeless--and too few good reviewers. One of the problems about being a system dependent on volunteers is that we have no way of getting anyone to do any work that they do not themselves actively want to do, or to do it as carefully as they ought to. DGG ( talk ) 06:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you David notMD for declining the draft with a clear explanation, at least that gives a clear indication of how to proceed. I really appreciate you taking the time to review it. -- JacquesKerner (talk) 15:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much DGG for the clarification around notability and for explaining the difference between WP:PROF and WP:GNG, it's been very educational for me. I can't thank you enough for devoting time on this draft. It's a daunting task to process all these drafts and verify their accuracy, and this is what makes Wikipedia so special. It makes me want to learn and contribute with time as well. Thank you. -- JacquesKerner (talk) 15:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Account suddenly became active after ten years without any activity

I stumbled upon User:Keithtownley. This account has made four edits to their user page in July 2009, as well as one edit to the article Orang Pendek in August 2010, and then became inactive. On 5 August 2021, they made several edits to articles about various places in England, adding external links; those edits were later reverted.

It seems weird for an account which was not used for ten years to suddenly start adding external links to articles, so I'm inclined to think they've been hacked. On the other hand, on their user page they have written about the United Kingdom, and their newer edits are all related to England, so perhaps I'm overreacting.

What should I do? Kleinpecan (talk) 14:06, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Kleinpecan: Do nothing. We don't know why that is, nor do we really care. Judge the content of their edits, and if and only if the content is problematic, handle it like you would with any other problematic editor. Even if they were "hacked", since it's a relatively low-profile account, there really isn't anything that Wikipedia could or should do about it. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 14:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay, thank you. Kleinpecan (talk) 14:43, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello @Kleinpecan, hello, what you may do is add them to your watchlist and check to see if or not the account is making disruptive or questionable edits, if they are, then this venue wouldn’t be the most appropriate place to report the incident as such incidents would require administrative intervention. Perhaps WP:AN/I would be better equipped to deal with such but you must be thoroughly convinced that the said account has been compromised. Celestina007 (talk) 15:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Help with a new page.

Hello everyone, I have created a new page but it don't look like an official page. What do I do to make it normal? Thank you! Soundsfromwater (talk) 12:29, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Soundsfromwater, it seems perfectly normal. You should probably remove the first line, though. MEisSCAMMER^{(talk)^(contribs)} 12:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Soundsfromwater, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. I have added a header to your sandbox so that you can submit it for review when you think it is ready. --ColinFine (talk) 14:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, I just submitted it! What's next? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Soundsfromwater (talk • contribs) 15:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Soundsfromwater: Welcome to the Teahouse! Now that you have submitted Draft:Austen (musician), please see the yellow template at the bottom of your draft that says "Review waiting, please be patient. This may take 5 months or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 5,525 pending submissions waiting for review." You can continue working on the draft while you're waiting (e.g. removing the first line, as MEisSCAMMER suggested above, adding more parameters to the references such as |date=, and |work= or |publisher=, adding WikiProject templates to the talk page). Happy editing! (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) 15:42, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Help with Editing

Good day ! I am Adolphinah Rhyn a new wikipedian student. there is an article that i would really like to edit or talk to the author about , how do i go about doing that? Rhynducy (talk) 11:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

If you're viewing Wikipedia in English, each article should come with a link labelled "Talk". Go to the article you want to talk about, click "Talk", and you'll arrive at the article's talk page. This is where you can ask questions about or make suggestions for the article. For most articles, you can also edit directly; but you should do this very carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 11:48, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Articles do not have individual authors. If you click on View history for an article, you will see a chronological listing of all edits, with authors identified. Some articles have hundreds of contributors. Exceptions: Very new articles may have only one author; also, if articles have recently been raised to Good Article status, many of the recent edits may be by the editor who was laboring to get to GA. David notMD (talk) 16:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

How to get a page accepted?

Johnw28 (talk) 14:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Wait and make sure that the draft complies with wikipedia's rules. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:16, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Johnw28:. Hello John, and welcome to The Teahouse. In case Blaze The Wolf's answer was too vague to provide any useful guidance, the best thing I can offer is a link to some further reading for you. First of all, the page Help:Your first article has a wealth of information on creating articles for Wikipedia. The ONE important thing, which I cannot stress enough is that in order for an article to be accepted, it needs to be about an appropriate subject. The thing that makes a subject appropriate is that other people have already written a lot about that subject. Significantly close to 100% of rejected articles are rejected because the subject of the article just didn't have sufficient source text out there in the world outside of Wikipedia. Your #1 job as an article writer is to find source texts to prove that the subject has already been written about. Everything else is a minor issue. If no one has written about your subject before, it won't ever be an appropriate subject for an article. I hope that helps. --Jayron 32 15:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

If this is about User:Johnw28/sandbox, it has no references. David notMD (talk) 16:57, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

How to change the title of the article made by myself

How to change the title of the article made by myself? Mr good man beast and beastest (talk) 13:22, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

You need to be autoconfirmed in order to be able to move pages (your account should be at least 4 days old and have made at least 10 edits). Since you're not autoconfirmed, you can request a move instead. Kleinpecan (talk) 14:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Also asked at the help desk. @Mr good man beast and beastest: please do not post similar questions in multiple locations. Thank you. Eagleash (talk) 17:23, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Need an editor to upload photos

@Michael D. Turnbull: I uploaded 3 photos to my wiki media commons and need them uploaded to Beta Technologies but I am a conflict of interest. I need the ALIA-250 picture by the section ALIA-250, the charging network (needs to be cropped) also by the ALIA-250 section, and the AVA eVTOL photo by the AVA section. Abbeyblankensop (talk) 16:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC) Abbeyblankensop (talk) 16:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, I'm onto it: see your Talk Page in a couple of minutes. No need to post again here or at the Help desk! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:43, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Abbeyblankensop Thank you for abiding by the rules. If you are employed by Beta then you need to read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure and make the necessary disclosure on your user page. If your COI is more simple please read Wikipedia:Conflict of interest and make a different declaration. It is usual to deploy either Template:Connected contributor (paid) or Template:Connected contributor for the relevant condition on the article's talk page Fiddle Faddle 16:56, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Abbeyblankensop: In the future, you can post your request on Talk:Beta Technologies with the {{request edit}} template, and another editor will provide assistance. GoingBatty (talk) 18:23, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

How to upload photos i did not take?

Hello, I am wondering how to upload a photo I did not take but have the permission to use? Can I not upload from Facebook? How do I use government website photos and properly attribute? Donniegardi (talk) 18:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Donniegardi: Welcome to the Teahouse! Copyright can be a tricky thing. There's lots of good information at Wikipedia:Image use policy. If someone else is giving permission for their photos to be on Wikipedia, you can ask them to follow the steps in Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 18:26, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Help!

I've been banned from Live Help. Help! 64.121.103.144 (talk) 16:30, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

There's probably a reason you were banned. I'm going to wait for another host to help answer your question further as I don't see why you would be banned just by looking at your contributions. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 16:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I was just asking about a dispute resolution request in Live Help: https://kiwiirc.com/nextclient/irc.freenode.net/wikipedia-en-help?nick=AmberYew60.

64.121.103.144 (talk) 16:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

64.121.103.144, I inquired as to the cause of your ban and was informed that you were banned for "persistent disruption spanning several days after [you] were told to stop." Please refrain from causing a ruckus, it is not appreciated. I was also told that, in the future, you should go to #wikimedia-ops to ask about or appeal the block. Thanks, EDG 543 ^{(message me)} 17:08, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

This is not the place to ask about IRC bans, you can join #wikimedia-ops to appeal and ask about it. TAXIDICAE💰 17:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Help! I've been banned from #wikipedia-en-ops too! Please reply on my talk page, or I may not see your respinse. 64.121.103.144 (talk) 19:07, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

You will not be unbanned and you're getting dangerously close to being blocked here if you continue hounding people about this. TAXIDICAE💰 19:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Categorized Pages with Uncategorized Template

Hello. I've noticed that there are a couple of pages on Category:All_uncategorized_pages that have categories. Should I just remove the template from the page if I see any more like that? Zachary Daiquiri (talk) 19:25, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Zachary Daiquiri: Welcome, and thanks for wanting to help. From the note at Category:All_uncategorized_pages, the answer is yes. If a page has any categories, then you should remove the uncatagorized template. RudolfRed (talk) 19:31, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Ok, thanks for letting me know. Oh, and also a couple of pages on Category:All_uncategorized_pages have deletion templates. Should I add categories anyway? Zachary Daiquiri (talk) 19:33, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Anjali Kotanala

Ravindra1762 (talk) 18:23, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ravindra1762: Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you have a question about Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 18:30, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Use your Sandbox rather than your User page to work on a draft of an article. Better yet, learn through WP:YFA how to create a draft. David notMD (talk) 22:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Helping people

How can I help the people that read my page? Banana10123456 (talk) 22:07, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Just concentrate on making worthwhile, solidly referenced additions to existing articles. -- Hoary (talk) 22:19, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

On your User page, you appear to be offering services to other editors. That is NOT what Wikipedia is for. David notMD (talk) 22:24, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Article: Re Gloria Hemingway/Gregory Hemingway

I recently made significant changes to this article to make it less transphobic and more inclusive but those changes aren't there now. There is more than enough evidence that Gloria Hemingway was a transgender woman, albeit struggling with her issues and more appropriate pronouns and use of her preferred name should be given a much higher priority, to respect her situation.

Jessica Ward 0419671882 Jessica T Ward (talk) 22:07, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Please see this reversion, with the edit comment "If you object to the wording, please start a talk page discussion". So yes, go to Talk:Gregory Hemingway and argue there for the rewording and retitling of this article. -- Hoary (talk) 22:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Jessica T Ward. You can look at any article's page history to see what happened with respect to any edit made. In this case, the edit summary show that the user who reverted you stated in the edit summary "If you object to the wording, please start a talk page discussion", thus referring to Talk:Gregory Hemingway. That is the normal way article content is decided on, through consensus discussion. See also Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. I suggest before you post there, you visit MOS:IDENTITY, MOS:GENDERID and Wikipedia:WikiProject LGBT studies/Guidelines, and any pages you find at those links, so that you have some relevant Wikipedia guidelines in your belt to focus and back up your talk page post. By the way, part of your edits added very misplaced editorializing and commentary into the article, such as, "which of course, is no determinate of what should be the appropriate pronouns to use to describe Gloria, even retrospectively" and "no doubt as a way of dealing with and suppressing her own transgender issues". I recommend you focus on the pronoun issue, and not any return of content like that, which patently has no place in an encyclopedia article. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:30, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

What is the teahouse?

What is the teahouse? Ollhg87 (talk) 22:34, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome! The TeaHouse is "A friendly place where you can ask questions to get help with using and editing Wikipedia ". Feel free to ask your questions about using/editing wikipedia. RudolfRed (talk) 22:39, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Ollhg87. If you scroll to the top of this page you find more information, but it's basically a place to ask questions about Wikipedia editing or Wikipedia in general. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:42, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Copyright Infringement?

G'day, I here because I don't know how to deal with a wikipedia commons file that appears to be misattributed as 'own work', specifically the file on the British Indian Army about Captain Mit Singh. Admittedly I have been involved in an edit war with the uploader of the file, but I don't have much expertise in this area. Could anyone advise me on this? IronBattalion (talk) 22:59, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

As this is a Commons copyright matter, you'd better ask at commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. -- Hoary (talk) 23:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@IronBattalion: G'day, I share your concerns about this being a copyright infringement. I have nominated it for a deletion discussion here: [1]. I am away from home at the moment, though, so don't have the ability to closely follow the discussion. Sorry. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

And here: [2] (second version). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Misleading articles by smear campaign community

So, I'm not sure how to handle this, and I've only contributed to wikipedia in the long ago past. We do a podcast about a little known Canadian teen drama called Ready or Not. It's a 90's show and it's pretty obscure, but my wife loves it so we started a review podcast. We've only got 8 episodes. Right away we got people who wanted to join our FB groups, discord chats, etc, but then instantly turned on us for providing negative reviews of the show and discussing rumors about the lives of the cast; none of which we've done. We basically recap the show and then tell anecdotes and react to the characters (and sometimes the show is not great, but that's our prerogative to say as much).

Anyway, this weird trolling and claiming we're bashing the actors has spilled over to the Wiki for this show. In the Other Media, ours (Here we Come) and another show (StillNotReady, with whom we chat with occasionally) have basically been called out for trashing the show, which we aren't. They're also doing a lot of smearing on their own groups and have even petitioned (to whom, I have no idea) to get both our podcasts "removed."

So, I'm not sure what I can do at this point. We've been dealing with them for months off Wikipedia, enough to know that using the Talk pages will not net us anything. We're doing the podcast for fun, but I don't like being unfairly labeled negative by users who are basically pretending to be friends and family of cast members and have some weird ax to grind with anything that they aren't running. So, do I just edit the page? Can I submit it for deletion? On what grounds? I'm equally fine leaving it alone, but I feel it may hurt us getting listeners.

Input please. Thank you. xadrian (talk) 19:45, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Editing the page is not what you should do! You have a major conflict of interest with the article. If users are changing the article to be negative their edits will be reverted as Wikipedia is always written from a neutral perspective. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:54, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I had a looksee, and honestly the claims made in re the podcast seem to be not compliant with WP:BLP, as they make claims about you without any sort of source. I will likely be removing them shortly for that reason. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 20:00, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I have removed the "in other media" additions. There was no sourcing for the claims at all, and they were written in expressly non-neutral way to attack other online content per WP:NOT, particularly WP:SOAPBOX and WP:FORUM. Koncorde (talk) 20:04, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link to Ready or Not (Canadian TV series). Another editor seems to have removed the section in question (visible at this diff) as it was unsourced and its coverage on the article was likely undue. Also pinging Grodytothemax1988, who wrote the material in question. RoxySaunders (talk · contribs) 20:06, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

User has been reprimanded on their talk page for adding the unsourced material in an apparent personal vendetta. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello

Is it possible to insert a photo into a page? I'm new here and I'm very confuzzled. VRchat (talk) 23:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@VRchat: This may help Wikipedia:Images. The hard part is getting permission for the image. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:29, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi VRchat.

If you want to upload an image for use in an article, you must determine the copyright status of the image. If you know the image is in the public domain or bears a suitably free and compatible copyright license, upload it to the Wikimedia Commons instead of here, so that all projects have access to the image (sign up). If you are unsure of the copyright status, see the file upload wizard for more information, but please be aware that most images you find on the internet are copyrighted, are assumed so unless you have affirmative evidence to the contrary, and do not need to display any copyright symbol. Please also read Wikipedia's image use policy.
If you want to add a free image that has already been uploaded to Wikipedia or to the Wikimedia Commons, add [[File:File name.jpg|thumb|Caption text]] to the area of the article where you want the image to appear – replacing File name.jpg with the actual file name of the image, and Caption text with a short description of the image. See our picture tutorial for more information. I hope this helps.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 23:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Homework assignments and article views

An observation - went looking for a pattern of page views of popular science articles such as the vitamins (esp C and B12) and saw weekend dips. Suggests to me that weekday school homework assignments increase views. David notMD (talk) 17:35, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I've noticed a similar trend with various programming-related articles. (Also, we're probably both violating WP:NOTFORUM right now.) Kleinpecan (talk) 17:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Given that this is discussion about Wikipedia, we aren't, really. Elli (talk | contribs) 19:14, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

But isn't the Teahouse intended for questions and not observations? Kleinpecan (talk) 20:13, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

How about: Has anyone else observed that science article views dip on weekends, suggesting some of viewership is school homework assignments? David notMD (talk) 00:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

How is my Draft promotional???

Hello, an editor place a deletion tag on my Draft. I don't even understand how that is applicable. The language seems to be neutral to me :/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Austen_(musician) Soundsfromwater (talk) 23:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

This editor https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:TheChronium is doing this to many other pages, when he himself, isn't an experienced editor :/ His pages look look just like mine with only a few references as well.

If anyone can place a tag on any page, then how is this fair??? Aren't we suppose to contribute in all aspects and not just place tags when not really experienced???

An Admin removed the Speedy deletion tag. However, while TheChronium is a recent account, the editor has a successful track record of Speedy deletion nominations: 14 approved, 1 reverted, and 5 pending decisions. David notMD (talk) 00:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Request a block

Where would I go to request a user to be blocked? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:47, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

For what reason? Depending on why, there's any of a number of different avenues. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 20:51, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

@Blaze The Wolf: Generally, you'd go to the ANI, but you better have sufficient evidence to support your claim (provide diffs). Note that your own behaviour will also be evaluated, so a report can be closed with sanctions taken against you. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

There's also WP:AIV for blatant vandalism, WP:AN3 for edit wars, and WP:UAA for unacceptable usernames. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 20:54, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Blaze The Wolf depending on the situation, you might look at dispute resolution first. There are lots of options there for dealing with conflict. The links given immediately above are also the right places to go for specific kinds of problem. I would not recommend going to ANI before trying other approaches. › Mortee _talk 22:54, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Seconding this. ANI should be one's last resort. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:43, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Help with renaming pages

I'm a car fan and I need help with renaming the Mazda Demio page. 73.2.129.126 (talk) 18:15, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest you post your request to the article talk page, Talk:Mazda Demio, to gain consensus from other editors. Presuming there are no issues, you can post a request on Wikipedia:Requested moves. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 18:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

GoingBatty I see no need to gain consensus from other editors as the article itself calls it the Mazda2. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:32, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

IP addresses cannot do a move, hence have to ask. David notMD (talk) 00:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

David notMD I knew that. I was telling that to GoingBatty. I wasn't saying the the IP could move the article. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 01:33, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

William Robert Spencer

I have been browsing 18th-century lives for research, making minor edits as I go (mainly typos, spelling, grammar). Some needed edits are beyond my experience, so I've been keeping a list for future projects. Recently I stumbled upon a puzzler in the entry for William Robert Spencer... In the text, his birthdate is listed as 1769-01-09, but in the sidebar (bio box, I don't know the actual term) the date is 1770-01-09. Thinking this should be a quick and easy fix, I began checking other sources... only to find about half list 1769 and half 1770. My question is, "What should I consider a definitive source?" (and of course, "When the heck was Spencer born?") Wendigo Lake (talk) 00:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

William Robert Spencer Wendigo Lake (talk) 00:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

If it were a couple of decades earlier, I'd suggest civil year 1769, historical year 1770. But this complication should have evaporated by 1769. Is it possible that some recent writer misunderstood the civil/historical distinction as continuing as late as this? If it helps, I've faced a similar disagreement among sources (though merely of day, not of year), and dealt with it in a note, explaining the matter more fully in the article's talk page. -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Blanking talk pages

Hi Teahouse, is it okay for a user to blank their talk page and remove warnings they have received? Here's the diff where they have done so [1]; if not, what should happen? Thanks! xRENEGADEx ^{(talk | contribs)} 02:28, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@XRENEGADEx: Yes it is OK. See Wikipedia:User_pages#Removal_of_comments,_notices,_and_warnings. There are only a few items on talk pages that can't be removed, such as a CSD tag or an declined unblock request as examples. RudolfRed (talk) 02:38, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@XRENEGADEx:, when an editor removes warnings from their talk page, that is evidence that they have read and, we can hope, understood the warnings. The warnings remain in the history of their talk page, and can be recovered easily if needed. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 03:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Did I move the page correctly?

I changed the hyphen to en-dash, but I would like to make sure I was hitting en-dash correctly before fixing the link. see Infinite–dimensional holomorphy. thanks!--SilverMatsu (talk) 22:58, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

But why did you move Infinite-dimensional holomorphy to Infinite–dimensional holomorphy? -- Hoary (talk) 23:09, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi SilverMatsu. You moved to an en dash but as far as I know (English is my second language), infinite-dimensional is a compound modifier and should have a hyphen in English and according to Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Hyphens. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:20, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for teaching me. I seem to have made a mistake. I'm sorry. I can't delete the page, would you revert it?--SilverMatsu (talk) 23:30, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Apparently, I'll can it revert myself, but the redirect seems to remain. If I make a mistake like this, should I revert myself and apply to remove the remaining redirects? I seem to more need to be careful now.--SilverMatsu (talk) 00:42, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Addendum:Perhaps the administrator can move the page without leaving a redirect, so I'm wondering which is more appropriate to move and apply for deletion by myself.--SilverMatsu (talk) 00:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

The article is now again titled Infinite-dimensional holomorphy, and Infinite–dimensional holomorphy redirects to it. -- Hoary (talk) 01:59, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you very much!--SilverMatsu (talk) 04:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

When am I canvassing for my own RfD nomination?

You might know which one it is already, but please let me re-iterate: I think that a redirect should be re-targeted to a certain page. Can I notify the WikiProject which said page belong to about my submission? Thanks, DePlume (talk) 03:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@DePlume: Yes you can! It is completely appropriate (encouraged, even!) to post a neutrally worded notification about a discussion to a relevant WikiProject noticeboard, as well as to the talk pages of editors who may be interested. See WP:APPNOTE for further examples of appropriate notifications. Canvassing specifically refers to notifications which intend to sway the outcome of a discussion in a particular way. For example, if you specifically targeted editors you knew would agree with you (called Votestacking), or if your notification presented the discussion in a non-neutral light (called Campaigning). Hope this helps, RoxySaunders (talk · contribs) 04:20, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

What if the Wikiproject does not have a noticeboard? DePlume (talk) 04:30, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@DePlume: the talkpage of the wikiproject is the appropriate location. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:25, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Identifying the deprecated source?

Is there a way to tell which reference in an article is a deprecated source without having to sort through them and cross-checking with the perennial sources page? nearlyevil 665 06:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Nvm, figured it out! nearlyevil 665 06:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Links

Highlighting text How do you make it so that when you click on some blue text, it sends you to another article? Dannycreatire (talk) 09:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Dannycreatire Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You place the title of the page you wish to link to in double brackets like this: [[Page title here]]. For example, [[Joe Biden]] appears as Joe Biden. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Dannycreatire: I see you often use VisualEditor. See Wikipedia:VisualEditor/User guide#Editing links for that. PrimeHunter (talk) 09:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Questions on my own userspace template

I have just made this template. I have a few questions for it:

Is it permissible to use such a template with the face of a real person?
If yes, is my disclaimer good enough?
Also, why can't I transclude it elsewhere?

Thank you, DePlume (talk) 05:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@DePlume: I'd say it's probably fine. Not sure why you can't transclude it - {{User:DePlume/Soroka}} should work. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Though, I am curious why you seem to have such an obsession with Soroka. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Good question - it is because he is one of my favourite ballplayers, and is the reason I re-started Wikipedia-ing (see Project:Articles for deletion/Mike Soroka). In fact, a few days ago, I have lodged a request with the stewards to change my username to NotReallySoroka, since I'm, well, not really a Soroka in the first place. DePlume (talk) 05:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It is indeed something strange. I cannot do so. DePlume (talk) 05:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@DePlume: what happens when you try?

Are you perhaps using visualeditor? Elli (talk | contribs) 06:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Nothing. No pictures of Mike, no red links, nothing. And I am using the source editor. DePlume (talk) 06:03, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@DePlume: noinclude wasn't closed correctly. I have fixed it. The license of File:Mike Soroka (48266240306) (cropped).jpg requires attribution by a link to the file page. You have removed the normal link with |link=Talk:Michael John Graydon Soroka. Apart from that I don't think it breaks any policies but it is odd. If you use it then users are likely to spend time trying to figure out the significance of the image or person. Apparently there isn't any. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Anyone handy at creating graphics?

Hi all. I'm a member of the Cricket Project and I'm looking for volunteers who are great at creating graphics. I'm working on a range of new initiatives for the project, which require a range of new graphics to be created. I wouldn't have the first idea how to create the below graphics, so I'm hoping someone here might be kind enough to donate their time and create some of these :)

A logo for the new project newsletter to be launched in the UK summer, I'm running with the title The Off Stump at the moment.
Trophies for the Awards section to include:
- Cricket Newcomer of the Year (for a new user who has made consistent and positive contributions)
- All-Rounder of the Year (for a user who edits anything and everything about cricket, big and small)
- The Champions Trophy (for the winner of the cricket quiz)
- The Golden Bat and Silver Bat (cricket bats awarded monthly for 1st and 2nd place in the new article contest)
- The Article Creator's Cup (awarded to the overall year ending leader of the above competition)
- Cricket Editor of the Year (the year ending winner of the general contest which is all about getting articles up the assessment ladder)
- The Champions Trophy (awarded to the year ending winner of the cricket quiz)
Various national barnstars, specifically for: Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Ireland, Pakistan, New Zealand, Scotland, West Indies and Zimbabwe.

If there is anyone who can offer their time to make these, it would be very much appreciated :) Cheers, StickyWicket (talk) 10:34, 10 April 2021 (UTC) StickyWicket (talk) 10:34, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@StickyWicket: Hello and Welcome to the Teahouse. I think you are better off asking at the Graphics Lab Victor Schmidt (talk) 11:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Victor Schmidt thanks for pointing me in the right direction! StickyWicket (talk) 12:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

question

I am trying to maintain a wikipedia page by updating it and expanding it but an automated bot is all the time dismantling it and making it appear like it was before.

why is that? Boxofideas (talk) 08:22, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Boxofideas You are not being reverted by an automated bot, but by a human. Please read the information on your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 08:24, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Blocked as suspected sockpuppet. David notMD (talk) 15:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

About Skye Sweetnam

Talk about something about her

Please see Skye Sweetnam.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 16:13, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding research on topic

Hello! I was wondering about adding research done on a subject by myself, if I could add it to a wikipedia page? I think I saw something on this but I am not sure. I have written a few articles on a rapper and wanted to add them to his Wiki page. Johndvandevert (talk) 11:51, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

You may be an expert on the subject; please see Wikipedia:Expert editors. Briefly, what you're welcome to do is add your suggestions to the talk page of the article, and wait for disinterested editors to take up these suggestions (or not). -- Hoary (talk) 12:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

In the past ten days you have more than tripled the length of Husky (rapper. There's more? David notMD (talk) 21:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

+ Yes. It's not done yet, his impact in Russia is huge. Also, you're telling me that it's too much when I am fairly sure you know nothing about the rapper and his legacy within Russia. It's like me going to the wiki page about dialectical materialism and acting like I'm a scholar in the subject. Do not meddle where you don't belong.

Aces Up

This concerns the probability of winning the solitaire card game 'Aces Up' (see: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aces_Up)

When I read the article in Wikipedia, I was sure the probability was less than that given ('about 1 in 10'). I've written a simulation, which shows the probability to be about 1:40.6, within very tight limits. I would like to correct the probability given (straightforward) plus also put the C program I wrote to compute this probability somewhere in Wikipedia where readers can see and/or download it.

Is there a way to make the program available in this way?

The program is instead of giving a reference - there isn't a correct one, as far as I know. The article refers to a book, Hoyle's Rules of Games, which gives the wrong probability of about 1:10.

I am about to retire and there's no guarantee that my web page, which is associated with my work, will persist - otherwise I could just put the link there.

Jonathan Deane 217.155.28.98 (talk) 19:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jonathan, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid the answer is, No: that counts as original research, which is not accepted anywhere in Wikipedia. If you write up your result and get it published by a reliable source, then that could be cited in the Wikipedia article, but otherwise, no. Sorry. --ColinFine (talk) 20:23, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

That applies to not citing your webpage, as it is original research. David notMD (talk) 21:26, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

rejected twice

I created a "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Misa_Tamagawa" page, but it was rejected twice. The first time was due to the lack of footnotes in the "Radio" section, so I added footnotes to that section. The second time, I added footnotes to the "Radio" section, and it was rejected because it had too many external links. I'm not sure what to do next. Please let me know if there is a better way. Shampoooo (talk) 00:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Shampoooo: Welcome to the Teahouse. Out of pedantry, the draft has been declined twice, not rejected, which is way worse. If Tamagawa has an official website, link to that in §External links; links to her social accounts are really iffy and unnecessary. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:40, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu 🐲: Thank you for your reply. The official page is of course put as an external link at the end of the page. The second review comment said "Way too many external links, we do not need all those socials. I have decided that the problem is that there are too many external links, is that wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Shampoooo (talk • contribs)

@Shampoooo: I believe that is the reviewer's concern, yes. (Please remember to sign your posts on talk pages by typing four keyboard tildes like this: ~~~~. Or, you can use the [ reply ] button, which automatically signs posts.) —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:41, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

WAY too much information in Personal that has nothing to do with her career as a radio personality. David notMD (talk) 21:40, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Declined twice. Rejected is a much stronger denial. David notMD (talk) 21:40, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Nationality of Thaddea Graham

Can someone adjudicate the nationality of Thaddea Graham - variously stated as British, Irish, Northern Irish by different editors. Thank you 76.14.39.120 (talk) 22:13, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Please start a discussion at Talk:Thaddea_Graham. RudolfRed (talk) 22:16, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Renomination for deletion two weeks after the last nomination

I am a little concerned about the renomination for deletion of Northern Independence Party. A discussion was closed on the 27th of March with a consensus of keep, and very little has changed, except that there is now even more coverage in RS. Is this ok, or does it go against rules? Boynamedsue (talk) 19:50, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Boynamedsue: Wikipedia:Renominating_for_deletion says to wait six months if previous decision was keep, but that is an essay not a policy or guideline. You can raise your concern at the discussion you linked to, if you haven't already. RudolfRed (talk) 20:16, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I see now that other participants have already raised the issue of the quick relisting, and discussion is underway. RudolfRed (talk) 20:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks a million for the advice. Procedurally, what happens now, does an uninvolved admin who happens along have the right to close it or does it have to run its course?Boynamedsue (talk) 20:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Unless it meets one of the criteria at Wikipedia:Deletion_process#Early_closure, it will need to run its course. Could possibly be a speedy close (keep) but there are a couple of comments that support deleting it, so I am not sure. It could also possibly meet snow closing. RudolfRed (talk) 21:35, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It is closed now. RudolfRed (talk) 22:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Making an article about The Ramanujan Machine

I'm not sure if making an article about The Ramanujan Machine is notable. Is it? Ratamatao ✉ 09:58, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

"If you have to ask whether some imaginable subject is notable, then it almost certainly is not," is the response that's so true (though perhaps, for politeness' sake, better left unsaid). Here, however, the coverage linked to from the site's page of "Coverage" (example) is substantial, so I'd imagine that the subject is notable. -- Hoary (talk) 13:13, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary: I hate adding any discordant notes here, but I feel compelled to say that quote is pithy but empirically untrue often enough that I think it's rather inapt. We get the question "is X notable" daily, if not more often (which means our attempts to broadcast our standards for inclusion are working to an extent), and the answer is manifestly "Sometimes 'yes', sometime 'no'" – with the "yes" not a rare occurrence (though admittedly less than half the time).--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:54, 5 April 2021 (UTC)

Those results, and the method used to find them, are fascinating (I hope more such results will be reported as they're found). I doubt the topic is notable (In Wikipedia's idiosyncratic sense) yet, but I expect it will be in a year or two. Maproom (talk) 07:49, 6 April 2021 (UTC)

So, should I start making the article? Ratamatao ✉ 12:29, 7 April 2021 (UTC)

Ratamatao, I suggest that you create Draft:Ramanujan Machine, and, when you think/hope that it's pretty decent, both (i) submit it, and (ii) put up a little message at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics, inviting anyone interested to look at it. Above, Maproom says they don't think it merits an article: if you don't want to risk having your article-creating time wasted by the reviewer saying the same thing, then don't create the draft but instead post to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics the same question: "Do you think that the Ramanujan Machine is [Wikipedia-style] notable?" If the answer is yes, proceed. -- Hoary (talk) 11:14, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary OK. Thanks for your advice. Ratamatao ✉ 14:42, 8 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't really understand the subject, but continued fractions seem to be relevant. Approximating irrational numbers with continued fraction expansion looks classical, and using ai looks new. It also seems to use real numbers instead of complex functions. IMO.--SilverMatsu (talk) 10:44, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I definitely don't understand the subject, but I looked at the web site, and I don't understand what the Ramanujan Machine is. When dealing with anything called the XYZ Machine, whether in engineering, physics, or math, the first challenge for the author is to explain what the machine is and does. There are a lot of different things called Machine in various sciences, and I also know that there are a few Machine papers that can't explain what the machine is because it is a hoax. So the first task is to explain what it is. And what does it have to do with Ramanujan? Robert McClenon (talk) 23:27, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

"Stephanie Adams" inconsistency

I'm reporting an inconsistency. The page for "Stephanie Adams" describes her as the Playboy Playmate of the Month for 1988 January. But in the List Of Playboy Playmates, Kimberley Conrad is listed in that month. Stephanie Adams is in the List Of Penthouse Pets for 1988 January. One or the other two pages must be wrong, but I don't know which one. I suspect the description in the Stephanie Adams page is wrong. Scott Blair H (talk) 22:15, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Scott Blair H: Stephanie_Adams Says November 1992 Playboy Playmate. Which article are you referring to? RudolfRed (talk) 22:18, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@RudolfRed: Aren't they referring to the Stephanie Adams article? I believe you meant to say which heading. ~Wizdzy 22:37, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I see nothing in that article that says she was playmate in 1988. Do you? RudolfRed (talk) 22:39, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

My bad. The List Of Playboy Playmates lists Stephanie Adams as the 1992 Playmate Of The Month for November. From the Stephanie Adams page: "Stephanie Adams (July 24, 1970 – May 18, 2018)[1][2] was an American model, author, and murderer. She was the November 1992 Playboy Playmate." But from The List Of Penthouse Pets: Stephanie Adams is listed as the 1988 January Pet Of The Month. But there is no link to the Stephanie Adams page. Is it possibly not the same woman? Or the link has not been established? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Scott Blair H (talk • contribs)

Maybe it's simply not there and she actually was Playmate? ~Wizdzy 00:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Scott Blair H: They are different women. Stephanie Adams (November 1992 Playboy Playmate) is part African-American and dark-skinned. Stephanie Adams (January 1988 Penthouse Pet Of The Month) is Caucasian (white). PrimeHunter (talk) 02:09, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

It is ok to use the sandbox for like, writing narrative essays or whatever i want(Non-vulgar, of course), instead of wikipedia editing. I know I can always change it, of course. Just wanted to know. Also, are user sandboxes viewable by other wikipedia editors? Fun81 (talk) 02:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fun81: anyone can view your sandbox. Generally, writings unrelated to Wikipedia are not acceptable, see WP:NOTWEBHOST and WP:U5 (a policy allowing such writings to be speedily deleted). Elli (talk | contribs) 02:33, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. That was easy. Well, time to go somewhere else then for that. This sentence basically tells you everything. ¨Your user page is not yours. It is a part of Wikipedia, and exists to make collaboration among Wikipedians easier, not for self promotion.¨ — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fun81 (talk • contribs) 02:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

What are the requirements to become a Global Renamer?

I would like to become one. I know that I have to apply at Meta-Wiki, but will I likely get approved there? Thanks, DePlume (talk) 20:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@DePlume: pretty sure to be a global renamer, you should generally be a bureaucrat at some other wiki first so... you don't have much of a chance. It's a pretty advanced and high-trust permission. Elli (talk | contribs) 20:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

ok, looking at the criteria again, crat isn't really necessary, but it's still a high-trust permission. Take a look at some archived succeeded and failed requests, say at m:Steward requests/Global permissions/2020-12#Requests for global rename permissions. Elli (talk | contribs) 21:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

What does a Global Renamer do, anyway? What do they rename? User accounts? Robert McClenon (talk) 23:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon - Yes. ~Oshwah~^{(talk) (contribs)} 03:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I then assume that any applicant will be asked by the stewards what they plan to do with that permission. I won't ask that question, because I don't know what a Global Renamer does, after many years of editing. But the stewards will ask. Robert McClenon (talk) 23:08, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, take a look at this page which explains it. There are 84 users with that right worldwide. I notice a few familiar names, like Deepfriedokra and Oshwah. Perhaps one of them will comment. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 00:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining, User:Cullen328. That looks like a lot of complicated responsibility without even really much added "power". Robert McClenon (talk) 02:29, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Nominating article for deletion

My question is: How to nominate an article for deletion? Thanks in advance. Hyderabadi (talk) 03:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hyderabadi: there are multiple methods: speedy deletion for some strict criteria (such as spam), proposed deletion for non-controversial article deletion, and articles for deletion, where you create a deletion discussion, and an administrator determines the outcome after seven days. Most long-standing articles should use the third option. Elli (talk | contribs) 03:20, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

How do I report misconduct and rudeness from rude users?

Epictrex (talk) 04:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I think you can report it at Please do not bite the newcomers talk page. A.A Prinon (talk) 04:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

A better place is at the WP:ANI noticeboard, but be aware that your own conduct will also come under scrutiny. I suggest that you read Dispute resolution. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Please see User talk:Epictrex#WP:CITE, this diff, this edit summary and User talk:ThadeusOfNazereth#Epictrex for a bit of explanation. He iro 04:33, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

How do I delete my Wikipedia account? There are some abusive users on Wikipedia

Someone said that they would get ANI involved, and I don’t even know what that is. I am super scared right now. I am sweating, anxious and nervous. Epictrex (talk) 04:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Per this edit and summary, where I removed this editors disruptive change of a section heading. For further info, see 2 sections above this one. WP:ANI is the admins noticeboard for incidents. It's where you make posts when other editors are behaving badly, being disruptive, and uncivil. But I urge you to calm down please. He iro 05:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, Heironymous Rowe I promise you that I am calm. I am sorry for getting upset. I was just hurt by some of the hurtful stuff you said.— Preceding unsigned comment added by Epictrex (talk • contribs)

Please see this, and no need to respond, I've said all I intend to. He iro 05:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello sir, I'm new here, I think you deleted one of my cited sources in an article

Courtesy link: Judiciary of California

I'm wondering what was wrong with the link I made to the California state constitution official site, It is actually used by a lot of the other links, mine was a link to a specific article. If this is an inappropriate link for an encyclopedia then I would like to know why. Thank you. SuprPuzishin (talk) 04:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@SuprPuzishin: your edit was fine, link additions from new users attract some scrutiny (as many are spam). I've re-instated your edits. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

One thing though: generally, don't use external links in the main text of the article - only in citations. Elli (talk | contribs) 05:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

How is Wikipedia not a reliable source for articles?

It is kind of self defeating if Wikipedia does not consider itself a reliable source... 747pilot (talk) 03:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

One reason is to minimize the risk of the woozle effect. Robert McClenon (talk) 03:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

The vast majority of Wikipedia articles are unprotected and can be edited, and therefore vandalized, at any time. There is no official final authorized version of any article. Anti-vandalism bots and human Wikipedia editors do our best to revert vandalism, but there is always the possibility that an article could be in a vandalized state when you read it. If you want to read reliable sources about a topic, take a look at the reference list at the end of an article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:RSPWP. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Help me with my new page

Hey there! Hope you are you doing good! I'm new to the Wikipedia and I am trying to create a page of a TV Show. I have filled most of the details but I needed help To create a content table like they made it with the details For e.g. Directed by, produced by, Poster, run time, etc. on the right side of the page. How do I create that box? I tried but couldn't do it so it would be great if somebody could help.

This is the link of my page - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Jainvighnesh/sandbox

Regards, Vighnesh. Jainvighnesh (talk) 10:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jainvighnesh: Hello and Welcome to the Teahouse. That box is called an Infobox. In your case, the most appropiate one is probbably {{Infobox television}}. Template:Infobox_television#Usage has some code you can copy. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

And While we are at it, User:Jainvighnesh/sandbox would benefit from some sources. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jainvighnesh, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia. I'm delighted by your enthusiasm, but I'm afraid that your post is a bit like saying "Hello, I'm new to building, and I'm trying to build a house. I've propped up some walls like I've seen in other houses, and I want to know how to put that thing on top, I think you call it the roof". Unless you learn a bit about building before you try, you are likely to have a frustrating time. In particular, what you haven't done is to survey the ground first, and check that it's fit to build on: in Wikipedia's terms, you haven't looked for the independent, reliably published sources about the subject, without which it will not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and your house will fall down (draft get deleted). In the same way that nobody who knows anything about building would try to build a house without surveying the ground first, nobody who knows about writing Wikipedia articles would write so much as a single word of an article before looking for the sources; because in both cases they know that if the ground is not suitable, any work they put in is likely to be wasted. I suggest you leave your draft for a few months, while you find some existing articles that interest you and that you can contribute to in small ways while you learn how Wikipedia works. --ColinFine (talk) 12:47, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Help with case of sockpuppetry

Recently, I've been reverting vandalism on the page Bob Cicherillo, mainly involving a bunch of IP addresses from the same country trying to change the the subject's last name without providing sources. I believe this is obviously sockpuppetry, and I know that there are steps to report such incidents (and I'm also familiar with WP:BOLD), but what with there being more than five separate IP addresses and me being a relatively inexperienced editor, I'm a bit lost. Is it possible for someone to step in here? HeyArtemis (talk) 13:01, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello HeyArtemis. As a first step, and because there are multiple addresses making similar sorts of disruptive edits, I have semi-protected the article for 7 days. Please check and ensure the article is in the best state, and make any corrections to it. There are two things you could do if this occurs again. Firstly, make sure after you've reverted any editor that you leave them a warning notice, rising to 4th level, after which an individual editor can be blocked. If you enable WP:TWINKLE in your preferences, you'll find it a quick and easy process to leave templated warning messages, relevant to different types of editing behaviour (ranging from edits unsupported by sources, BLP violations, vandalism and spam etc). Secondly, where there are multiple editors disrupting a page , as you've experienced here, it can be best to ensure the page itself is protected from new account holders. So you can do this by reporting it at WP:RFPP. Hoping this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: That was very helpful, thank you! HeyArtemis (talk) 14:18, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

My new Draft???

Hey everyone, I have created a draft @ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Flowersoftheblue/sandbox

I want to add a LOGO, but what should be the licensing?

Also, does it really take 5 months to get it reviewed?

Thank you! Flowersoftheblue (talk) 13:28, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Flowersoftheblue. It may take five minutes or five months: it depends on whether a reviewer decides to pick it up sooner or later. That's the nature of a volunteer project. As for Logos: nearly all logos are uploaded as non-free materials, and so may not be used in drafts, but only in articles. --ColinFine (talk) 13:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Flowersoftheblue WRONG NAME! That's my username. Not my page's name. How to correct this??? I didn't change it.

Hello Flowersoftheblue (I assume that was you). Normally, adjusting a page title requires a page move. However, in the case of Draft:Flowersoftheblue I wouldn't worry about that right now: The reviewer will take care of that when accepting the draft. Victor Schmidt (talk) 15:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Article

Somebody please have a look at Majiziya Bhanu. The achievements mentioned there have no references. Many fault statements are there. Please have a watch. ♠Devan Lallu ^Talk 14:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Devan Lallu. I encourage you to be WP:BOLD and edit the article on your own. What you can do is look for the sources that would back the statements provided, or remove the statements that look dubious per WP:BLP. There are also a couple of projects that deal with article improvement such asWP:FACT or WP:GUILD, you can post a request there. Happy editing and thank you for your contributions. Less Unless (talk) 15:25, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Rowspan and Colspan

FYI

– Heading added by Tenryuu.

What’s the difference between colspan and rowspan? Superman011 (talk) 13:41, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Superman011: Rowspan makes a cell span over multiple rows and colspan makes a cell span across multiple columns. Please use the "New section" link at the top or the Ask a question button if you have a new question. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Superman011. See more at Help:Table#Combined use of COLSPAN and ROWSPAN. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

I find it extremely difficult to edit or create a Wiki page

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johnny_Hott I know Johnny Hott very well, we have played together almost forty years. Does that make me not able to edit his wiki page? I have lots of information of value, plus photos, to make the page great. Things that I have witnessed personally. I could not figure out how to edit, where is the edit button? Why is it so complicated? I only have so much time to fool with this. But I will keep trying, and it's not only Johnny's page, but many others I can make valuable contributions to. Do I need to pay an expert to make the changes? The guide to making the changes is confusing. At least I could upload a photo of Johnny, but it looks that is being rejected for "Conflict of Interest"? How can an authentic photography of Johnny Hott be a conflict of interest? Thanks Brooke Saunders Richmond, VA Brookesaunders (talk) 15:58, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Aaaaaaaah, hope this helps: Your knowing Johnny Hott personally makes you potentially a source of good information, but Wikipedia puts a (surmountable) barrier between you and editing the article directly. Conflict of interest (see WP:COI) calls for you to declare a COI on your User page, and to restrict your efforts to making suggested article changes on the Talk page of the JH article. What you know cannot be used at all, as that is considered "original research." Only what has been published and can therefore be referenced. It's a true-and-verify thing. On the Talk page, start a new section (top menu), give it a title, an in the section, be specific on changes you propose. A non-involved editor will act to either implement or deny.

In general answer to how to edit, each article as a whole has an Edit option on the top menu, and edit for each section (but you shouldn't, for reasons given above).

As to the photo you added, the description clearly states that you are not the photographer. With certain exceptions, only the photographer can add a photo. David notMD (talk) 16:45, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Brookesaunders. Just wanted to add a link to a guideline on creating a request - WP:COIREQ. Also I feel sorry you find it difficult to edit Wikipedia. This tutorial H:EDIT helped me personally, I hope it will be of good use for you - there are also videos which I find especially helpful.

As for the photos - you can upload any amount of photos to Wikimedia Commons (that is an image-related project of Wikipedia) if you are the author and willing to post it for free use. If you don't own the copyright for the photos, unfortunatelly you can't add them.

Best, Less Unless (talk) 16:57, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

(ec) Brookesaunders WP and Commons are very strict concerning copyright. When you say that something is own work, on these websites that means that you took the picture with your camera. If you have pics you have taken, and not published elsewhere already, you are welcome to upload them on Commons, other pics will be deleted sooner or later.

Yes, WP is difficult in parts, but it's possible to get the hang of it. Adding references is an essential skill, see WP:TUTORIAL. If you can't ref it, don't add it. Apart from WP:COI, also take the time to read WP:BLP. And keep asking questions as they occur. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Brookesaunders Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm sorry you've had difficulty. Aside from the other advice given here, I wanted to say that the purpose of a Wikipedia article is to summarize what publicly available, published, independent reliable sources say about article subjects. It is not a place for people to share their personal knowledge, as we have no way to verify what your personal knowledge is. If you have independent sources that chose on their own to write about your personal knowledge, that would be something we could add, because readers could verify that information. 331dot (talk) 17:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Should Affenpinschers be classified as an endangered breed? Plus, why are they called pinschers, when they dont have any of those characteristics?

1. On Akc’s popularity rank, Affenpinschers rank 148 out of 197, definitely meaning that they’re rare.

2. Should affenpinschers be classified as a pinscher? The other pinschers have a slender body, pointed ears, a long snout, and are usually Black and Tan. The affenpinscher shares none of these characteristics, and looks more like a black wire haired Pug.

Answermeplease11 Answermeplease11 (talk) 18:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Answermeplease11. The Teahouse is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. Try the Reference desk for general knowledge questions. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 18:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Widsith: long poem or short?

Hi there, I've been wondering how Widsith should properly be marked up. If it's a long poem, like Beowulf, then it is italicized, but if it's short, then it only takes quotation marks, right? Is there a general consensus on this question? The Widsith page itself doesn't seem of much help as it includes a mix of italicized and non-italicized mentions of the name. Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:55, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Maybe someone else can point you to an Official Decision on the matter, but at 143 lines it's shorter than "A Lover's Complaint", and the latter's title is formatted with quotation marks rather than italics. Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 14:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku: Forgot to ping, why do I always remember after posting a reply... Wikignome Wintergreen^talk 15:24, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku: A rule of thumb that I was taught a long time ago is that a poem's title should be italicized only if the poem is often published (or was originally published) by itself as a book (like, for instance, The Song of Hiawatha or Evangeline). So "Widsith" by that rule would be enclosed in quotation marks rather than italicized. Deor (talk) 15:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you both for your input, it is much appreciated! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 18:21, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Starting a page, but with an issue.

So, let's say I wanted to start a page on something, however, there is no media coverage of it or any other notable documentation besides the person who created it. What do I do then?

I

Am

Llanfairwyll

17:38, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to The Teahouse. Wikipedia only publishes articles for topics that have received significant coverage in reliable sources. Theroadislong (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Llanfairwyll. Just to take the above to it's logical conclusion, if it's not obvious, what you do is not create the page. If the premises of your post is accurate, then you will waste your time; any such page created will be deleted if submitted directly, or if submitted as a draft, declined and eventually deleted, as not able to meet threshold standards for inclusion. There are plenty of places online to post about topics that aren't encyclopedias. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:27, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Lost Article

Few days ago, I saw an article about Malliyoor Sree Sankaran Namboothiri. But I can't find the article now. What happened to that article? 27.59.224.151 (talk) 02:09, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Malliyoor Sankaran Namboothiri was deleted 1 April as created by a banned user. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:17, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

PrimeHunter, is there is any way to get the history or Deletion details or something like that?

Okay 27.59.224.151 (talk) 02:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Most likely not, though, if the article was itself useable, you might be able to ask Drmies if he can prodive you the text (hard with unregistered editors - IP's can change) or restore it to draft. Be advised that it is often better to create a new article, because, in my personal experience, suffer from all sorts of problems, depending on the banned individual. Victor Schmidt (talk) 06:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, Victor Schmidt, you are right about "problems"--it was a pretty bad article, with only one decent source in it, and that an obituary (which are not known for being very neutral). I don't mind restoring it (well, recreating it) as a severely abbreviated stub, though. Drmies (talk) 20:32, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

New here - hi!

Hi guys,

I've always been an avid reader of Wikipedia, making it my first port of call any time I want to find out something. I finally decided to take the plunge and get involved in the editing side of things. While I know you probably get this question all the time, I AM a newbie here (editing-wise at least), so what would you suggest is the best way for me to get involved in terms of editing? I really want to be a positive contributor to the community.

I'm looking forward to learning a lot more from you all :)

Thanks in advance! DizzyDaisies (talk) 21:00, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

DizzyDaisies, welcome to Wikipedia! We get this question a fair bit, so I've made a list of some easy but important things for newbies to do. It's: User:Giraffer/Things for new users to do. If you have any questions, or need any help, feel free to ask here. Giraffer ^{(talk·contribs)} 21:03, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I will be sure to take go through this thoroughly - it looks incredibly helpful. DizzyDaisies (talk) 21:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

DizzyDaisies A common error committed by new editors is to add true content to an article but without a reference to verify it being true. This can lead to automatic reverting by an automated program or reverting by another editor. (Many popular or controversial articles have multiple 'watchers' who see that the articles they watch have new edits, so responses can be QUICK). Think of each revert as a lesson. David notMD (talk) 21:25, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@DizzyDaisies: what kind of stuff do you enjoy? Are you more of a writer, or someone interested in maintenance tasks? Elli (talk | contribs) 22:33, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Website blocked from use

How can a site that has been registered on Wikipedia's blacklist be checked for use? Is there a way for someone to share why a particular site was blocked over others that are similar? Thehistorian17 (talk) 00:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Thehistorian17. You can try asking about this at WT:BLACKLIST. Perhaps the website in question was previously discussed somewhere, but that discussion is now buried in some page's archives like the ones listed near the top of WP:BLACKLIST. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! How might I go about finding a discussion that has been buried? Is there a way to search? I put in a request for it to be whitelisted as well.

Thehistorian17 (talk) 01:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thehistorian17: There is a search box for the archives at the top of Wikipedia:Spam_blacklist, or you can ask on the talk page as suggested. RudolfRed (talk) 02:37, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Map is light blue after publish

I did a copy edit on Parkmont School to take it out of stub status. When I went to preview mode, there were no Editor errors showing and everything looked fine. When I published the article, the area in the Infobox where the map was, was instead light blue. When I clicked on the light blue screen, the map shows up full screen. I double-checked everything and even compared it with other wiki articles. My editing of the map coordinates is identical to other articles.

It shows up in preview mode, but when in "Read" mode it's gone. Can somebody take a look at the article and tell me what I've overlooked? Pibal373 (talk) 20:39, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Pibal373: The map shows up OK for me (though it takes a couple of seconds to load). Maybe try clearing your cache. Deor (talk) 20:48, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Deor:It looks like clearing up the cache worked! Thanks!--Pibal373 (talk) 22:07, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Deor:I noticed that you put "format=dms|type:edu_region:US-DC" in the edit. Just for me to know... is there a specific reason behind that or it's more of an editor's preference. I.m always trying to improve my skills. Thanks again.--Pibal373 (talk) 23:22, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Pibal373: I think that {{Infobox school}} automatically adds the edu type to coordinates (among other things, that determines the scale at which maps will be shown when one clicks through the coordinates); but I can never remember which infoboxes add the type automatically and which ones don't, so I just threw it in. The region parameter is useful because it determines which maps are listed at the top of the GeoHack page when one clicks through the coordinates. For a full explanation of {{coord}} parameters, see WP:GEO#Parameters. Deor (talk) 03:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I need help with Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement

There is a problem. In the article, List of Starship flights, a dispute resolution request outcome has to be enforced. I don't have an account and don't desire to make one. I want to send a request to Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Enforcement. Can someone do it for me? 64.121.103.144 (talk) 17:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

The dispute resolution has already been closed. MEisSCAMMER^{(talk)^(contribs)} 17:55, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

I mean I need help enforcing the outcome of it. See note.

64.121.103.144 (talk) 18:17, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

This post illustrates an occasional problem in Wikipedia, and that is an editor stating that they need help enforcing the outcome of a dispute resolution, but there wasn't an enforceable outcome. Sometimes a dispute at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard is closed without action, but the filing editor tries to claim that it was decided in their favor. (Besides, DRN is voluntary, and very seldom makes a binding decision other than by starting an RFC, and in that case it is the RFC that is the binding process.) In this case, two DRN cases were closed without action. Robert McClenon (talk) 17:50, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

User:64.121.103.144, since you are about to come off block, I don't know whether you actually think that a dispute was resolved in your favor or whether you know that a dispute was dismissed and there is nothing to enforce, but you are both wasting your time and misinforming the community in saying that you want help enforcing a dispute. DRN doesn't work like that, and your dispute was dismissed for various reasons. Spreading misinformation will get you another block. There is no valid reason not to register an account unless you have an account that has also already been blocked (and you are acting like a block-evading sockpuppet). Robert McClenon (talk) 04:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Images uploaded under 'own work'

Theoretically speaking, suppose I suspected someone of being a WP:UPE but didn't have any ironclad evidence to move this forward with a report, but the suspect had a number of images for a variety of musicians and performers uploaded under 'own work'. What would be the proper approach going forward in terms of flagging said images? Or would it be uncustomary to flag them as erroneously marked as 'own work' based solely on a hunch? Thank you in advance! nearlyevil 665 14:36, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Nearlyevil665: That person could go to a lot of events relating to that musician, so maybe they took them themselves? Examples: concerts, fansigns, etc. ~Wizdzy 15:07, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Some of the photos uploaded are blatant professional photoshoots. nearlyevil 665 15:17, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Maybe the photographer is a professional? I wouldn't hold that against him or her. I suggest you look a their Talk Page on Commons to see if comments have been made there about the images. To go further, you will have to name names. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:29, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

The descriptions read nothing but "Uploaded own work with UploadWizard". Am I allowed to post the user's Commons page here? I know the rules are pretty straightforward about making accusations without any proof so I want to confirm I wouldn't be crossing that line. nearlyevil 665 17:09, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

It should be fine to post for the purposes of asking for a second opinion, nearlyevil665. When I've encountered similar situations in the past, I've found it helpful to use a reverse image search tool to find out if the images have been posted elsewhere. Sometimes I've found that this reveals they were taken by different photographers, meaning that while the uploader could have taken one of them, they couldn't have taken them all. But if you post a link I'm happy to help investigate. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for the initiative. Here is the link. nearlyevil 665 07:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Well, a reverse image search didn't throw anything up here for the photos, nearlyevil665. However, the user has also uploaded several corporate logos with CC licenses, which seems to be an incorrect use of those licenses if nothing else. Have you also seen Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Files uploaded by Geezygee? Cordless Larry (talk) 08:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

No, I haven't, Cordless Larry. I'm quite active over at AfDs and NPP but am completely oblivious when it comes to images. I wouldn't really look into it that much but I had a hunch the author could be an UPE and the fact that a reverse image search doesn't show much only raises more red flags. How would you advise to proceed on this? nearlyevil 665 08:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm just going to add that there's not much anyone here at the Teahouse can do about images uploaded to Commons. Commons has it's own policies and guidelines and own administrators which means that any issues you might have with a Commons image are going to be need to be resolved there. As for concerns about UPE, be very careful about posting anything anywhere on Wikipedia that might be considered WP:OUTING. Instead you should probably follow the instructions at WP:PAID#Reporting undisclosed paid editors and use email to let others know about your concerns. Please understand though that Commons seems to have a completely different take on COI editing and PAID editing and it actually seems to welcome all content as long as it can be verified to have been released or uploaded by its copyright holders under a license that Commons accepts. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. I'm aware about WP:OUTING and that is why I asked twice here for confirmation about even linking to the Wikipedia user for a secondary opinion. I don't hold any off-wiki evidence of UPE, it was more of a hunch based on the behavior of the user + suspicious professional photoshoots not found elsewhere on the web. nearlyevil 665 08:30, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Requesting review of twice declined draft

Hi Teahouse. I have an article that has already been declined twice, so if anyone can, please review it here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mini_sport_utility_vehicle. Lewis4642011 (talk) 03:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft has been declined thrice, most recently by an editor named Hoary. If you're still not sure as to why it's being declined even after reading the latest decline notification, try asking for assistance at WP:AFCHELP. Perhaps someone there will be able to explain what is still lacking. Finally, you might also want to ask about this at Talk:Sport utility vehicle or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles because your draft has the look of a content fork; in other words, there might be something in your draft worth adding to an already existing article even if the subject isn't deemed notable enough for its own stand-alone article. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

But Marchjuly, it had only been declined twice before that nasty editor Hoary saw the polite request above and duly declined it a third time. -- Hoary (talk) 05:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

No personal attacks please, even if they're of the self-inflicted kind.

-- Marchjuly (talk) 05:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

How is this not just a merge and redirect to Sport utility vehicle#Mini SUV? TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Dutch cricket team in South Africa in 2021-22

I can't understand why this article was moved to draft by Lugnuts. He explained the reason as nothing has been confirmed. But nothing has also been confirmed about this tour - Pakistani cricket team in Bangladesh in 2021-22. But there is already an article about that. Besides, the article which I created was also curated and was found no problem earlier.If the tour was scheduled to take place in next year or later then, it would be WP:TOOSOON. But, September is not too far, only 5 months away. I wanted help by leaving a message on the page mover's talk page. But he neglected my request by deleting my message and saying at edit summary that he took four attempts but couldn't make me right. I just wonder, What's this. Is Wikipedia a place for biting the newcomers. Please anybody help me about this. A.A Prinon (talk) 04:06, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi A.A Prinon. Just because another similar article exists, doesn't necessarily mean it should exist. Moreover, whether five months is WP:TOOSOON or not might depend on whether there is significant coverage of the upcoming or scheduled event that is already discussing it and that can be cited in the article. I'm not very familiar with articles about cricket, but in general if the article is going to be nothing but a list of results or a single sentence simply stating something is scheduled, then it might be best to simply wait until the tour has actually taken place so that there's something actually worth adding to the article before creating it. You might try asking about this at WT:CRICKET because may one of that WikiProjects members can help found some more encyclopdic content that can be reliably sourced to add to the article (e.g. the background of the tour, any controversies associated with it) which would make creating an article about it right now seem not TOOSOON. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Marchjuly. If my article is WP:TOOSOON and moved to draft then why this can't be - Pakistani cricket team in Bangladesh in 2021-22. This article was published on 1st of January and 9 months were left for the tour being happened when the article was create. On the other hand, the tour about which I created is 5 months away. But why my one is WP:TOOSOON and that one is not. My article is also a stub and that one is also. So, I can't yet understand why it was moved to draft. Please reply. A.A Prinon (talk) 05:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

As I posted above, WP:OSE is not really a valid way to try and argue that an article should be kept because it's possible that the other articles you're citing as reference probably shoudn't exist as well. All editors are WP:VOLUNTEERs and with over six million articles already created and more being added each day, there are things that slip through the cracks and go unnoticed even for years. Have you tried to discuss at WT:CRICKET since that's where you're going to find editors familiar with cricket articles? Please understand I'm not saying you're completely wrong in this case, only that I don't know enough about cricket tour articles to give you a more specific answer and explain why someone felt Pakistani cricket team in Bangladesh in 2021–22 is OK but Draft:Dutch cricket team in South Africa in 2021–22 isn't since they look practically identical to me except for one of the sources cited. Asking people who know about cricket might help clarify what the difference between the two is. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Marchjuly, Thanks for replying and hope you stay safe. A.A Prinon (talk) 09:37, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Waiting and waiting for approval

I submitted a draft a while ago and I’ve made changes where necessary as one of the references wasn’t trustworthy.

I think it’s waiting for approval but seems to be stuck in drafts still and it’s been 4 months now.

Could you tell me what I need to redo to submit?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Clip-On_Veneers 79.66.226.78 (talk) 06:12, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

First of all, if you are Dwhkabsl: Please Log in. Draft:Clip-On_Veneers hasn't been submitted for review. I will shortly add the appropiate informationt o allow you to do so. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:25, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry if I’ve done this wrong - it’s my first time using the tearoom. I’m logged in and ready for more information, thank you! (~~)

@Dwhkabsl: Note that the template that was added to Draft:Clip-On Veneers did not submit it for review – it allows you to do so, if you want to. You should be aware that the draft is not ready to be an article, though. It reads like an advert, and at least two of the sources do not meet Wikipedia's requirements. It also addresses the reader directly and contains advice ("... it is recommended that you..." and similar phrasing). Even more importantly, it contains medical claims that are not sourced (for instance "Unlike traditional procedures, there are no negative effects on the existing teeth". It is very easy to find sources that contradict this, for instance this, which also would not be useful as a source in the article, but it confirms that the claims the article makes now are almost certainly incorrect). For any kind of medical claim in Wikipedia, the requirements for reliable sources is particularly strict – more information here. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 09:42, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello whoever I’m typing to!

I’m CredibleClover6719 and I’ve just assigned Wikipedia. Even if I’m typing English I’m actually Turkish. I’ve recently realized while I was surfing in Wikipedia for my article that some subjects were different in Vikipedi (Turkish Wikipedia). So that made me think

CredibleClover6719 (talk) 12:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello CredibleClover6719, and welcome to the Teahouse! Yep, the language-versions of WP are different. Different people are/can be involved, the policies/guidelines can differ, etc. Media notice this sometimes, see for example Non-English Editions of Wikipedia Have a Misinformation Problem. Of course en-WP can have misinformation problems too. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Turkish-English volunteered translation due to inadequate information in Vikipedi (Turkish Wikipedia).

Hi whoever I’m typing to! I’m CredibleClover6719 and I’m from Turkey. Recently when I was surfing in Wikipedia for my article I’ve realized that some of the subjects were differently typed between Wikipedia and Vikipedi (Turkish Wikipedia). Trusting my sufficient English grade, I thought maybe I could do some translations to help improving our Vikipedi. But when I browsed it in Wikipedia I couldn’t see anywhere related with translation section. Are there such topic I can assist? Excitedly waiting your replies! Much Love, CredibleClover6719 CredibleClover6719 (talk) 12:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

CredibleClover6719, see Wikipedia:Translate us. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:54, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Deleting an account

How do I go about deleting an account I own? I discovered that I had a 2nd wikipedia account (I think the user is BlazeWolfYT or something) on my home PC that I had completely forgotten about. I'm not actually using that account as I had created it a while ago (and I think the username breaks one of wikipedia's rules cause it's kinda self promoting my YT channel which I"ve just left to die), so how would I go about deleting it? (also I do own it, I think it's actually registered under the same email as this one) Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I just searched up that username and it says it isn't registered. Is there a way I can check to see what accounts are registered to my email so I can figure out what my account I need to get rid of is? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:31, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Blaze The Wolf. It is not possible to delete accounts. See Wikipedia:Username policy#Deleting and merging accounts. You can enter an email address at Special:PasswordReset to get a mail for accounts with that address, and a temporary password for them. Maybe you can find the username at Special:ListUsers/BlazeWolf or Special:ListUsers/Blazewolf. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:49, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Creating a bot for archiving my talk page

Hi. I want to create a bot for archiving my talk page every month. How can I do that. Can anybody help me? A.A Prinon (talk) 13:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi A.A Prinon. Creating a bot is difficult but there are already archiving bots you can request for the task. See Help:Archiving a talk page#Automated archiving. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:52, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Pitanje

Pitanje Why did no one make an article about "Cunami Flo"? MuradifSaUlice (talk) 14:07, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Cunami Flo PBR THC @MuradifSaUlice: The reviewer who declined your draft left you information. Your draft is not in English, nor is it properly referenced. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 14:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

My original page was declined

My original page was declined. I made changes and resubmitted it 3 months ago. I hasn't been accepted yet (nor declined again). How do I find the current status of approval? TAH0916 (talk) 10:41, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi TAH0916, welcome to the Teahouse. User:TAH0916/sandbox has not been resubmitted. Click the "Resubmit" button and then "Publish changes" to resubmit it. PrimeHunter (talk) 10:58, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

TAH0916 Before you resubmit it you should remove all the external links from the body of the draft, specifically the Equipment stuff. More radically, consider deleting the equipment section entirely. What equipment he uses does not contribute to his notability, and can be seen by a reviewer as promotional. David notMD (talk) 14:49, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Pesky vandal on someone's talkpage

Can anyone block this user named Dababynowpleaseplease? They keep on vandalizing this person's talkpage. Another editor, I presume the same person, has also vandalized the same talkpage. They keep on lying that they are an admin and "have a fetish for little boy's feet". All of this vandalism that this user keeps on doing is disgusting. Can an actual administrator block this user indefinitely? Thanks. Treekangaroosandlions 2 (talk) 14:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

yea me and dababy are two different people Stevelovesweewee (talk) 14:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Stevelovesweewee: Okay, I don't really care. Now please stop being a vandal. Treekangaroosandlions 2 (talk) 14:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Treekangaroosandlions 2: but i love feet and this admin talked about my feet yum cokokei Stevelovesweewee (talk) 14:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Stevelovesweewee: I'm just gonna ignore you now. Goodbye. Treekangaroosandlions 2 (talk) 14:20, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

UPDATE: both offenders indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 15:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Attribution?

If I copy information from a website which is available under a CC license then how to attribute it? ExclusiveEditor (talk) 07:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: You generally don’t want to copy articles word for word. If you are sourcing an article and adding the info, you will instead want to rephrase it. You can also make specific requests for assistance on an article’s talk page. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 08:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi ExclusiveEditor. Great question. A threshold issue: you must first check whether the CC license involved is suitably free and compatible. If it isn't, then treat as you would any other non-free source source (and don't copy). If it is, then you can absolutely copy the content, so long as you provide the proper copyright attribution your question regards (no rephrasing needed). Two overarching actions are needed:

(1) in the edit where you are importing content, write an edit summary stating what you are doing (that you are copying content); specify the source of that copying, with its URL; and that is a licensed under a compatible CC license.

For example: This edit copies content from __SourceName__, available at http://www.insert_rest_of_url.edu, licensed under CC-BY-SA; see its history for attribution
A few pages that might be helpful for understanding, though only by analogy: Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia – which explains providing attribution for our internal CC licensing scheme; and Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content, which is for external re-users of our content.
See also Help:Dummy edit, where I have listed some specific examples of edit summaries for various attribution situations (also "by analogy", since its format is actually geared toward repairing attribution that was not originally provided, but which can be adapted for original edit summary attribution purposes, with only a small change).

(2) Provide further attribution to the same attribution information in the references section of the article.

There are a variety of templates for this purpose that have been made for specific freely-licensed sources, such as {{Wikia content}} for content from Wikia (renamed Fandom). See others at Category:Attribution templates.
In the absence of a specific attribution template, use the catchall {{Free-content attribution}}, filling out the parameters as listed at its documentation.

Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:48, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

RedWarn misuse

Hi! Where can I get help with an editor who is misusing WP:RW to revert non-vandal edits whilst leaving nonsense edit summaries? ◦ Trey Maturin 15:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Trey Maturin, you can report a user to an administrator, or use WP:ANI. ✨ Ed talk! ✨ 15:52, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Their edits aren't from RedWarn use. It seems like they're simply adding the usual RedWarn signature at the end of manual reverts. Chlod (say hi!) 15:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

frustrated with edits getting reverted

I feel like Wikipedia is very hostile to new editors, I've made a couple edits here and all that ever happens is they're reverted. And now somebody wrote a message to me accusing me of bad faith with no specific explanation for why my edits (which added academically referenced content) were unconstructive. Almost fed up with this site already. Folx (talk) 16:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Folx, you're correct in saying that Wikipedia isn't a very welcoming platform for new editors. Hundreds of policies and essays, confusing instructions and more. I assume you're talking about your edit to Race and sexuality, which was reverted by CommanderWaterford. The edit seems to have been fine, I think however it may have been inadvertently reverted (words such as
"porn" are so common in vandalism that an edit may be reverted without checking the context). If you don't agree with the revert, you can leave a message on the reverting user's talk page. Hope this helps! — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 16:05, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Folx As you already know your edits had been restored some time ago. CommanderWaterford (talk) 16:07, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

thank you for restorint it! I'm glad that was resolved quickly. I was worried that an hour of digging up references went down the drain. Folx (talk) 16:15, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Updating a Heading

I have noticed that there is a page with the incorrect spelling of an individuals name in the Heading but the correct spelling in the body fo the page. I have posted in talk for that page but is there a way to suggest an edit to the Heading?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Will_MacDonald#:~:text=Will%20Macdonald%20(born%201966)%20is,Your%20Toothbrush%20and%20TFI%20Friday.

FrancescaAssistantProducer (talk) 16:07, 12 April 2021 (UTC) FrancescaAssistantProducer (talk) 16:07, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@FrancescaAssistantProducer:

Done. Since the sources cited in the article all use "Macdonald", I've moved it to Will Macdonald. Deor (talk) 16:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Question about CSD templates

I was going through articles and went to tag for CSD A7, but I noticed that Twinkle does not include an option for a template for movies, books, and others. What template do I use in these situations? {{db-a7}} says that if possible a more specific template should be used, so is there one? bop34 • talk • contribs 15:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Bop34, you can see more speciifc templates in the "notes" section of {{db-a7}}. That specific template is usually used when there is no other template that can be used. Twinkle has the other more specific templates, but in the case there is a template that is not specific enough, just use the standard A7 template. Hope this helps! — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 15:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bop34: Note also that CSD A7 explicitly "does not apply to articles about products, books, films, TV programmes, albums, software, or other creative works". Deor (talk) 16:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi bop34. Further on to the above, the CSD are generally strictly construed because of the nature of that process. It is thus strongly recommended that users familiarize themselves with the actual criteria parameters, e.g., that CSD A7 only applies to articles, on a defined, limited list of topics, with a variety of provisos setting out clarifications and strictures on its applied ambit. To answer the actual question you asked: "No, none". No criterion is applicable to any of these. Of course, if one of these articles had, say, unambiguous copyright violations, and met all the parts of CSD G12 (the same for G5, or G11, et al.) then another CSD could apply, but only because of an intervening defect, unrelated to the topic. If there's some uncontroversial reason for deletion, such as that the topic appears patently non-notable, and you've done at least a bare check before tagging for minimal due diligence, you could use the proposed deletion process. Otherwise, a deletion discussion process is required (which is only warranted after you've done some more involved due diligent checking before invoking a process that is far more expensive of community time and resources). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:06, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Article: Legion duel 2

I need some help getting my article off the ground. Lomrjyo (talk) 14:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

It exists as Legion Duel 2. What do you mean by 'getting it off the ground'? And remember, it is 'an article', not 'your article'. David notMD (talk) 15:14, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Lomrjyo — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 15:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD, I want to expand the article's content. Lomrjyo (talk) 15:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Lomrjyo. Then find reliable, secondary, independent sources that treat the topic in substantive detail and summarize the information they provide (without copying the words used, i.e., in proper paraphrase), citing those sources as you write. If you already understand that, and are asking more about how you can get others to contribute to it, that's already been done situationally by having it in the mainspace, as stub tagged; not much else to do. Someone either will or won't come along to expand it, probably dependent entirely on whether they're interested in the topic. That's just the way it is with a volunteer project. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 16:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

You could model expansion on Lenovo phone articles listed at Lenovo smartphones. A major issue is that the phone was very recently released, so there may not be much to cite yet (other than the reviews you already have - that it breaks easily). David notMD (talk) 17:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

About source editing

So, ever since I joined the Simple English Wikipedia, I've been stuck on the 2017 Wikitext editor and I don't know how to go back to the other one. How do I do it? Thanks ~Wizdzy 17:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Wizdzy: It should be a beta feature that you can disable by going to your Preferences → Beta features → uncheck "New wikitext mode". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:50, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Is it possible to send a message to contributors?

I found what appears to be a factual error in Wikipedia entry [3], and I would like to notify the contributors of the article about it. I do not wish to change the erroneous information myself, since I do not have the correct information to replace the erroneous information -- I can only substantiate that it is in error.

How can I send the details of the error to the contributors? 79.178.32.161 (talk) 17:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

A recently active contributor is User:Sturmvogel 66. You could leave a message on that editor's Talk page. If the wrong information has a reference, then a replacement reference will be necessary. David notMD (talk) 17:26, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi person editing from ...32.161. A dedicated place to post about this is the article's talk page – every article has one – where anyone who is watching the article might see the posting popping up on their watchlist, and the post will remain for future interested editors to view, in case no one currently noticing has both the knowledge and motivation to address the issue. In this case, that would be Talk:Douglas XTB2D Skypirate. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Which link should I visit to see all available user templates?

I want to decorate my user page with user templates but I do not know which templates should I use to decorate the page. Npovobsessed (talk) 18:25, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm not sure if there is a specific page with every single user template in existence. I usually just find them after going to projects I'm interested in or I just happen to discover them on another user's userpage. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Npovobsessed. To find ones to use, see Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries and Wikipedia:Userboxes/Galleries/alphabetical. For using them, formatting, them, creating them, etc., see Wikipedia:Userboxes. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:56, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

When controversy rules a page

Courtesy link: Foreskin Deor (talk) 20:30, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

'Foreskin' I actually came to this page looking for some simple verifiable references and I was shocked by the article and shocked by the talk page. I made one 'citation needed' edit which was immediately reverted. The article contains much that I and others suggest is bias, the sources look from the talk page to be unreliable. The talk page reads like an argument - still unresolved by last comment. I think it needs flagging up as a battleground but it needs proper assessment by someone who is good on the rules. I believe that some reference sources should be deleted but I am no expert in the area. The page is almost useless as a reference source. Sorry that's not a question, that's a flag. Thelisteninghand (talk) 19:15, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thelisteninghand Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The user that reverted your edit wrote an edit summary where they say that the statement at issue was already sourced. If you have some sort of issue with the source, you may discuss your concerns on the article talk page with the other editors that follow that article in order to arrive at a consensus as to what should be done. 331dot (talk) 19:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I did not see an edit summary in the history. did I miss a click?Thelisteninghand (talk) 19:26, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thelisteninghand This link will take you to the "diff" with the edit summary. 331dot (talk) 19:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. The text containing the citation appears to be absent from the article being edited. It's why I put citation needed by the point where a citation is needed. Again, with apologies, am I missing something?Thelisteninghand (talk) 20:04, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thelisteninghand: A reference is often placed at the end of the content it supports. This may be multiple sentences. The next reference has the quote in the edit summary. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:05, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks again, I may be moving towards asking for intervention on this page because of bias. But following the links to do it are getting me lost. Is it a dramatic thing to do? And could someone give me a shortcut to the simplest way of getting neutral oversight?Thelisteninghand (talk) 19:03, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Creating a Page

Courtesy link: Draft:Masande Ntshanga TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 17:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

On average, how long can I expect to wait before I have my draft reviewed? Mdlsee (talk) 16:21, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

First you need to create a draft and then submit it and wait for at max 4 months. Was an explorer (talk) 19:31, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

It can be maximum 2 or 3 days. EditJuice (talk) 16:41, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@EditJuice: That is highly unlikely, unless the draft has obvious problems such that it can be almost immediately declined. @Mdlsee: There are over 5,500 drafts in the backlog, so it can take around 4 months. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:50, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh, sorry. I wanted to say that. EditJuice (talk) 16:52, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@EditJuice: I'm curious as to what your need for a speedy review is, as Wikipedia has no deadlines. Is it related to the conflict of interest that you declared? 331dot (talk) 16:53, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes. Wikipedia has no deadlines. EditJuice (talk) 16:58, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@EditJuice: To be frank, Wikipedia is not concerned with any deadlines you are under or what you have been tasked with doing. Are you declining to answer my question? 331dot (talk) 17:02, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

I guess I'm declining to answer your question... EditJuice (talk) 17:04, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@331dot: I think you're talking to the wrong person. Mdlsee is the one who asked "how long can I expect to wait before I have my draft reviewed?" and EditJuice just replied to that question. Kleinpecan (talk) 17:31, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Sorry, that's indeed what I did. 331dot (talk) 18:48, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

Mdlsee To answer your question, the backlog of drafts is not a queue. Reviewers pick what they want to review. Can be days, weeks, or (sadly) months. David notMD (talk) 21:17, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@EditJuice: @331dot: I just wanted to confirm the 4 months timeline. I want to understand how Wikipedia works.

Mdlsee, if you're keen to see the draft reviewed soon, you can help by greatly reducing the number of references. In particular, remove all those which are to press releases, to content written by the subject, and to interviews with the subject. Wikipedia in not interested in anything a subject says about himself. 49 references, many of them doing nothing to help establish that the subject is notable, is a lot to expect a reviewer to wade through, and the long list may induce a reviewer to ignore this draft and move on to something easier.Maproom (talk) 22:32, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

@Maproom: Thank you, but I'm okay. There was a user before you who advised raising the number of sources and that's what I chose to do. I'd rather be thorough and I'm okay with waiting.

@Mdlsee, Having gone through your talkpage & the comment left on the draft I don’t see anyone expressly asking you to increase the number of references. More references are of no value, when it comes to sourcing, the quality of the sources are what counts. Three good reliable sources are enough to prove or substantiate notability. Anyway if you want the article to be reviewed as soon as can be I am happy to review it for you albeit I doubt you’d be happy with the outcome. I’d like to know, in what capacity do you have a conflict of interest with your article's subject? Do you merely know them too well that it would constitute a COI or are you being compensated for creating the article, which exactly is it? Celestina007 (talk) 00:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mdlsee,

Done, I’m dazed myself that the article surprisingly met our notability threshold, I was more than ready to decline this but having observed the sources used in the article, and their awards won i had a change of heart. I take it that you heeded the advice of Theroadislong and substantiated the awards won via RS. In any case, I have proceeded to accept the article. congratulations. Celestina007 (talk) 00:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Competence is required

Can somebody keep an eye on User:Inceptio because he or she is making typographical and other edits which don't conform to our style, nor anybody else's in some cases? I've changed a quite a few of them back to the correct versions, but I have a life to live. Thank you. BeenAroundAWhile (talk) 19:16, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I have looked at their contributions and some of them are helpful. However I do not have the time to look through all of them Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:39, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Protection Policy Edits

How do you check how many total edits you have, and how do you check how many days old your account is? Was an explorer (talk) 19:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Was an explorer: Special:Preferences will show your edit count and when you registered. RudolfRed (talk) 19:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you. Was an explorer (talk) 19:55, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Was an explorer, here's an other version: [4] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Article Review

Can anyone review an article submitted for review?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Association_for_a_Better_Long_Island Longislandecodev (talk) 18:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Longislandecodev: The draft is submitted for review. There are over 5000 other drafts also waiting for review, so please be patient. You can continue to work on the draft while waiting for the review. RudolfRed (talk) 18:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Longislandecodev. In the meantime, I suggest you bone-up the attribution details of the citations. You are even using a few naked URLs as citations, and the ones that aren't, are not providing full attribution details (some of them are also making odd use of parameters, e.g., next to |first= and |last=, which are for a person's first and last names, I see dates, times, am/pm, etc.).

Since you have a lot of reference to newspaper articles, you might switch those from the template {{Cite web}} to {{Cite news}}, as better configured for expressing newspaper source details (in either case, visiting the templates themselves, linked earlier in this sentence, will access their explanatory documentation).

To give you one example, you cite the this Newsday article by its title alone. I would expect a fully attributed citation to tell me the linked title, the Newspaper name, the writer (if provided), and the date. I will provide as an example a footnote at the end of this sentence to this source, which will format to the citation seen at the very end of this post, using the markup immediately below.^[1] Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

<ref>{{Cite news|work=Newsday|last=Sprangler|first=Nicholas|date=April 24, 2019|title=Report envisions modernizing Hauppauge Industrial Park|url=https://www.newsday.com/long-island/suffolk/hauppauge-industrial-park-1.30160362}}</ref>

P.S. to improve the draft (though the lack of this will not cause your submission to be declined), I recommend judicious linking to other articles, for appropriate items mentioned in the text of the draft, by surrounding the name in doubled opening and closing brackets ([[ArticleName]] or [[ArticleName|DisplayName]] <-- a piped link). See Help:Linking for technicalities on this; Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Linking for appropriateness; and Wikipedia:Tutorial for the basics of lots of stuff like this I am omitting.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

In answer to the original question, there are editors who qualify as reviewers. Obviously, not enough of them, or there would not be the horrendous and growing backlog. At Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation see How to get involved. David notMD (talk) 21:37, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

References

^ Sprangler, Nicholas (April 24, 2019). "Report envisions modernizing Hauppauge Industrial Park". Newsday.

What does ! vs !! Mean?

I have seen them in headers but I don’t see the difference.73.111.22.127 (talk) 20:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC) 73.111.22.127 (talk) 20:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi. Vs usually means versus in English writing; no idea about exclamation points used in relation; (as usual) the actual context would be incredibly helpful in providing a concrete answer.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:25, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I'm guessing that you mean the header row of tables? If so, have a look at Help:Introduction to tables with Wiki Markup/2. --ColinFine (talk) 20:23, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: Ah, smart.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes I looked there and I don’t see difference can you show it.

See Help:Basic table markup. The introductory help table articles assume you won't be looking in such detail. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:45, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

It is there on the page I linked to, (under "header cell") but it's not so obvious as on the page that StarryGrandma linked. --ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Vandalism

So how do you know if an edit is vandalism? Superman011 (talk) 14:52, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Superman011 and welcome to Wikipedia. Generally vandalism is something disruptive or malicious, but also inappropriate addition, removal or modification of texts, humor or hoaxes. Anything that is not aimed at constructive improvement can be considered vandalism. If you want to learn more, please take a look here Vandalism on Wikipedia and WP:VANDAL. Best, Less Unless (talk) 15:10, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@Superman011: Adding on to that, a lot of the time it is pretty clear when an edit is vandalism. For example, vandals commonly insert obscenities, add racist/homophobic/sexist "information", or blank parts or all of the page. Sometimes vandalism can be a lot more subtle and you should always watch out for that, but a lot of the time it is pretty clear. bop34 • talk • contribs 15:19, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Not as common, but deletions can be vandalism. However, sometimes editors remove text and the references that supported it because they believe that content did not belong in the article. What is written in Edit summaries can help determine intent. David notMD (talk) 16:35, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

It's important to understand that vandalism is largely determined by the INTENT of the editor; vandalism is a DELIBERATE intent to defeat or obstruct the purpose of this encyclopedia. A poor edit which introduces incorrect information, invalid markup, POV content or incomprehensible language is not vandalism if it was done with the intention of improving the encyclopedia, however misguided or incompetent the result is. See WP:VANDNOT for important details on this point. Be careful that you are sure you understand the intention of the editor before calling an edit "vandalism". CodeTalker (talk) 17:15, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

It's vandalism if it adds new information without consensus. 91.142.213.109 (talk) 17:36, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

No it is not. That's bold editing and is encouraged. Of course if the edit is challenged then the bold, revert, discuss cycle should begin. But even then it is not vandalism if the INTENT of the edit was to improve the encyclopedia. CodeTalker (talk) 17:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Superman011 . I know there's already quite a bit of content above, but I have a different take (and also there's both correct and seemingly incorrect advice above, or at least that in my view could easily be interpreted to come to an erroneous conclusion). As CodeTalker explained, it is about bad faith, which requires an assessment of intent (it is thus incorrect that, as implied in some of the content above, merely inappropriate additions are per se vandalism ). The way you "know" if an edit is vandalism is to ask this question as a test, and come to a negative response: Could the edit involved (even if inappropriate for a wealth of reasons) have been reasonably made in good faith? Only if "no" is it vandalism.

So "fart" inserted in the middle of a sentence is on-its-face vandalism, because we we can glean bad faith to a high degree of certainty from the edit itself. Situational context is important though. If a user makes an edit that is clearly defined as inappropriate under policy/guideline apparent, but is not of a type where bad faith is apparent from the edit itself and it is either: the first instance of making that edit, or the user has never been warned, it cannot be assessed as vandalism (and so don't use rollback, nor call it "vandalism). However, that same edit, after the user has been clearly informed of the inappropriateness of such edits, is transformed into vandalism, because apparent bad faith is involved. As part of that logic stream, we do make the radical assumption that talk page warnings are read, even if that conceit is untrue a fair amount of the time. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 21:58, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Keeping edit requests from getting to me

IPs can't receive autoconfirmed and extended confirmed privileges, so I end up making a lot of edit requests. Recently, though, I've found myself having to repeat myself about the fact that the citations already present in the article are sufficient for my edit, when that happens to be the case. This seems to be because editors are in a hurry to move on to the next edit request and clear up the backlog, and they tend to summarily reject edits lacking HTML ref tags. Is there some way I can format my edit requests to go through the first f***ing time instead of having to answer stupid f***king questions and set the edit-request-answered parameter to "no" until someone decides my edit request is worthy of being accepted? My time for editing enwiki is no less limited than that of the admittedly public-spirited folks who volunteer to clear the edit request backlog... 128.62.29.29 (talk) 20:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. There's no need for cursing; we try to keep things friendly and civil here. You could obviate the need to make edit requests by creating an account and becoming autoconfirmed, but I assume you are aware of that. It's difficult to say more unless you provide diffs of edits or the pages where this has happened to you. 331dot (talk) 20:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

It would make it much easier to answer if you would link to an example or two of your edit requests. You have made no other edits with this IP address. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Have you approached reviewers with your concerns? 331dot (talk) 20:19, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Simply provide an appropriate proviso to your post, e.g., <tailor to context>"Please note that the existing source at the end of the same paragraph (footnote 7, to X source), directly verifies this addition"</tailor to context>--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 20:31, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, folks, for being willing to review my edit requests. My motivation for posting this question from a campus IP address, rather than my usual one, was to keep from drawing unnecessary attention to specific folks interacting with specific edit requests - I did not want to contribute to potentially "dogpiling" them as one might expect from posting to a forum as popular as the Teahouse. I admit I let that motivation get mixed up with my motivation to vent in unfiltered language; I agree with those of you who have pointed out this gets in the way of keeping things friendly and civil here. I thank Fuhghettaboutit for their constructive suggestion and will put it into practice as I make more edit requests. 128.62.53.11 (talk) 22:21, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

need help

Iam trying to edit a wikipedia page and tried to copy what other people did but I messed up can someone help me fix it please. the wikipedia page is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Call_Me_Karizma Coolio66699 (talk) 22:58, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I've fixed it. Kleinpecan (talk) 23:04, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Can anyone help me with my bad history article?

With the help of others, please help me expand my Bad History article, and eventually, it can become a Wikipedia Page! Answermeplease11 (talk) 12:48, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Answermeplease11: Link? ~Wizdzy 13:04, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Wizdzy: Draft:Bad History. Kleinpecan (talk) 13:13, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Here’s how you can find the article

1. Go to my user page

2. On at the bottom of my user page, it shows the link for bad history, and thats how you find it.

But anyways, here’s the link!

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bad_History

Answermeplease11 (talk) 13:14, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Answermeplease11: welcome to the Teahouse. I fear the answer is "No!" as there's nothing in your draft to show a bunch of Romanian YouTube videos merits an article here. Had you supplied some references to independent sources that talked about it in detail and in depth, then our Notability criteria might be met. Unless you can do that, there's nothing we can do to assist you. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 13:24, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Nick Moyes, here is where you can find the sources I am going to put on Bad History:

Herehttps://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:KylieTastic#KylieTastic,_can_you_help_me_with_my_bad_history_article

Answermeplease11 (talk) 13:33, 12 April 2021 (UTC) Answermeplease11

@Answermeplease11: In that comment you mention Wikitubia and the YouTube films themselves. The films are not independent sources, and Wikitubia is a user generated source just like Wikipedia, so that is not a reliable source. In other words, I'm afraid Nick Moyes' comment still applies. Please take a moment to follow the link Nick supplied, to the notability criteria. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 13:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Then who will create the article? Or will it never be created?

Answermeplease11 (talk) 14:23, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Somewhere between WP:TOOSOON and never, but closer to never. David notMD (talk) 14:59, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Update: Following a discussion at my talk page this user has confirmed they would like their draft deleting. I'll leave it a while before doing so, lest they have second thoughts and suddenly find sources they can use. But it seems improbable that will happen. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Adding content from a different version of Commons

I’ve been spending the past while trying to add an image from the Hebrew Commons to an infobox without much luck.

Does an image need to be on the English Wikimedia Commons to be added to an English Wikipedia page? If so, am I permitted to reupload the image there? And if not, what do I need to do to add the image to the infobox? Havitush (talk) 23:23, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Havitush: Welcome. There is only one Commons, and if the picture is there you can use it on any Wikipedia. I think what you are describing is that there is an image on the Hebrew Wikipedia that is not on Commons that you want to use here. Unfortunately you can't do that directly. You will either need to upload it to Commonsf it is licensed appropriately, or upload it here if it qualifies for WP:NFCC. RudolfRed (talk) 01:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:GirlTrek 404 Error

I started writing a draft article for GirlTrek, a non-profit organization in the United States but have run into some issues. As this is my first article, I would like some insight into why I am getting the following notification when trying to publish new edits: "Error contacting the Parsoid/RESTBase server (HTTP 404). The first draft I published a few days ago saved without issue. But when I came back today to add more information, I could not publish my changes. What should I do? HLC BRAND (talk) 01:54, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi HLC BRAND. I made a WP:DUMMY edit to the draft to see if I got the same error, but the page saved fine for me. Perhaps it had something to do with the computer or device you were using. Maybe try to make the same edit again to see if you're still having the same problem.

Finally, please take a look at WP:IU because your username looks like it might be something not allowed. You might also want to look at Help:Your first article and MOS:MOS as well for some general ideas on how to create and format a Wikipedia article as well as WP:NOBLE and WP:COI if you're connected to GirlTrek in any way. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

What happens if a image gets a new logo does it need to be updated?

What happens if a image gets a new logo does it need to be updated? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 21:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi ItsJustdancefan. I'm not sure what you mean by an image gets a new logo, but I'm going to assume that you mean that a company, sports team, TV program, etc. got a new logo or changed their branding. In such a case, the most recent version of the logo should be used, in principle, per Wikipedia:Logos, but how to best go about do that can sometimes be tricky. Can you provide a link to the article where you want to add this new logo? If you can do that, then perhaps someone can give you a more specific answer. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:49, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Introductions of expressions of doubt

Are the introductions of words like "maybe" and "possibly" as seen in this diff [5] violations of MOS:DOUBT guidelines? Kind regards. —Twotwofourtysix^{(My talk page and contributions)} 03:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

If not DOUBT then WEASEL. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 03:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Editing Semi-Protected Article

Hello! I was wondering that, I want to edit a semi-protected article even though I'm not an autoconfirmed user.

I want to edit a semi-protected article. Please! AdjectiveGuy (talk) 03:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@AdjectiveGuy: Welcome to the Teahouse. You've made more than 10 edits and have been around for more than 4 days, so you should be autoconfirmed. Taking a look at your user groups you're already an implicit member. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

From me added links in ´See also´ deleted

Hi. I added some direct relating links in ´See also´ of Vitamin B12: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vitamin_B12&curid=14538619&diff=1016679908&oldid=1016660194
Now they have been removed: " →‎See also: removed not useful additions Tag: Manual revert".
I am going to message as ´Vandalism´. But just do not know how. Or perhaps there is a better way.
Thanks for reading and interesst.
--Visionhelp (talk) 10:40, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Visionhelp. Please read WP:VANDNOT because the removal of those links wouldn’t be considered vandalism. The editor who removed the links is actually quite experienced and is also a Teahouse host. So, I’m sure David notMD will be happy to clarify why he felt the links didn’t meet WP:SEEALSO. — Marchjuly (talk) 10:52, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Marchjuly. Thanks. He will be happy, but will not help it. He has his very own opinion, what wikipedia is for and what not, for example: sources of other encyclopedies not wanted. (Wikipedia one rule is Sources. Sources of other encyclopedies closing off so can not be a rule of wikipedia, but he does saying. In a talk between us.)

Sadnessly, this way, not even a talk can happen for my understatement.
(Deleting links of ´Sees also´s not vandalism ? Hm.
And being able to delete and say and decline "not useful additions", he absolutly alone decides, what is useful" ?

--Visionhelp (talk) 11:28, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

Visionhelp I have no power to 'decide' (I am an editor, not an Administrator). The standard path for having an edit reverted is to start a discussion on the Talk page of the article, invite the editor who reverted the changes, and see if the two and other interested editors can reach a consensus. I stand by my decision to remove what I consider not-useful 'See also" additions. Be aware that edits in good faith can be debated, but are not to be tagged as vandalism. David notMD (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

In looking back at my contributions, I see that you and I have already had discussions at Talk pages of B12 and other articles about what are valid "See also." I have added more comments. We can continue there. David notMD (talk) 17:03, 9 April 2021 (UTC)

You can also return here to Teahouse to get other opinions on this issue. David notMD (talk) 00:55, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

A lable ´not useful´ is deciding and determining, WHAT is useful and what not. You did mention, it was already linked in the article. (But now are more links removed.)
A precept of ´useful´ is a guideline, where You determine, what is useful. With this You determine with the sound of a talk. Alreday there I am out. Who determines the sound, determines the content.
´Finding´ as rule, links which have been mentioned in an article not to link in ´See also´s also works already absolutly against my conviction, links for overview and connection and relations at an own place as ´See also´.
But revoming links, which have not been mentioned in an article to remove: I only can call vandalism, sorry. But writing in an article has its already very own rules at wikipedia. And this is now my really last edit in any article, but my own, and this (one) also is being stopped, but OK.
This for me it is not a way to work with fun and sense. But this is my way, how I can and want and may work. Sorry.
Quote "We can continue there": I did. (Oh sorry. I did here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Diatomaceous_earth#%C2%B4See_also%C2%B4:_the_my_note_and_link_to_Silica_got_removed)
--Visionhelp (talk) 13:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)

This to mention still to this rule:
The only alternative to this rule is, to not link in the texts, for to may link it at the ´See also´.
A one wants (likes) to use the link already mentioned in the texts, an other first in an overview of ´See also´s.
Why does wikipedia not like to let this freedom of both, both justified: different needs and different expectations ?
Sorry: a ´See also´ with not the links, which are linked already in the texts.
And such a rule first may find, when having to find it happend, been deleted links in ´See also´.
Such a rule has to be noted at ´See also´ near ´Edit´ as ´Rule´ (to ´See also´).
That such a rule at all exists, only already for how to use a text and links and ´See also´ at wikipedia, for a reader, not just only for (Writers) Editors.
--Visionhelp (talk) 04:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Diplomatic mission of Ukraine to the UK

I was wondering if it would be notable enough (and allowed) if I created a new article, called "Diplomatic mission of Ukraine to the United Kingdom" containing information on the Embassy in London and the Consulates in Edinburgh and London. It could also include further information such as the opening of the diplomatic missions (I have a source from the Ukrainian Ministry of Foreign Affairs providing this information). This article would merge the current Embassy of Ukraine, London article into this one article (the Edinburgh Consulate doesn't have its own article, as far as I am aware). If the topic doesn't warrant its own article, no problem! Thank you! MBihun (talk) 20:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@MBihun: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia is more interested in what independent reliable sources have published about a topic than what the ministry wants to say about itself. See Help:Your first article for lots of good information about writing a draft article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 04:36, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

What if external links section contains citation (ref) ?

I've run into article that had duplicate references, one in section References, other at the end of the page (see https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Schinzel%27s_hypothesis_H&oldid=1017095382 ). This was caused by ref in section External Links, which itself was after section References.

Now I quick fixed that by moving section External Links before the section References, but now I am second guessing my decision as I am not sure what is actually preferred solution... What is the proper/common way this is handled?

Thank you SilTheFirst (talk) 21:14, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

That was caused by someone placing a citation into the external refs section. That external refs section should come after the references section. Since the wayward cite was a duplicate of material already used as a reference, I reverted your switcheroo and deleted the unnecessary citation. He iro 04:57, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Is this a good source?

Moved to Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard § Is this a good source?

Signature with no content

Marista28112000 (talk) 20:04, 10 April 2021 (

we are classmates working on a class project

Hello! VPEllipsisW05 and W05 VP Ellipsis are classmates working on a Linguistics 300 project for a university course on Syntax. We have been tasked with creating content and are learning as we go. VPEllipsisW05 was not able to save content, likely as a learning curve issue. W05VP Ellipsis today was told that content was deleted because she was coordinating with another writer without having disclosed the relationship. How do we disclose the relationship and move forward on our class project? We are both interested to learn how to write Wikipedia content and are learning on the fly! VPEllipsisW05 (talk) 02:15, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

This may help you Wikipedia:Student assignments. Your teacher should probably also take a look at it. He iro 02:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi VPEllipsisW05. The similarity of the two usernames sort of makes it seem as if the two accounts are being controlled by the same person. The simple way to resolve this would probably be for one of you to request a username change to something that's different enough to avoid such confusion.

You mentioned you've been tasked with creating content, but not who has given you this task. Are you editing as part of some class project? Do you know whether this project is connected to Wikipedia:Education program or did your teacher simply say go and create some Wikipedia articles? If it's a case of the latter, you might want to ask your teacher to look at Wikipedia:Education program/Educators because it's can be much harder than it seems to create content, particularly when your working under time constraints for a university course; moreover, your teacher should have a good idea as to what they're asking you and your classmates to try and do. Many students participating in class projects find themselves quickly having problems with other editors because they're not familiar with Wikipedia's various policies and guidelines. In some cases, these problems might be the result of their teachers not really be familiar with Wikipedia and expecting their students to be able to do things that simply are quite difficult to do for a new editor trying to learn as they go along. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

VPEllipsisW05 I would concur with the advice given by Marchjuly. It is extremely unfair to you a student for your teacher to ask that you write a Wikipedia article as part of an assignment. Students have little control over the process, and are under pressure to get a good grade, and are often ignorant of Wikipedia guidelines and practices, and as such often end up frustrated and desperate to succeed which ususally does not end well. 331dot (talk) 07:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Content about Mandarin was deleted because it was a copyright infringement. David notMD (talk) 09:28, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

This site is so cool

Greeting from New Zealand & thanks too thoes people that have helped with you tube & internet. My question u make money from post's & this way cooler than facebook & yeah im new too this site. So yeah its great so any help making money please help? 122.56.208.247 (talk) 09:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, IP user. Wikipedia editors are volunteers. It is a hobby and a kind of service to others – we do it because it is (usually) enjoyable and (usually) meaningful, and we don't make any money from it. --bonadea contributions talk 09:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Help

I need help with my article. I will check the references. I gave two links as references. Minwel (talk) 08:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I need help. I do not have the time to become a full Wikipedian but I will check the references. There is already a German Wikipedia article on Michael Gue, with references, etc. Maybe that can be linked somehow ...

Will loook into it when I have the time. Really would like this article to go online. Please help me.

We can't use the existence of an article at another edition of Wikipedia to justify an article here at en.wp. Each edition is its own project with its own standards, and they're rarely, if ever, fully compatible with one another. —A little blue Bori v^_^v ^{Jéské Couriano} 09:00, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Michael Gue

@Minwel: The subject does seem to be notable, so that's a good start. You do need to format your references as footnotes though. You can read Help:Footnotes for a detailed explanation, but the general gist of it is to put it in <ref> tags, so that they show up like so:^[1] If you use VisualEditor, it will format this more intuitively, like editing a Word document. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:05, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I understand. Thank you. I will deal with this in the afternoon.

Yes, the subject is notable. More later, best, Minwel / Annette — Preceding unsigned comment added by Minwel (talk • contribs) 09:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

References

^ www.google.com

what are the critters to create a article page in wikipedia?

Fatjona90 (talk) 09:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Specifically, are you asking about Draft:Enea Kadiu? - X201 (talk) 09:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fatjona90, WP:NFOOTBALL may be what you want. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Guessing here that you were in auto-correct for spelling, and you device liked "critters" more than "criteria". David notMD (talk) 09:39, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Creating a bot

Hello. How can I create a bot? I need a bot for archiving my talk page every week. EditJuice (talk) 06:46, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@EditJuice: Hello, and Welcome to the Teahouse. Before you try to create a bot, please be advised that there are already existing bots that can archive talk pages. See Help:Archiving_a_talk_page#Choosing_a_bot._Table_comparing_the_2_main_bots for more info. Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:23, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

But how can I choose one of them? EditJuice (talk) 07:31, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@EditJuice: I suggest lowercase sigmabot III for a user talk page. Every week is very frequent. I suggest 30 to 90 days unless your talk page has huge activity. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:44, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I don't want it to be 30 to 90 days. I think it can be every week... EditJuice (talk) 16:42, 11 April 2021 (UTC)

EditJuice, IMO weekly is a bad idea. But that's your call. S Philbrick (Talk) 22:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

OK. EditJuice (talk) 09:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Section blanking

Hi. What template should I use to warn a user for section blanking, not page blanking? Thanks. SeaCardinal (talk) 11:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Never mind, I found out. SeaCardinal (talk) 11:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Create New Article?

Create New Article? NiRan Jr23 (talk) 08:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@NiRan Jr23: See WP:Your first article on what you should do and watch for when creating a new article. Be advised that sucessfully creating a new article is one of the harder tasks one can undertake on Wikipedia, is requires much effort and practice. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:24, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Show word meaning when mouse hovers

Is there a way so that when someone mouse pointer hovers over a word its meaning is displayed ? Much like when we hover over trans. , translated is displayed. Specifically, I am writing summary of episode in a article. I want to write, "Madhurima responds that maybe Kajol will play a part to part them", meant as, ". Madhurima responds that maybe Kajol will play a role to separate them". See the difference in meaning of two part. I can use separate words but writing "part to part" looks cool(Use of some literary device, maybe alliteration, Not Sure). Parnaval (talk) 09:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Parnaval: do you mean Wikipedia:Tooltips? --DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Don't do it!. Read MOS:NOHOVER - X201 (talk) 10:00, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Also clarity of meaning should take precedence over literary devices. See Wikipedia:Ambiguous words.--Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing:, Thank you for the answer but due to other 2 comments I have decided not to use it. Parnaval (talk) 13:26, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft pending review + new published article

I came across a new article, and subsequently found out that it was a recreation of an earlier draft, rejected once at AfC and currently waiting re-review; hence now there is a more-or-less identical copy both published and in the draft space. What's the correct process for handling this (assuming I can/need to do more than just walk on by...). My first instinct was to request speedy on the recreated article, but I wasn't sure if A10 applies, given that the other article is only a draft? Thanks, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@DoubleGrazing: Since the draft is now "in mainspace", there are several points to consider. The first question you should ask is wether the draft has substantial contributions by others. If so, request a history merge. It usally better to err on the side of caution with this. Secondly, you need to ask yourself wether the article is "ready for mainspace". If it is, it can stay there. If you aren't sure, leave it there for now. If it clearly isn't, you have three options: 1) Tag it for CSD, if one of the criteria applies (A10 does not, because the other page is a draft) 2) Take it to AFD or 3) (after a histmerge) move it back to draft. It would be helpfull if you could give us the name of the article, as this would make answering easier. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks @Victor Schmidt: the published and draft articles are both mostly but not entirely the work of a single editor. (In the case of the former, I myself made copy edits, added cats, etc. before realising the situation.) I don't think the article is any more ready for main space than the earlier draft was, as it suffers from the same issues of notability and flaky sources. I doubt that it's speediable, though, if as you say A10 wouldn't work, so I guess I'll dispatch it to AfD, then. Thanks for your help, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 13:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Robert Héliès

Hello. Could someone combine the infoboxes on Draft:Robert Héliès? Could you make it a bit like Petr Cech's infobox? I don't know how to do this. Thank you. Paul Vaurie (talk) 13:28, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Paul Vaurie Done. For future reference, you can add |module= to the first infobox and then put the second infobox, as in Special:Diff/1017564363 Joseph2302 (talk) 13:54, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try to remember that. Paul Vaurie (talk) 14:24, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Help

I have to created an article: Draft:Soham Lahiri. Can someone help me in publishing the article in the main namespace? Thanks in advance. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Vtbn21 (talk • contribs)

You can past {{subst:submit}} at the top of your draft to submit it for review. Although looking at your draft, the subject does not appear to be sufficiently notable for a wikipedia article, see WP:GNG and WP:BIO. Polyamorph (talk) 10:44, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Vtbn21: I agree that Sohan Lahiri has not reached Wikipedia notability, so expect your draft to be Declined. See WP:TOOSOON. There are format and referencing errors, but even if all those were fixed, very unlikely the draft will be accepted. [Youtube and Facebook are not reliable source references, hyperlinks do not belong in the text, references do belong in the text in a format that creates a reference list.] David notMD (talk) 11:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

If you decide to submit it anyway, there is a large backlog of drafts waiting for review, so could be as long as months before a reviewer chooses to review your draft. David notMD (talk) 11:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Vtbn21. To be clear, do not spend any more of your time on this, as it will be wasted effort. Given what you've written in the draft, all indications are that you are simply not notable at this time (just as I am not, and most people in the world are not); no amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability. There are plenty of places online to post a profile about yourself, but Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, with all that that entails. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 15:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Peer-reviewed Magazine vs. Journal

Is there a difference? Is a peer-reviewed magazine essentially an academic journal? I'm thinking about the likes of Adoranten and Ancient Egypt Magazine. Tyrone Madera (talk) 21:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Tyrone Madera. I don't think that the distinction between "magazine" and "journal" is all that significant. If the peer review is genuine and the publications have good reputations in their fields, then the sources are generally reliable. When creating references, it may be best to use Template:Cite journal to capture all the relevant information. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 02:12, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay, Thank you! Tyrone Madera (talk) 15:40, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Update image

Hi there, I was wondering if someone could help me. I’m trying to update the image on Monica Lennon MSP’s wikipedia as it was taken in 2016 and is no longer accurate to her current Twitter profile image : https://twitter.com/monicalennon7/status/1381911208157151234?s=21

If someone could help it would be much appreciated :) Advancededits7 (talk) 16:09, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't think pictures from Twitter are allowed. But if another host says they're allowed then you could probably update the image yourself. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 16:13, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Advancededits7: You can't just use a new photo that happens to be on someone's Twitter account because of copyright restrictions. Any photo used on Wikipedia for living people must be licenced CC BY-SA and in practice that severely limits what we can use. See Commons:Licensing for more details on this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:17, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Okay, didn’t realise this was the case. Thanks :)

Assistance on Draft:KaHa Pte

Draft has been attended to and would need extra hands from the Teahouse to overview the article. Thanks Afí-afeti (talk) 13:36, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

The draft was declined, and there are several comments on the shortcomings of the draft. David notMD (talk) 15:03, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

I have looked into it and made the necessary changes on the draft before resubmitting it.--Afí-afeti (talk) 17:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Why is wikipedia not allow short links?

Why is wikipedia not allowing short links? Fortniter2728 (talk) 12:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

I don't exactly know the reason. I'm guessing it's to prevent people from hiding virus links as legitimate ones but you should probably wait for another owner to either confirm or deny my answer. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

If you're talking about url shorteners, its because they allow editors to get around the spam filter, make it difficult to see where links lead and there's no reason to use them when there's no limit on article length. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 13:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

If however you're talking about edits like these [6], [7], [8], the reason they are being removed is because they are spam. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

How to remove a Redirect page?

A - First I made a small edit on the "Henri Richard" page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henri_Richard) and removed the redirect for 'Pocket Rocket" to snooker player Graeme Dott (as his nickname is in fact "Pocket Dynamo"). B - Then I tried to remove the redirect on Graeme Dott's page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graeme_Dott) but didn't manage. C - Removed the redirect for Graeme Dott on the redirect page "The Pocket Rocket" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Pocket_Rocket) which left this empty and I don't know how to remove the page. Sorry, a bit of a mess. Any guidance on offer? Thanks. Jules van Dooren Jules van Dooren (talk) 16:49, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

The place to ask for problematic redirects to be deleted is WP:Redirects for discussion. In this case I've retargeted the redirect to the article on the hockey player, as they do seem to go by that nickname, and removed the hatnote from the snooker player's article, as the redirect no longer points there. I think that fixes the issue? 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes it does and thank you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jules van Dooren (talk • contribs) 17:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Duty Relief

I signed up to become a Teahouse host and an Adopter a while ago. However, over 2020, I have been editing on here less frequently, then came back to it during the later months of that year. I signed up for those roles out of wanting to try new things. However, I have realized that I should stick to what I do best, fighting vandalism. Is there any way that I can relieve myself of those duties, i.e. just remove myself from the lists of Teahouse hosts and Adopters? LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 16:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@LPS and MLP Fan: As far as being a host goes, I think inactive ones are removed from the roster after six months, but that's done manually. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi LPS and MLP Fan. Go right ahead and edit:

to remove yourself (as implied at the last link, you should couple that with dropping a note at User talk:Jtmorgan that you have removed yourself from the inviter list [though they will also be pinged by this mention to this thread]). Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 17:45, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Published page not showing up

I created a page (I guess it is called an article), published it and it doesn't come up when I search the individual I created it for. As the user (myself) when I search that name it comes up. Can I change the user to the person's name I did the article about or how would I make the article about this person come up in a search? Thank you! Jazzchic (talk) 17:09, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Is this the page you're refering to - User:Jazzchic/sandbox? If so the reason it isn't showing up is because it is in your userspace - the name starts with User:. It needs a bit of clean-up and formatting before it can be accepted as a page in the main encyclopedia, e.g. the references need formatting so that people can tell what information came from which source, guidance can be found in the manual of style. I would recommend you use WP:Articles for creation for your first article, which will involve an experienced editor reviewing your article for formatting, Notability and content before being moved into the encyclopaedia. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:25, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hello, Jazzchic, and welcome to the Teahouse. You have created a draft in your sandbox User:Jazzchic/sandbox. I have added a header which allows you to submit it for review when it is ready: but please don't do that yet. Please have a good look at your first article and referencing for beginners. It looks as if you have written from what you know: I'm afraid that Wikipedia is not the slightest bit interested in what you know (or what I know, or what any random person on the internet knows): it is only interested in what has been published in reliable sources, independent of the subject. I haven't looked at your references (you haven't formatted them to make it easy) but it looks to me as if they are routine announcements, and so do not contribute to notability - and unless you can find the references that will establish notability, your draft will never be accepted. I notice that this draft is the only thing you have edited on Wikipedia. Apart from saying that this is like "I'm new to building, and I'm going to start by building a house" - it's really, really, hard for a new editor to create an article - I want to ask whether you have some connection with Frazier. If you do, you have at the very least a conflict of interest in writing about him. If you are in any way employed or paid to publicise him, then you are a paid editor, and are required to make a formal declaration of that. And if you are Frazier, then please know that autobiography is strongly discouraged. If the draft is accepted as an article, it will not belong to Frazier, will not be controlled by him or his associates, and it will not necessarily say what he says or wants to say about himself. --ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Going forward: Improve the draft (refs for all facts, etc.); submit to Articles for Creation for review; being processed by a reviewer can be in days, weeks, or (sadly) months, as there are thousands of drafts; if Declined, try to fix it; if accepted, it becomes an article that anyone can subsequently edit. Lastly, there is a lag period of up to months between being accepted and being 'found' by a search engine such as Google. P.S. "Publish changes" means save, not 'published.' David notMD (talk) 17:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft:Warina Hussain

I would like to request what might be a fourth or fifth opinion, on the notability of Draft:Warina Hussain. Warina Hussain is currently a redirect to Loveyatri, but User:LearnIndology thinks that she passes acting notability and should have her own article. User:Onel5969 and User:GSS disagree. LearnIndology has provided a long explanation on the draft talk page at Draft talk:Warina Hussain why he thinks that she is notable. I would like to try to be neutral, and would like to know whether there is another experienced editor who will recommend accepting the draft, or whether it is too soon and he should wait until she acts in another major movie. Robert McClenon (talk) 07:49, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Robert McClenon, nicely said. Onel5969 ^{TT me} 13:35, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Another reviewer declined the draft. Robert McClenon (talk) 18:34, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

LaTeX not rendering

So, I've noticed that the LaTeX doesn't render anymore when reading, but it does render when using visual editor. Why is that? Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 15:31, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Is there a specific article that you're having an issue with, or does this occur on all articles? 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:46, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@86.23.109.101 It occurs on all articles (for example, Angle). Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thingy-1234 does it work if you open the page in an incognito window or log out? Have you recently changed anything in your account preferences, browser or computer/phone? 86.23.109.101 (talk) 19:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@86.23.109.101 My school doesn't let me go into incognito mode. I'll try logging out. Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 19:50, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hm, it does work. I'll look at my preferences. Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 19:52, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thingy-1234 Have you recently changed anything in the maths section in Preferences → Appearance → Details? 86.23.109.101 (talk) 19:55, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Fixed it, thanks! Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 19:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Thingy-1234: This might be strange, but does anything happen when you adjust your browser's zoom level? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Tenryuu Doesn't seem like it. Thingy-1234 (talk | contribs) 18:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Isn't It Prohibited For Editors To Create Articles They Are Associated To?

I'd like an admin to have a look at the discussion I am having on Carlton K. Mack. Megtetg34 (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2021 (UTC) Megtetg34 (talk) 18:00, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Conflict of interest editing is very strongly discouraged, and often has other issues that are against policy (e.g. using Wikipedia for promotion) but technically it isn't against policy to edit pages on things you are associated with. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) Hi Megtetg34. Answering your headline, technically, no, it isn't. The conflict of interest guideline actually only has "strong" recommendations as to what editors with a COI should and should not do. The only enforceable related policy in the area we have is WP:PAID (in that regard, please note the template series {{uw-paid1}}, {{uw-paid2}} and escalating as a method of putting the requirements into practice), which is now incorporated into the COI guideline. However, the language in the body of the COI guideline has evolved to almost sound like prohibitions and enforceable strictures; many users describe and refer to these recommendations as having teeth, and in my view, the way we treat the guideline and the language in the interior should result in a change to its introductory language and status, but that has yet to happen.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 18:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks guys. I was under the impression that there was zero tolerance on editing like that, but I understand. Thank sagain. Megtetg34 (talk) 20:03, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox

Hello, I was curious as to whether other people can my sandbox without me submitting it for review, thanks Aiden LaBonne (talk) 19:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC) Aiden LaBonne (talk) 19:37, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Memerman69: Hello Aiden LaBonne and Welcome to the Teahouse. Yes, other people can see what is in there (thats why the save button is labeled "publish changes"). However, they won't normally edit the content, unless they have a good reason. Victor Schmidt (talk) 19:47, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

@Memerman69: Just to be clear, every page here is public, and all previous versions of pages are also public, anyone can look in the page history and find out what used to be on the page. If you have accidentally added something to that page that you did not intend to be public please use WP:Requests for oversight to get it removed from the public record. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

You can also request deletion of the page, Memerman69 (see WP:U1). This will mean that no one, apart from administrators, will be able to see it or its history. Oversight, mentioned in the comment above, has the additional effect of hiding deleted content even from administrators. Cordless Larry (talk) 20:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

1968 NAIA football season

I want to enter the 1968 W-L records for the Northwest Conference onto this page(https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1968_NAIA_football_season), but do not entirely understand how to do it by looking at this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=1968_NAIA_football_season&action=edit&section=1

Can you help?

Thank you very much. 75.164.176.76 (talk) 20:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You would first create a template such as Template:1968 Northwest Conference football standings and then add it to 1968 NAIA football season. Checking out some of the other templates might be helpful. Or, you could ask for assistance at the article's talk page - Talk:1968 NAIA football season - and provide a reliable source for the records. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:30, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

It might also be helpful to check out Help:A quick guide to templates and Help:Templates. Cordless Larry (talk) 21:34, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Creating a bio wikipeida page

How do i go about creating a bio page for my director? How much does it cost? How much does it cost to have an author to create his page? 23.126.192.51 (talk) 14:08, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Before doing anything though you should check that your director meets Wikipedia's guidelines for WP:Notability, i.e. they must have been covered in depth in reliable sources that are independent of the subject, if the required sourcing does not exist the article will simply be deleted. after that you should read the advice at WP:Conflict of interest to understand how to write an article when you have a conflict of interest with the person you are writing about. If you believe the person meets our inclusion criteria and that you can write an article that would not be advertising or promotion I would recommend that you use the WP:Articles for creation process which will involve another editor reviewing your draft reviewed before being added to the encyclopaedia. There is no fee or charge for submitting an article, everyone here is a volunteer freely donating their time and the servers are funded entirely through charitable donations. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:18, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

There are people who offer to create articles for pay, but there is no guarantee (and they are not allowed to offer their services through/at Wikipedia). David notMD (talk) 15:20, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

There are, but it's a good idea to have a little bit of knowledge about our policies before deciding to go that way. If the person would clearly fail our notability guidelines there is no point asking a paid editing company to write an article, as it'll be pretty much instantly deleted as WP:A7 or WP:G11 as soon as it is created. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 15:48, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

If they aren't notable, don't. If they are notable, it is free, however you will want to read the conflict of interest page (which IP ending in 109.101 linked above) as from what you stated it seems like you have a conflict of interest. If you are being paid by your director to create the page, please state it on your userpage. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:24, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Note also that if Wikipedia does have an article about your director (whoever writes it) the article will not belong to him, neither he nor you will control its content, and it should be based entirly on what sources wholly unconnected with him have published about him (in reliable places) whether he likes what they say about him or not. See An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. --ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Same applies if your director is a her or a them. David notMD (talk) 16:38, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

In general, I'd recommend against hiring a paid editor. The problem is that while there are editors who follow our policies when creating articles for pay, many that you will find do not and instead create articles against Wikipedia's policies. In those cases there is a very real risk that the article will be deleted and you'll lose any money that you have paid. If it was possible to tell which was which things would be different, but my experience has been that the ones who do not follow policies will claim that they do, making it very hard to know if you are hiring someone who is above board. You are much better off following the advice above and creating the article yourself - so long as you are open about your conflict of interest and create it as a draft through articles for creation, it is possible for you to do so within policy. That said, it is not possible to create an article yourself (or through a paid editor) unless you can show that there is considerable indepenedent coverage of your director in independent sources. YOu will be looking for multiple newpaper articles, for example, which discuss the director in depth. - Bilby (talk) 21:58, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Review my Article : Maceo Frost

Hi Wikipedians, I have submitted my article(draft) for review, which is being in the 'review' status for three days. When I submitted for the first time, it got reviewed the same day. But, I also know that Reviewers does not follow an order for review, and do review articles randomly. The thing here his, I just need to know weather my article is eligible for a Wikipedia Page. I would also like to know the errors I have made (if any) and weather my article has enough and reliable sources. Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC) Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: I believe that any article is eligible if it meets the requirements. But if you read the reason why your article got declined at AfC, you may check your talkpage. ~Wizdzy 00:29, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Wiz Thank you for your help, I myself too looking forward for the article's review!!. Thanks!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:35, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: I note this mention that you were being paid to write an article about an (unspecified) company, and invitation to see the declaration on your user page but lack of any such declaration on your user page. Are you also being paid to create an article about Maceo Frost? -- Hoary (talk) 00:38, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Hoary, Hi, I had a contract earlier, but due to some suggestions of Wikipedians, I have dropped that idea, and have removed that I was being pad to edit. Also, I am not related to the person ( Maceo Frost) in any kind, and I am not being paid to create an article for him. Thanks!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 00:51, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

You resubmitted Draft:Maceo Frost without having made major changes since it was declined. While it may not be reviewed by the same reviewer, it may be declined for the same reasons as before. David notMD (talk) 01:06, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Hi Jocelin Andrea. Thank you for further clarifying things. Please try and understand, however, that the fact that you once seem to have been willing to create an article about Frost for some kind of payment might still make some others suspicious of your motivation. They might still feel that you've got an WP:APPARENTCOI. So, the best thing for you to do would be to continue to work on the draft, try to address the issues raised by the AfC reviewer who declined it, and then submit it for another review when you think it's ready. You can also ask for additional assistance at WP:AFCHELP if you want. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:08, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

CORRECTION: The now abandoned article-for-pay project was about an entirely different topic (Speedy deleted, so not seen in her contribution history) - not Frost. That said, most of the refs are about Frost's work; too few (if any?) are about Frost. David notMD (talk) 01:11, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@David notMD, but I thought they were good references as he has directed them, and a short summary of him has been mentioned in the references. Anyways, please do let me know how to submit it to a any other reviewer as said byyou. Thanks!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Marchjuly, Thanks for the information!! But the previous reviewer has only mentioned that he lacks notability and need more references for him. So, I have only added a few (10-12) references about him. Thanks!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:17, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Specifically, refs 1, 3-9, 20-23 mention Frost by name, but are not about him. These can stay, but do not count toward establishing Wikipedia notability. As submitted, any reviewer can chose to review, including the reviewer who declined it the first time. David notMD (talk) 01:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help @David notMD, let us see what happens to the article...! Meanwhile, you have a good username!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 01:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: please carefully review your draft article and correct all typos and grammar errors. I read over your draft and saw that you wrote african, when it should be African, with a capital A. Several times you have no space after comas and periods, and one sentence ends with two periods. There are places where you mention what I assume to be an award title, but none of the words are capitalized, so I didn't know if you were giving the name of an award, or just writing a confusing sentence.

We all make typing mistakes, but numerous typos make your draft appear unprofessional. You may have delibertly added typos to show that you are not being paid to write the article, but I would suggest that you strive to make a good first impression on all future reviewers by providing them with an easy to read article.

Best wishes on your future editing and writing. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:27, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you Karenthewriter for pointing out the typos in my article!! This is a really great help indeed. Well, the typing issues are there cause that's my first article! And, I am not being paid to write, please understand me. Thanks!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 04:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Karenthewriter, please do check my article for any Typing or Grammatical errors now if possible. It would be a great help if you do this. Thanks in advance!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 04:47, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: I have done some editing to correct grammar mistakes to try to improve the article draft. I am confused by your statement that the typing issues are because this is your first article. You originally had a contract to write an article on another subject, so you must have some writing experience, or you would not have been hired. Just remember that the writing rules for a Wikipedia article are not much different than the ones you followed when writing reports for school work, or when writing for print publications. Always read your draft at least twice to check for errors before submitting for review. Karenthewriter (talk) 07:12, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Karenthewriter, Thanks for editing my article!!! Now this looks great. This is a real good work indeed. Thanks for your help!!! Jocelin Andrea (talk) 10:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Jocelin Andrea: please don't become complacent, for I believe you need to do a great deal of work to make your draft manuscript show that Mr. Frost is notable enough for a Wikipedia article. Several of your references are written in a foreign language, and are of no help to anyone who can only read English. Many references just indicate that the documentaries exist, and not that they are important. I Googled Maceo Frost and found websites I've never heard of, but no printed articles about him. (Notable people tend to have articles written about them.)

Find good references to show that the awards Frost won are important ones, and not ones given by an obscure group. Find references that indicate the film festivals that showed his documentaries are well regarded. How important is the African singer that Frost did a video for? It will likely be many months before your draft is reviewed a second time, so spend those months working to improve your work. One reviewer did not believe Mr. Frost was notable. What are you doing to make your article show that he is important? Karenthewriter (talk) 23:52, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Please see WP:OVERCOME and WP:ARTN for reference, but drafts aren't generally declined because of typos, grammar, punctuation or formatting errors. A beautifully written and perfectly formatted draft may still be declined if the AfC reviewer feels the subject doesn't meet WP:N. So, if would be better to focus on finding better sources which show that Frost has received the WP:SIGCOV required by WP:BIO since that seems to be the main reason why your draft was declined. If you've got more specific questions about this, you can try asking at WP:AFCHELP or maybe even Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers. -- Marchjuly (talk) 05:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

update a profile

How can my profile be updated to include a recent award my profile is here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doris_de_Pont I was awarded an Auckland Museum Medal in 2019 as recognition for achievements to the public service of Auckland Museum. the updated information is here https://www.aucklandmuseum.com/media/media-releases/2020/museum-medals-2019?fbclid=IwAR1NZoIvnrTNpCKz8SQB5PQJDTeLR6-qb2O7p_Q5vVqLQbT1Mk5klsFGSEQ

}} 151.210.145.195 (talk) 00:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

In order to have a profile, you need an account first.

Creame puff 01:18, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for asking. You're welcome to make suggestions for changes such as this (to your article, rather than "profile") on Talk:Doris de Pont. (I think that Creamepuff is talking about a "user page".) -- Hoary (talk) 01:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Brand new to Wikipedia

All, I'm brand new to the platform, and I jumped in with a few edits, but I have absolutely no idea if they are helpful or not. Is there any sort of feedback system to explain if these changes were useful?

Thank you so much, John NerdOfAllTrades42 (talk) 18:53, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

There isn't necessarily a feedback system besides the thanks button. I will take a look at your recent contributions and let you know if they are helpful! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

NerdOfAllTrades42 I have taken a look at all of your contributions and they all seem to be very helpful. If you would like to continue copy-editing more articles then you might want to take a look at WP:WikiProject_Guild_of_Copy_Editors Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 19:02, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

But if you do copy-edit articles that are tagged as needing copy-editing, please be careful not to add language errors – this edit added multiple errors and looks like it was made using an automated tool for grammar checking, without looking carefully at the suggestions made by the tool. Tools like Grammarly must be used very carefully, since most of the things they flag as possible errors are not errors at at all. --bonadea contributions talk 06:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you, I really appreciate the feedback! NerdOfAllTrades42 (talk)

Improving an Article / Reliable Source help

Hello. My entry was declined and I am having a difficult time improving it. Here is the link and note I received. Any help is greatly appreciated and I thank you for your time. I have updated the sources but perhaps I need to do more? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Postindustrial_(media) Comment: Sources are all self-published or too close related to the Subject, please see Wikipedia:Notability (media) CommanderWaterford (talk) 19:28, 13 February 2021 Dawnpalmyra (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC) Dawnpalmyra (talk) 13:02, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey Dawnpalmyra, and welcome to the Teahouse. I see a few issues still:

There seem to be a few things that are in the lead section but not in the body of the article. You should try to make it so the lead is a summary of the body.
In the history section, the sources are used wrongly. The WPR source does not mention Postindustrial at all, so it cannot be used to say something about it. The citation to Postindustrial itself does not actually say what it is cited for; and if you cite the subject of the article, you should always present it as a statement from the subject and not the objective truth.
In the content section, the part about the coverage area seems wrong. In the lead it says the coverage area is the rust belt and appalachia, and that is also what Postindustrial says they mean by "Postindustrial America" in the article you cited in the history section.
Also in the content section, you use a source in an inappropriate way: the Postindustrial article that you cite is an example of what you're talking about, but what you should cite is an independent source that says Postindustrial writes such articles.
Finally, in the last section there is an external link in the text. Either remove it or move the link to the "External links" section where it belongs.

I hope this helps. 86.89.77.70 (talk) 23:21, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Also note that Dawnpalmyra is one of the principals behind the organization, and therefore has a conflict of interest with respect to the article, which needs to be declared.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Help - getting my 4months+ submission reviewed

Hello to all! I have submitted last 1st december my submission on IADS following some works I did on department stores: Draft:International_Association_of_Department_Stores The same day, 1 user made a review and declined the submission, however I carefully followed his comments and significantly reviewed the submission according to his guidelines. I have been patiently waiting for a review until last March, and another reviewer made some comments that I followed. This is my first submission, won't be my last but before moving forward I would appreciate getting a review of this one. I do believe that it is now fit and follows all wikipedia rules. I am not compensated whatsoever for submitting this proposal (just in case). Thank you for your help! --Perchsquirell (talk) 11:44, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

The submissions are in pool. Some reviewers concentrate om topic areas, others omn oldest, others on news drafts. It is not a queue per se Fiddle Faddle 12:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

thank you Fiddle actually the reason why I am asking is that when I reverted to the first reviewer, he advised me to look for a new one here --Perchsquirell (talk) 13:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Perchsquirell they have a point, but, generally, you are at the whim and will of reviewers.You may well prompt/g=have already prompted a review, though Fiddle Faddle 13:40, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Perchsquirell: Try reading WP:NPOV for details. ~Wizdzy 12:01, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

thank you Wiz but actually, I have been reviewing this part a lot according to previous comments. Unless it is a question of command of English, there are no opinions stated in the text (I have removed all parts and all the information provided is backed by references) and I present also limitations on the topic and other opinions. If it is the way it is written that is problematic, can you orientate me or let me know which part is an issue? Thakn you --Perchsquirell (talk) 13:00, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Perchsquirrel: There's nothing wrong with the article in my opinion. I just saw the reasoning. ~Wizdzy 13:03, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

The comment mentioning NPOV does not apply to the current version of the draft, @Wizdzy:. It is the reason why the draft was declined back in December, but it has been substantially rewritten since then. If you want to check the differences between the way the draft read when it was declined and the way it reads today, you can always check the page's history. I agree with you that the draft as currently written is pretty neutrally written. --bonadea contributions talk 07:11, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I just added a new article in the Esperanto Vikipedio.

I just added a new article in the Esperanto Vikipedio. How do I get it listed in all the other Wikipedias?

The subject is Intertel - the HIGH IQ society. EoGuy (talk) 04:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

EoGuy, assuming that your article is reviewed and accepted at the Esperanto Vikipedio, you will need to translate it into the different languages according to their respective Wikipedias' translation and article creation standards.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi EoGuy, I have added it to the Wikidata entry for the topic and it will now appear at the other Wikipedias that have an article. You can see it in the list of languages at Intertel. StarryGrandma (talk) 06:33, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Like [9], [10] Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 08:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Request edit for COI and changes address issues highlighted in template message.

Hello,

I have made an edit request on this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monkey_Kingdom_(production_company), the changes I believe address the two template messages, one that says 'contains content that is written like an advertisement.' and another that says 'may contain wording that promotes the subject through exaggeration of unnoteworthy facts.' I removed any exaggerated language in the about section and then updated the shows made and awards won using citations in the dedicated section of the page.

I think my mistake was making the changes before disclosing COI and instead of putting in an initial edit request I made edits directly onto the page. I had never edited a page like this before as I am new and have only done copy editing for tone or spelling and grammar. I do believe the changes I have suggested remove the promotional language, exaggeration and unnoteworthy facts - does this still require an edit request? Or is there another way?

Thanks for any guidance or advise! FrancescaAssistantProducer (talk) 09:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Need to go live with a draft

Hi, may I please ask for some help moving this page from draft to live? I thought hitting publish would publish it live, but it doesn't seem to work. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Sensor_Open_Systems_Architecture_(SOSA%E2%84%A2) Shotacoffey (talk) 03:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Shotacoffey: The "publish" button works more like a "save" button, while Draft:Sensor Open Systems Architecture (SOSA™) is like the save location of the content. I've added an actual submission button for you when you're ready for a reviewer to check. However, your article is unlikely to pass review because it is not written in a neutral point of view and the sources do not demonstrate notability of the subject. The prose also needs to be rewritten; its currently too vague and confusing for the common reader. Please read WP:YFA for more information about article creation. Thanks. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

All content in Background needs to be connected to citations. Wikipedia content needs to be verified. David notMD (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Article on worm charming

The article states: The earliest place to practice worm charming was in London, which is today in the UK. London was always in the same place, it has not moved from its position on the Thames in England. to imply that it has somehow moved is written English at its worst. 2A02:C7F:E819:FF00:F4F0:CBBE:598D:4E5D (talk) 09:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The UK has not always existed, which is what that wording is suggesting. However, if you feel that idea can be expressed differently, you are welcome to edit the article, or bring up your concerns on the article talk page, Talk:Worm charming. 331dot (talk) 09:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

A different problem is that there is no reference to validate worm charming originating in London. That means the sentence should be removed from the lead unless a ref is provided. David notMD (talk) 09:44, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I removed it – I have been trying to find a source for the claim, and have failed. --bonadea contributions talk 09:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Biography on Wikipedia

Hello! I don't understand why I can not have my article about my biography on the Wikipedia. What am I doing wrong? please help me to find the solution!. Thank you. all the best, Helena Helenasul (talk) 12:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Helenasul Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that you have a common misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is. It is not a place like social media where people tell the world about themselves. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia which has articles about people, typically written by independent editors that take note of a subject in independent reliable sources and choose on their own to write about it. Those articles should summarize what those independent reliable sources say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable person(there are also more specific criteria for many fields, such as musicians). Wikipedia is not interested in what someone wants to say about themselves, only in what others say about them. It is usually very difficult for someone to write about themselves in the manner required by Wikipedia; in essence you would need to forget everything you know about yourself and only write based on the content of independent sources. Most people cannot do that. People also naturally write favorably about themselves, which is why autobiographical articles are discouraged.

Lastly, a Wikipedia article about yourself is not necessarily a good thing. There are good reasons to not want one. 331dot (talk) 12:08, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Helenasul, on your user talk page, you're told that "the page seemed to be unambiguous advertising which only promoted a company, group, product, service, person, or point of view and would need to have been fundamentally rewritten in order to become encyclopedic". Another reason for deletion is that the deleted draft was unreferenced. (Compare, say, the article Maurizio Pollini: the reader is provided with references for what is said.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Article rejected

I am trying to create an article about an important old school in Lebanon. My article is getting rejected with the following message:

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

what should I do to have the article accepted? Makatra (talk) 13:21, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Makatra Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Your draft was only declined, not rejected. Rejection would mean the draft cannot be reconsidered. Your draft does little more than tell of the existence of the school. Wikipedia articles must do more, they must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the school, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. The fact that the draft was only declined means that the reviewer thinks that is at least possible to do. Please see Your First Article for more information. 331dot (talk) 13:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your welcome

I addressed this request to @User:Xezbeth but have had no response? Can you do something about this? Thank you {CAlexander783 (talk) 13:32, 14 April 2021 (UTC)}

CAlexander783, please read WP:BUSY. max20 characters 🇺🇸 14:57, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Request to investigate omission please

Good afternoon @User:Xezbeth I noticed when reading Thandie Newtons Wikipedia article that you were a contributor. I have recently read her cover story in this months Vogue UK, and I noticed the racial bias she had faced in Hollywood from female producers nontheless- one in particular remarked that black actresses did not play University graduates. I deduce from your profile that apart from being a Wikipedia administrator you are also an inclusivist and pro-women. I would like to request you to investigate why the roles that Angelique Rockas [ https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Angelique_Rockas ](an artistic inclusivist , and some sort of pioneer) has acted with her own company Internationalist Theatre [5] are not even listed in the main space article, even though there are some production photographs. I noticed that in the Wikipedia article of another actor of South African descent Paul Herzberg , a contributor provided his Spotlight page as a record of his performances . I tracked down Ms Rockas `s Spotlight page [ https://www.spotlight.com/0938-4538-5216 ] and it would be beneficial don`t you think if you as an administrator could find the time to investigate omission and possibly ask someone to complete the page. Thank you . Keep safe {CAlexander783 (talk) 13:34, 12 April 2021 (UTC)}

That is a lot of words, and not clear what your request is, nor why posted here at Teahouse (in addition to Xezbeth's Talk page). If you believe content should be added to Angelique Rockas, then either do it or suggest it on the Talk page of that article. P.S. 'Sign' your comments by typing four of ~ at the end. David notMD (talk) 15:10, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

How to debate RfD result?

Is there a parallel of WP:Deletion Review with redirects? NotReallySoroka (talk) 15:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: Deletion review applies to any deletion coming from a speedy delete or discussion including Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion RudolfRed (talk) 16:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Are there any tools to check our own PROD stats similar to AFD stats

I am looking for a tool that can help me know my PROD success. Like we have one for AFD [11]. Does any such tool exists? Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Nomadicghumakkad: If you've been nominating things for PROD via Twinkle you can set it to track both CSDs and PRODs for you. That would only help going forwards, however. I don't know if there's a script someone has that will assess past stats Nosebagbear (talk) 16:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey, thanks for this tip. Yes, I use twinkle. Will check how to set this up! Nomadicghumakkad (talk) 16:56, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Review of a page to go live from draft mode

Colleagues: I sincerely appreciate your review of this page which is in the draft mode so it can go live. THANK YOU! https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:The_Neurosurgical_Atlas Acohenmd (talk) 12:45, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Acohenmd Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You have submitted the draft for review. As noted on your draft, this could take months, you will need to be patient. 331dot (talk) 13:01, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Acohenmd, am I right in supposing that you are the Dr Cohen who produced this atlas? (Also, perhaps because I never even started on the road to becoming an MD, I'm surprised to learn that neurosurgery is a matter of "unspoken secrets".) -- Hoary (talk) 13:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

All refs need fixing. David notMD (talk) 13:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

And I REALLY DOUBT that Dr. Cohen took that photo of Dr. Cohen. David notMD (talk) 13:22, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Acohenmd I would clarify that typically the rights to a photo belong to the photographer, not the subject, unless you have a contract or other legal agreement assigning you the rights to images of you. 331dot (talk) 13:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Can you please advise what needs to be fixed in the references? The dates are in the references. Appreciate your help. I have been assigned the rights for this image. Do I need to do anything to move these forward. Thank you

Acohenmd I fixed all the refs (month before year) and turned duplication of refs into repeated uses of those refs. And removed the "unspoken secrets" sentence. Because. David notMD (talk) 15:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Acohenmd I recommend removing the photo of Dr. Cohen from the draft. Mentioning him by name as the founder is sufficient. The topic of the draft is the association, not him. David notMD (talk) 17:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Draft tone - Help

Hello

I hope you're fine. Anyone here with experience to help in this draft. The tone must be formal and encyclopedic.

Thanks Art&football (talk) 15:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

STATUS: Declined four times. David notMD (talk) 17:42, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Can you help me. I accidentally put a link instead of a citation in a botulism page. Can you help me remove the link?

Psyduckwet (talk) 18:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Done. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:58, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Who can write an article/page?

Would an unpaid person who services on the Board of Directors of a non-profit organization be an inappropriate person to write an article about the organization? Russell Moxie (talk) 19:01, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Russell Moxie I would first direct you to the conflict of interest policy as I think it might answer your question. In short, it is not forbidden for someone to write such an article, but there are several pitfalls involved. First, the organization must be shown with sigificant coverage in independent reliable sources that have chosen on their own to write about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable organization. Independent reliable sources does not include press releases, the organization website, interviews with organization personnel, brief mentions, announcements of routine activities, or other primary sources. If the organization is notable, you would need to set aside everything you know about the organization and only write based on the content of those sources, summarizing them. Most people in what I assume is your position have great difficulty doing that. If you truly feel that you can do these things, you should create and submit a draft at Articles for Creation. I might suggest that you read Your First Article and use the new user tutorial first. 331dot (talk) 19:06, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Amarquezwheeler (talk) 19:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

WHY WAS THE BELOW REJECTED SINCE REFERENCE WERE SUPPLIED TO SUPPORT THE SUBJECT?

<Copyright violation removed, please do not hat this in the future but remove immedately, with extreme prejudice, and ask for revdeletion--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 19:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)>

Zanesville320 (talk) 17:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

The left you a note for why it was rejected, specifically to see Help:Referencing for beginners and learn how to do references. He iro 17:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Your draft User:Zanesville320/sandbox was Declined and then Rejected because the company's own website cannot be used as a reference to establish notability. David notMD (talk) 17:46, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Help me to improve my first draft ever

I have submitted a Draft and I want to know if there are more ways to improve it. Like I have seen radio links and stuff on other pages. Thank you! Soundsfromwater (talk) 19:00, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Draft:Austen (musician), submitted five days ago. Was Speedy deletion tagged and that was removed. David notMD (talk) 19:16, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

What matters in whether a draft is accepted or not really comes down to two things: 1) the quality of the references (are they all reliable and containing significant coverage of the subject, and most of them independent of the subject); and 2) the quality of the text: is it neutral, encyclopaedic in tone, and entirely based on what people unconnected with the subject have published about the subject. Anything else (eg lists of tracks, albums, or gigs, and external links, pictures, infoboxes) is a "nice to have" which will not affect whether the draft is accepted or not. --ColinFine (talk) 20:26, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

PROBLEM with sorting numbers in charts

Can you help to SOLVE PROBLEM with wrong sorting numbers in charts.

Problem description:

Chart link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E-segment#Sales_figures_in_Europe

If you try to sort numbers by years, smaller numbers (with 3 digits) come first.

Example: If we try to sort 2013. year, Maserati with number 339 come first?! Why? (I understand that 339 is bigger then 107,307 because of "," comma. But why this is not happen in A-segment to D-segment)

Can you solve this problem?

Thank you

P.S.

I place good chart example and problem chart examples in my sandbox (we could talk there if you want):

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:New_Heaven_%26_New_Earth/sandbox&oldid=1017763958 New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 14:19, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

There's a SPACE character between the pipe and the number e.g | 339 Which means the table is sorting by the SPACE, then the 3, because (in computer terms) SPACE is alphabetically before everything that's why (SPACE)339 gets sorted to the top. - X201 (talk) 14:53, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi New Heaven & New Earth, welcome to the Teahouse. Leading spaces are ignored so the above reply is wrong. 339 didn't come first before, it came last, so I don't quite understand your post. I added data-sort-type=number | in the column header to specify numerical sorting per Help:Sorting#Forcing a column to have a particular data type, so 339 does come first now.[12] I don't know whether VisualEditor can do it. I use the source editor. If no data-sort-type is specified then it depends on circumstances wehther the software chooses numerical sorting. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you friends for helping, it means a lot to me (I am trying all day to solve this problem with no success).

For X201 in chart: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:New_Heaven_%26_New_Earth/sandbox&oldid=1017763958#F-segment_=_PROBLEM there is no SPACE to make problem, but as you can see any column from 2013 to 2017 does not sort properly.

For PrimeHunter I quote your sentence: "339 didn't come first before, it came last, so I don't quite understand your post." When you click 2013. year in before 339 come first (it should be last not first). So there is a problem. (that is what I see)

But, your solution of added code data-sort-type=number | solve this problem.

Thank you very much

God bless you

New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 18:20, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@New Heaven & New Earth: I referred to clicking once to sort in increasing order. Maybe you are talking about clicking twice to get decreasing order. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:13, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Yes! We understand each other now. And, without your help with adding code data-sort-type=number | other charts cannot proper sort numbers.

I still don't know why A-segment chart can proper sort numbers without adding code, and in other charts like before we must add code data-sort-type=number |.

If we know the cause of problem we can avoid future problems.

I saw the same problem on page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J-segment

I will correct that page in future with your code.

I am very grateful for your help.

May God keep you live, healthy and happy in this time of trouble

New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 20:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@New Heaven & New Earth: Help:Sorting#Configuring the sorting says: "By default, the system tries to guess the data type in each column. It does this by looking at the first five rows and evaluating their contents."

Before the only years with numbers in all the first five rows were 2019 and 2020 so those two years sorted numerically. It's often best to add the wanted data-sort-type= anyway in case something changes later. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

(e/c) @New Heaven & New Earth: Basically it comes down to the fact that the wiki software can be a bit stupid. The software can either sort entries alphabetically or numerically, and when you make a table the software tries to figure out which method to use. It gets it right most of the time, but occasionally it'll sort a list of numbers alphabetically, in which case it lists all the numbers starting with 1 first, regardless of the number of digits, then all the numbers starting with 2 etc. Sometimes it gets really confused and tries to sort some cells alphabetically and some cells numerically in the same column, which results in the problem you noticed where you get a list that mostly sorts properly but which has a few random numbers that just get added to the start or end out of place (because the software thinks they're text, not numbers). This is particularly a problem with lists that contain things like references or notes, so individual cells contain both numbers and text. data-sort-type=number |. tells the software the data is numbers and should be sorted numerically in ascending order. Help:Sorting contains more information on setting up tables so they sort properly. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:09, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you PrimeHunter and User:86.23.109.101 you are wonderful friends.

Without your explanations I wouldn't be able to understand why Wikipedia software sorts numbers randomly.

Your answers are invaluable and will surely help others who are facing with a similar problem. (these answers should be on the Q&A list)

There is so much to learn and I hope that we will talk again in future.

God bless you friends

New Heaven & New Earth (talk) 22:05, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

New WikiProject

Can I make my own WikiProject? 64.121.103.144 (talk) 00:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

This should help Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 00:22, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Also you're not supposed to edit Template:WikiProject directly, as it says in the banner at the top, you're supposed to copy it to a new page. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 00:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I've substituted the template onto the page and reverted your edits to the template, please make any further edits to Draft:Wikipedia:WikiProject SpaceX directly. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 00:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

can you have multiple accounts

hello i was wondering if it was possible to create a second wiki account for a friend? i suppose i could go over to her house, but with covid-18 corn teens that makes it difficult. basically how can i get her an account so she can edit wikipedia 162.245.178.141 (talk) 22:25, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. I don't quite understand what you are asking. Every editor is encouraged (but not required) to create an account, which is personal to them and should not be shared with other editors. They may log in to that account as many times and in as many places as they wish. It is permitted in certain circumstances for an editor to use more than one account (see WP:VALIDALT), but no account should ever be shared by several people.

It occurs to me that you might be thinking, as some people do, that there is some connection between the name of an account and the articles which may be edited by that account: this is not so. With few exceptions, any editor (whether logged in or not) may edit any page.

Does this answer your question? --ColinFine (talk) 22:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

In summary, the answer to your question would be a “yes” insofar as you have read WP:LEGITSOCK and are ready to follow the instructions. But the answer to the content of your question is a no, if your friend wants to become an editor here all you need to is to mail her the methods, all of which from start to finish wouldn’t take a quarter of an hour. Celestina007 (talk) 23:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

For security reasons, it is strictly forbidden for any person to share the password of a Wikipedia account with any other person. If any such sharing is discovered, all of the involved accounts will be blocked indefinitely. My wife and I have been married for 39 years and we share everything. But she does not know my Wikipedia password. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Jay shah is nagar vania

Omkar omkar (talk) 15:34, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Omkar omkar: What language are you speaking in? This is the English Wikipedia.

Creame puff 15:35, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@Omkar omkar: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to add a claim to a Wikipedia article about a person's caste or ethnicity, you must have independent sources showing that it is information that might be relevant for the person. Caste is a sensitive topic, and deeply personal to many people, and so there are particularly high requirements for reliable sources when it comes to that. In most cases, it is best not to include such information at all, unless it is clearly particularly relevant for the person. Regards, --bonadea contributions talk 15:43, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Appears to have been indef blocked. MEisSCAMMER^{(talk)^(contribs)} 16:40, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

For the record, looks like attempted vandalism at Jay Shah (an Indian politician). Java Hurricane 04:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Credible source question

Why is the Indian Census website or domain .in blocked? It seems like a credible source to put as anyone who knows about credibility only from one class Whatergun110 (talk) 21:22, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

(I added a section title). David notMD (talk) 21:53, 12 April 2021 (UTC)

@Whatergun110: As eviddent from your logs, you tried to add a link to census2011.co.in, which is not published by the indian government, but rather by a private entity, as evident by the url saying .co.in rather than .gov. It will not get unblacklisted, please use this (grabbed from here) instead. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 05:56, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Just chiming in here, but I took a look at these sites whilst doing some random editing the other week. The problem with the official Indian census site is that it's horrible to use. All the actual data appears to be in Excel files that you have to download and pick through to find the bit you want. The census2011.co.in have done all that, and presented everything in a easy-to-use (and link to) form. So they're not just scraping the official site, they're essentially a secondary source (which is what we're supposed to use, isn't it?). If the Indian government presented their census in an even tolerably accessible way, we could (and should) use their site. But as it stands there's no way to get at the stuff in there without a ton of OR. Chuntuk (talk) 09:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I need somebody to read two of my recent articles

Hi everyone! I've been recently active working in two articles on Argentinian towns, which are San Martín de los Andes and Puelches, La Pampa. I'm an experienced editor, so I kinda know my way about editing on wiki. The problem is that I'm not a native English speaker, so I'd appreciate if somebody who knows the language at a very good level could read them and correct them. Grammar, punctuation and such. I came here because I don't wanna overload the Guild of copyeditors (also not planning to take to GA status or such).

I'd apprectiate your help. Many thanks!--Gunt50 (talk) 19:37, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Russell Moxie (talk) 19:52, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

i am going to be honest, those are well written and i recommend taking them to featured status162.245.178.141 (talk) 22:31, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Current ratings are Start-class and Stub-class, respectively. In my opinion, they are already better than that. Perhaps any editor who does a once-over for English will be willing to upgrade. However, I would not take the suggestion of IP editor 162 seriously, as has been editing only five months, and has never participated in a GA or FA. David notMD (talk) 22:54, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I was thinking they are better than their current raitings. However I guess it's up to the WikiProject Argentina to judge which is the current class for both of them, as they have their own scale. From my standpoint, they don't meet the criteria for GA or such, having done some myself. Now I need somebody with a better level of English to read them, so I can be sure they're okay.--Gunt50 (talk) 10:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Patera Building article

The Patera Building article has a proposed deletion notice due to lack of links to other parts of Wikipedia. The building is of historic importance. It is the subject of a listing application to Historic England. The article is work in progress. I intend to edit to include photos and links to Mark Whitby, Tony Hunt Michael Hopkins, 20th Century Society, Historic England London Dockland Development Corporation, Canary Wharf, and others. I am new to this. Please help with positive suggestions. Please let me know how to remove proposed deletion notice - I can't find the wording on the page. Nigel PG Dale (talk) 21:30, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Nigel PG Dale, and welcome to the Teahouse. The lack of links to other Wikipedia articles is not the reason why it has been proposed for deletion: that is a superficial problem, easily remedied. The proposed deletion is because the proposer, DoubleGrazing, claims that it does not meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability; that is, that there do not exist sufficient independent reliable sources that treat the subject at sufficient length to ground an article. As the Proposed deletion notice says, anybody may remove it, if they disagree. But it will then be open to the proposer, if they wish, to submit the article to the articles for deletion process, which will initiate a discussion. I presume (but have not looked to verify), that DoubleGrazing looked at the sources currently cited, and decided they were insufficient, and looked for other sources, before concluding that the building does not meet the criteria for notability. I have pinged DoubleGrazing here, so they should see this discussion. --ColinFine (talk) 21:49, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I have added to the article, uploaded an image, and added links to various independent sources eg 20th Century Society ( a charity charged with recording and helping conserve important buildings) and Historic England ( a Government agency responsible for the listing process). I can add sources such as Architectural Review, London Festival of Architecture and other published, publicly available references if necessary. Whether or not DoubleGrazing took the time to look at the sources might be open to question.

Courtesy link: Patera Building @Nigel PG Dale: I saw you deprodded the article, but didn't address the limited sourcing. You only linked terms to other articles. I think you are confusing adding sources with adding wiki-links to other Wikipedia articles. You could add info from this [[13]], and may be able to find more sources. (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.) TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 23:07, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

I created sections. Agree that there are swathes of text with no references. David notMD (talk) 23:12, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

@ColinFine: thank you for pinging me. @Nigel PG Dale: you are quite right, I did not verify the offline sources, as I do not have access to them. I looked at how these sources were cited: each only once, against basic statements which largely seem to verify that the building exists. That does not imply to me significant coverage sufficient to establish notability. (Meanwhile the great majority of the article was, and remains, unsupported by citations.)

On a separate but related point, it was also not clear to me what the importance or significance of the building is/was; this may of course be perfectly obvious to an expert in the field of architecture or construction engineering, but not necessary to most readers of a general encyclopaedia. For that reason, the lead paragraph should help even an uneducated reader such as I grasp the essential meaning, by setting the context, summarising the key points of the article, and establishing clearly why the subject is important and notable enough to warrant entry in an encyclopaedia.

FWIW, I would argue that work is needed on all these fronts, and were I to come across this article now for the first time, I would probably propose deletion again. Which is to say, I won't, of course, but someone else could. Hope this helps, --DoubleGrazing (talk) 06:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

What we have now is an article about a prefabricated steel industrial building which could be bolted together on site, but seemingly never went into widespread construction. Hardly a unique notion. Broad swathes of the article are unreferenced, which is never a good indicator. Either the referencing should be improved to better demonstrate notability, or all unreferenced content should be trimmed away. Would the remaining content be worthy of an encyclopedia article? I am unsure but not optimistic. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 06:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your help on this. I will certainly edit the introductory paragraphs to make much more of the project's place in the PopArt and popular culture of the time with links to the imagery of Archigram, Ron Herron, Future Systems, Jan Kaplicky, Buckminster Fuller, Andrew Holmes, Paolo Soleri and others. Also, links can be made to other intended to be mass-produced futuristic designs of the same period: Delorean 'Back to the Future' and Sinclair C5 electric cars. Contemporaneous, these should set the context for the Patera Building's place in history.

Nigel PG Dale No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. Articles about a thing - in this instance a pre-fab building - are about the thing, NOT about other stuff. Not Archigram, not Ron Herron, not Jan Kaplický. not Future Systems, etc., etc., etc. Not Nissen hut, not Quonset hut, not Romney hut, not Dymaxion deployment unit. Examples of other pre-fab designs can be mentioned in a See also section, as done at Quonset hut. STAY ON TOPIC. David notMD (talk) 11:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Specifically, your two paragraph addition to the History section of Patera Building, describing post-WWII England as context, has absolutely nothing to do with the topic - a pre-fab building designed in 1982. I removing all of it. And the paragraph mentioning cars. David notMD (talk) 11:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice - I don't mind you removing irrelevant material. This building does have a context though, and as a design is very widely admired as it was innovative and in terms of fabrication, it has never been surpassed.

Submitting an article

Hello Hoary, many thanks for your message! I have edited the collections list only with the ones that can be verified via links in English. I intended to write a very concise article on the artist and list only relevant information that can be verified. I haven't included awards or an excessive list of exhibitions, to allow other users to complete as well, please do let me know if I should edit anything else. I appreciate your help, I'm making my best to follow your notes. Thank you! Melloncita (talk) 08:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Pinging Hoary. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 09:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: This is in reference to Matilde Marín, which has been accepted as an article after an initial decline. David notMD (talk) 11:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Congratulations on the promotion to article status, Melloncita. Note that it's perfectly OK to provide references that aren't to web pages, and references to material that are in Spanish, French, German, Italian, or any other language. -- Hoary (talk) 12:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Marshals of the Empire

From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) 01:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC) Alert! There might have been an edit war occurring for article, Marshal of the Empire. Please help resolve his issue. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) 01:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

A user, Marshal Davout III has been reverting good faith edits that genuinely is reasonable. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk)

@Burgundian Feudalism: I have left them a note and invited them to discuss on the talkpage. On a side note, you have like three signatures in this request, which makes it read pretty weird? You only ever need one signature for most things :) CaptainEek ^{Edits Ho Cap'n!}⚓ 03:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! But this issue is still going on right now... I really mean it. Someone reversed Marshal Davout III’s edit, and I think the edit conflict will widen. From Burgundian Feudalism (talk) Calm down. Other editors can help. Thegreatsoldiers (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 12:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Never thought I'd have to come here again, but....

How do I make a guestbook? Macadamia of the LeafWings | ROAR!! | Contribs |Sandbox 12:38, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

User:Macadamia of the LeafWings You just need to make a page somewhere in your userspace (for example User:Macadamia of the LeafWings/Guestbook), set it up however you want with text and images then set up a link to it on your userpage/signature etc. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you!

Macadamia of the LeafWings | ROAR!! | Contribs |Sandbox 13:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

question about suspicious "wikipedia foundation"

hello friends I saw on the home page that wiki is owned by wikipedia foundation. this is concerning, as I though wikipedia was owned by all of us. I also see a bunch of copycat wikis linked on the main page. can these be deleted as wikipedia is superior? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 162.245.178.141 (talk • contribs) 22:28, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation is the body that houses the servers for Wikimedia projects, one of which is Wikipedia. The other wikis you're seeing are either Wikipedias in different languages or a sister Wikimedia project that does not function as an encyclopedia but as something else. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:48, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Please read Wikimedia Foundation to learn about the group that provides hosting and software support to Wikipedia. The English Wikipedia is not "superior" to other language Wikipedias or other free knowledge projects hosted by the WMF. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Assuming you refer to Main Page, it says: "Wikipedia is hosted by the Wikimedia Foundation, a non-profit organization that also hosts a range of other projects". The Wikimedia Foundation does not own the copyright to Wikipedia. The contributions belong to the editors who release them with the license given at MediaWiki:Wikimedia-copyrightwarning. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Publishing articles on Wikipedia

Who is eligible to publish articles in the Wikipedia? Dbaidoo (talk) 00:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Dbaidoo: It's the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. Check out WP:YOURFIRSTARTICLE. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 00:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Editing does not mean adding new articles. I made some attempts to add new articles but failed because they were rejected. Dbaidoo (talk) 00:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

In order to create an article directly, a new editor must be autoconfirmed. That means that the account is at least four days old and has made at least ten edits. Any new article must comply with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or it will probably be deleted. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Let's start over. Dbaidoo - You established an account in May 2020 and have done hundreds of edits on existing articles. However, per your Talk page, your attempts to create articles were Speedy deleted for various reasons, including copyright violations because you copied content verbatim. So it's not a question of who. You are eligible. If you intend to create a new article, per Tim's note, I recommend WP:YFA. That includes instructions on how to create a draft and submit it for reviewer decision to accept or decline or reject. David notMD (talk) 02:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Remember, "anyone can edit" means "anyone can remove what you just did, if it's not genuinely an improvement". DS (talk) 14:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Can High Honor members of the National Honor Society get a article

I want my own article but I know your will be deleted if your not notable so does National Honor Society mean you can create a article on yourself — Preceding unsigned comment added by Demons x Nevaeh2003 (talk • contribs) 14:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

To be a bit blunt, No, winning a scholarship or the like for the National Honor Society would not be sufficient to qualify for an article on it's own, we don't even have a list type article of winners. The fundamental guideline for inclusion in the encyclopaedia is WP:GNG, which requires you to have been covered in multiple substantial reliable sources that are independent of you, e.g. full length national/regional newspaper articles about you, substantial coverage in reliable published books, or articles on reliable news websites. I would also advise you to read the conflict of interest guidelines at WP:COI and the autobiography guideline at WP:AUTO. It is extremely difficult to write about yourself in a neutral way that is supported by sources (e.g. making sure your birthday is actually in one of the sources you cite), so it is very strongly discouraged. If think that you would qualify for an article and you would still like to write an autobiography you should read the Biographies of living persons guidelines at WP:BLP, especially the sourcing requirements, and use the articles for creation process, which will involve an experienced editor checking your draft before it is added to the encyclopaedia. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:48, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Greetings and Communications Test

Greetings. I am writing this message because I have an on-again/off-again relationship with this account and by writing this I hope to test a number of features, including but not limited to asking questions and receiving notification of other users answers or responses. I invite you to respond with your own greeting, questions or links to resources an outsider may find useful. Fundy Yeoman (talk) 11:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm quite confused, but I think(?) that you want to test pings, so @Fundy Yeoman, here you go. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 12:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. Your confusion is the most interesting contribution because I thought I had been so clear. Thank you for this reflection and test of "pings" but I am also interested to see how I am notified if a user responds to something of mine without a "ping"? Is the signature in the "tilde" considered a "ping"? Fundy Yeoman (talk) 12:13, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fundy Yeoman, without a “ping”, you won't receive a notification. Some people add a page to their Watchlist to keep track of all edits to it. The signature simply signs of your message, helping users identify who it came from. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 12:16, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

If someone edits something on your talk page, you receive a notification. Sometimes just using their name (for you it would be Fundy Yeoman) gives them a notification. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 13:04, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fundy Yeoman: You will only automatically be pinged with responses on your talk page. On other pages, the responding editor will have to ping you. All experienced editors know this, but if you want to ensure everyone pings you, you can include a ping request on whatever comment you make on another page. This is usually only necessary if you are not watching the page on your watchlist. For busy pages, watching may not be feasible or desired. Also, to notify others, you will need to sign your posts with the four tildes, except on their talk pages. TimTempleton ^(talk) ^(cont) 13:11, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Timtempleton: @Blaze The Wolf: @Berrely: Thank you, this has been educational.

No problem! Happy to help! Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Archive organization on Talk Pages?

Greetings. Could someone direct me to educational resources about organizing talk pages into Archives? If there are no specific resources, could you please provide a short tutorial? Thank you for your time. Fundy Yeoman (talk) 15:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Do you mean your own Talk page or article Talk pages? David notMD (talk) 15:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fundy Yeoman, you can set up automatic archiving by following the instructions at Help:Archiving a talk page — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 15:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

There's actually a bot that can do it for you. I don't remember the exact name of it though so you'll have to wait for another host to give you a courtesy link to the bot. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

As linked above. — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 15:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I believe it is User:Lowercase sigmabot III. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1 !11 !! (talk) 16:02, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

How to Publish 1st Article ?

How can i make my 1st article live ? Tarn Dhiman (talk) 13:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Tarn Dhiman You have misused your User page by creating an 'article' about yourself there. It will be deleted very soon. Attempts at autobiography, even if created as a proper draft, are frowned upon. Unless you are famous enough that other people are publishing stuff about you, there is no chance that you are notable enough to qualify as the subject of a Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 14:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

This is called a conflict of interest. If I were you, I would edit some already existing articles and improve them, to get a feel for Wikipedia's guidelines and policies. You can also try the Wikipedia Adventure or adopt a user program. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1 !11 !! (talk) 16:07, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Sandbox Usage

I have encountered a sandbox - I will not here mention the user, as this might not be the proper forum for such identification - which to me has been constructed as an alternative, WP:PROMO-heavy WP:BLP intended as a whitewashed version of the main article. I do not wish to suppress any editors' attempts to learn how to edit or create articles, but a clear end-around of an article the editor does not like (and perhaps has a WP:COI) seems inappropriate. My questions to you: Are there any explicit policies concerning what can, and what can not, be included in a personal sandbox? And secondly, where does one go on-site to have sandboxes evaluated impartially, with a possible result being administrator-mediated page deletion? Thanks. JoJo Anthrax (talk) 14:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, there are. If the sandbox is purely promotional content, it may be deleted under criterion WP:G11, Unambiguous advertising or promotion. It's fine to identify the user if you want, as sandboxes aren't private pages. @JoJo Anthrax — Berrely • ^Talk∕_Contribs 15:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your help, Berrely JoJo Anthrax (talk) 16:29, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Using a bot

I was curious whether there were any bots or scripts that could be used to remove external links from the body of an article. I'm specifically looking to remove the links from Tiny Desk Concerts and Getting Doug with High, but I don't feel like spending the time going through and manually removing every single link. Any suggestions would be appreciated. TipsyElephant (talk) 15:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: Regarding Getting Doug With High, my recommendation would actually be to perform WP:BEFORE and consider nominating the article for deletion, as the best two sources I can find about the podcast (admittedly not a thorough search) are this article from Vulture (which is reliable, independent, and contains quite substantial coverage) and this one from the Los Angeles Times which is an interview. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:36, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant: In the meantime, though, I whipped up a little user script that will do this: User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/elRemover.js. You can install it by adding the line mw.loader.load("/w/index.php?title=User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/elRemover.js&action=raw&ctype=text/javascript"); to your common.js page. Once you install it, You should see a new button whenever you're in editing mode on a mainspace article called "remove external links (in the "More" menu, or just as a new button along the top if you're using the Monobook skin). Once you click it, it'll try to detect and replace external links throughout the currently-loaded section, and then give you a popup with how many external links it tried to replace.

A caveat, though: it's doing a relatively simplistic regular expression, so false positives and false negatives are definitely possible. I tried to do a simple check to avoid external links that are part of references, but there's only so much regex can do, so the script is serious when it asks you to check the diff of your changes and make sure the changes are what you want before you save the edit. Remember, ultimately you're still responsible for edits that you make with the assistance of a script or tool. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Review my Article for Roger Pomerantz

My first attempt for publication was rejected for WP:Basic, not sufficiently notable. The form and references seem to pass. Does anyone have any advice thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Roger_J._Pomerantz,_M.D.&oldid=1014388783 Kendall Bio (talk) 16:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Kendall Bio, your article reads more like a curriculum vitae than an encyclopedia article, and may indeed be based upon Pomerantz's cv. You need reliable sources which are unconnected to the person, in-depth, published and neutral. Go and find them!--Quisqualis (talk) 17:20, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

I'm afraid that the references in the draft do not show that the person in question would qualify for an article. WP:GNG, the basic standard for WP:Notability requires that the subject of the article must have been the subject of Multiple, substantial, reliable, independent sources.

Substantial means that the source must contain a significant amount of coverage of the person, routine announcements that they've joined/left companies are not substantial sources.
Reliable means that the source must have some kind of editorial control. Things like google scholar searches are not reliable
Independent means the source must not be connected to the subject. Press releases (from places like PRWeb and PRnewswire) and announcements from the companies he's worked at are not independent.

A source must satisfy all three criteria to count towards establishing notability, and notice that the standard requires Multiple sources. You would be looking for things like newspaper articles on him, coverage in reliable, independent books and coverage on reliable news websites, see WP:Reliable sources for advice on what you would be looking for, and WP:Perennial sources for a list of sources that often turn up and community assessment on their suitability. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 17:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Citation style

I'm trying to improve and expand the contents of Minjung theology, but to do so I started using a citation style I've never used before because I wanted to be able to cite pages, chapters, and quotes from the same source in multiple different places. I just wanted to ask whether there are any glaring problems with my references so far. I was also curious whether the references section should be ordered in a specific way like alphabetically by the author's last name or by the order in which they appear within the article. TipsyElephant (talk) 17:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Who fits this category? Wikipedians looking for help

Hi, I just added this to my user talk page, as I am looking for help with citations on the page for Nobel Laureate David Gross. It was immediately removed - what is the meaning of the category? Martine. 18:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Martine This category is used by {{Help me}} to track usage of the template. If you would like to ask for help just copy the template and your question onto a talk page following the instructions on the template page, and it will automatically add you to the category. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 18:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I've done that but to no avail - just monthly messages that there are 192+ jobs ahead of me. thanks anyway! Martine — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartineWhite (talk • contribs) 14:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

hi

Poshbillionaire2 (talk) 15:39, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

a

a Localrussan (talk) 17:33, 15 April 2021 (UTC) a

Hi there! Did you have a question? Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello

How can I help you with? HoanganhLe1234567890 (talk) 18:09, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello! You don't have to help us with anything. If you want to help answer questions you can, or you can add yourself as a host. However it is recommended that you have some experience with editing Wikipedia and how it works. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Conflict of Interest - Limited Editing

I am considering editing the article on Robert Maranto, a relatively minor academic. However, I have a potential Conflict of Interest in that I know him in real life. My understanding is that editing when a potential Conflict of Interest is present is strongly discouraged, but I only intend to update his list of recent books, as the list is nearly eight years out of date and doesn't even include some of the books in the article's lead section. Should I go ahead with this edit or, considering I'm a new user, would it be best to keep away from this fairly discouraged activity? IDontHaveAnAccountYet (talk) 19:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

IDontHaveAnAccountYet The article currently has zero reliable independent sources, rather than adding more publications, it would be preferable to add some sources for the content that already exists. Theroadislong (talk) 19:17, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Theroadislong, a faculty webpage and highly cited articles are sufficient references for someone who meets WP:NPROF. Hi IDontHaveAnAccountYet and welcome to the Teahouse. There may be problems here. Wikipedia does not have encyclopedia articles about relatively minor academics, only those who have made significant contributions to their field. Maranto is borderline rather than minor. He holds a named professorship. Education is not a highly cited field. Articles should list only a few of the most significant publications; leave out the opinion pieces. Find the book reviews of his best known books and add those as references. One such review is:

Stein, Judith (2014). "President Obama and Education Reform: The Personal and the Political by Robert Maranto and Michael Q. McShane". Journal of School Choice. 8 (1): 146–149. doi:10.1080/15582159.2014.875424. ISSN 1558-2159.

StarryGrandma (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Page deletion

Hi, I've recently requested that the page Sandy Montenegro Littlefield be speedily deleted. She is a client who claims no association with the article creator Littlefieldassistant, understands that she is not notable for a Wikipedia article and does not want an article about herself here. Additionally, I've checked the current sources and her general notability online - I could not find independent and reliable sources, so she clearly doesn't meet WP:GNG.

Her picture was uploaded to Wikimedia Commons without her permission, as well. The article referenced by Littlefieldassistant in the permission section of the picture here does not contain this picture and is not in the public domain by any means.

I am unsure as to which kind of disclosure I should add to the talk page of the article. Please advice if there is another way to go about it. Hillster (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC) Hillster (talk) 17:34, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

HillsterThe article has been tagged with a Proposed deletion. If that is not opposed, it will be deleted at the end of one week. The article creator has not been Wikipedia-active since creating the article in 2009. David notMD (talk) 20:06, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Hillster. While it sounds as if this particular case is drawing towards a satisfactory close, please note that having "no association with the article creator" is the norm: any association between an article creator and the subject is a COI, which immediately raises concerns about neutrality. Equally, I have nominated the photo for deletion, but that is because I don't believe the claimed copyright status, and nothing to do with whether Littlefield gave permission or not.. --ColinFine (talk) 20:50, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Can administration be involved in the discussion in the talk page?

I am currently having a discussion with an editor who claims nonsense and just refuses to understand my point on the talk page in Anti-Korean sentiment. I believe that the discussion would not end if the editor could not comprehend the topic of the discussion. Is there anything that the administrators can do to resolve the dispute? Npovobsessed (talk) 18:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Npovobsessed, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:DR should tell you everything you need to know; but I will throw in that a conviction that only one of the participants understands the issue is not conducive to achieving consensus. (This is a general comment, not one on the particular dispute, which I haven't looked at). --ColinFine (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

That is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you for your help. Npovobsessed (talk) 21:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Inactive projects

Hi, is there any policy/recommended way to see if anybody's interested in restarting an inactive project? I'm looking at Wikipedia:WikiProject Images and Media, especially some of the drives. Thanks! EpicPupper 20:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@EpicPupper: Welcome to the Teahouse! See Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Dealing with inactive WikiProjects. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Publish problem on Tawag ng Tanghalan

Hi, I am clarifying an edit on Tawag ng Tanghalan and I also added a reference that is error after publishing. After that I fixed the error ref but it doe'snt want me to publish it, see this. A warning will pop-out after you fix it. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 10:58, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@SeanJ 2007: Welcome to the Teahouse! When creating a new section on a talk page like this, please post at the bottom for maximum visibility.

After I fixed the <ref>...</ref> tags, I received a warning about a protection filter on lessandra.com.ph. I simply removed the URL and saved my edit. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Trouble with writing draft

Courtesy link: Draft:Derail Valley

I don't know how to write from a neutral point of view, and how to write in an encyclopedic tone. Also, this is my first time doing this so can you give me good advice on good ways to make a good article. Also, I don't understand what they are saying in this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Neutral_point_of_view and this https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Tone Apersonthing3000 (talk) 21:03, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Apersonthing3000: Welcome to the Teahouse! The use of the pronoun "you" is not appropriate tone for an encyclopedia - try using "the player" instead. There are a lot of good ideas at Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Video games, specifically in the "Gameplay" section. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:28, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Apersonthing3000: Welcome to the Teahouse. Another issue a reviewer has noted is that the sources used aren't appropriate for Wikipedia; you may want to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources to understand what references are acceptable for encyclopedic use; tutorial walkthroughs do not fall under that scope. Perhaps you could look for gaming publications that cover the game in significant detail? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:41, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Apersonthing3000: Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Video games#Sources and Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources should help you identify reliable sources for this video game. GoingBatty (talk) 21:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Help

hi there, I created an article about an actress. It is proposed for deletion on 11th April. So, now I improved the article and add reference. So please check this article Sinchana Gowda (Actress). Is there anything I need to add? Please let me know. Mralphan11 (talk) 19:05, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Mralphan11 As you have added content to the article after the Proposed deletion, you are completely within your rights to remove the Prod tag from the top of the article. You can consider adding to the Talk page a short summary of why the Prod is no longer justified. It would be possible that any editor who considers the article still below standards to start an Articles for Deletion. What is missing are references to significant published content ABOUT her, not just confirming the movies she has appeared in. David notMD (talk) 20:18, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mralphan11 Since I have been the one nominating the article for deletion let me say that currently it will be nominated for Articles for Deletion, @David notMD should have stress more the fact of needing significant, independent coverage of herself (which apparently does not exist). CommanderWaterford (talk) 21:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Lord Mayor

I've been archiving a lot of local news articles recently which mention actors, rappers and other people born in my city who have appeared in visual productions.

One of those people is a recently retired mayor and councillor, along with the founder and chairman of a famous heritage railway organisation/line (although there's nothing on that Wikipedia article about the railway organisation/line mentioning him for some reason), who was born and raised in the city. He was also a director/chairman/board member/campaigner/spokesman who was involved in other local organisations, which mainly seem to revolve around transport for over 50 years like a bus service operator, at least 2 bus museums, and an estimated 3 railway museums.

He also had an uncredited cameo in a famous drama feature film (featuring the railway), a credit in a 2 part TV documentary series for the BBC (featuring the railway), and no doubt many more documentaries about trains or railways which haven't been added to his IMDB profile yet.

I've not even started archiving the local articles which mention his name yet, as there's a maximum of 933, and an estimated minimum of 405-522, as some of them are from sister newspapers in the city so could be duplicates. Plus there was a league winning footballer in the city with the same name a couple of years before the articles started being published online, who might be the person mentioned instead.

Therefore I'll have no problem finding references to prove he's notable, especially with non-local articles on top.

However as I've never created an article before, I'm not sure which category I should put him in, or where I would find a template for his page.

I'd guess he should go in some political category, seen as though he was a mayor for at least 8 years, but as he is mainly involved in transport related stuff, I'm thinking maybe he should go in some other category. Plus as he will no doubt have been featured in more than the 2 known productions so far (I'll no doubt be the person who finds the rest), maybe some film/TV related category.

Danstarr69 (talk) 20:56, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Danstarr69 If you've never created an article before I would recommend that you have a read of WP:Your first article, which contains a lot of helpful information and contains a link to the article wizard, which can help you through the process and has standard templates for articles. You could also substitute a copy of Template:Biography onto a sandbox or draft page with {{subst:Biography}} to get an example outline to work from. There's no restrictions on how you categorise articles and you can list a person under a whole range of unrelated categories. Arnold Schwarzenegger for example contains a range of categories related to his bodybuilding, acting and political career. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

86.23.109.101 I don't understand all that sandbox/draft stuff, so when I can be bothered to create the article I'm going to be writiting and publishing it myself without a sandbox/draft.

I know how to add infoboxes, navboxes, categories, external links for websites like IMDB, tables, new sections, references, the same reference more than once etc, practically everything the need to fill in an article.

I've completely revamped countless articles on subjects I'm not even interested in over the last couple of years especially, because they were practically empty, or were largely incorrect.

When I say "category" I'm talking about the things which appear in the infobox at the side.

For example, actors get an actor template which includes an actor infobox.

Which article template would include the most relevant stuff to fill in for a mayor/councillor, and train/bus transport expert?

Danstarr69 (talk) 21:25, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: Try {{Infobox officeholder}} or {{Infobox person}}. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: Ok, sorry for patronising you, I misunderstood your question.

If someone has been involved in multiple areas and there is more than one infobox that is relevant to them you can embed one infobox inside another to generate a compound infobox with different sections relevant to each of their careers, see the documentation at Wikipedia:WikiProject Infoboxes/embed. In this case I would probably start with a generic Template:Infobox person and embed a Template:Infobox officeholder inside it, there's an example of this being done here. I don't think we have a standalone infobox for transport experts, but someone else might know of one. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:40, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

86.23.109.101 I was just about to post that here as the one I'm going to be using eventually (it's going to be staying in my private Blogger for now until I've looked through all the news articles), as most of the other stuff seems to be USA related, but that bit specifically mentions mayor.

If I find a relevant "transport" related inbobox in the future, could that also be added to the bottom using the "embed = yes" thing?

Danstarr69 (talk) 21:51, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: Yes! GoingBatty (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: You can embed any of the templates listed in Category:Biographical templates usable as a module in an infobox person using "embed = yes", and putting them under "module2", "module3" etc parameters, for up to a maximum of six sub-infoboxes (you can also repeat the same infobox multiple times, e.g. if they held multiple political offices). 86.23.109.101 (talk) 21:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

My personal sandbox

Hello Teahouse! I had one small question about my personal sandbox. Are there any rules as to what I can and can't do in there? HelenDegenerate (talk) 22:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Please DO NOT place promotional, copyrighted, offensive, or libelous content in sandboxes.

For more information on what is a sandbox, see Help:My sandbox. For information and resources on the basics needed to comprehend, comment on, and edit Wikipedia, see Contributing to Wikipedia or our tutorial. If you have questions, you can find help at the Teahouse. You can also use Test Wikipedia.

Please see Wikipedia:Sandbox He iro 22:57, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

HelenDegenerate Editors are given a large amount of leeway for what they can do in their sandbox, but the same general rules apply as the rest of the encyclopedia, e.g. you cannot host or link to copyright violations in it, you cannot post advertising and promotion, you cannot host libellous content, etc. Apart from that you can use it for experimenting with and drafting whatever you want. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 23:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi HelenDegenerate. It's your personal sandbox really in name only as explained here which means any content you add to it will still need to comply with Wikipedia:User pages. Generally, other editors will leave you own to experiment or test or work on improvements as long as none of what you're doing is a serious violation of some Wikipedia policy or guideline. Violations of Wikipedia:Copyrights, Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons, Wikipedia:Non-free content criteria and Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not seem to be the ones which will likely will lead to someone (or something) editing your sandbox. Finally, one very important thing to remember is that your sandbox is not private; if you can see it, then the WP:REALWORLD can also see it; moreover, any content you delete or remove from it will still be there for anyone to see. -- Marchjuly (talk) 23:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

To elaborate on that last, it will not be found by Wikipedia or external searches on content words, but any editor can see all of your contributions, including those in your Sandbox now, and those previously deleted. David notMD (talk) 23:21, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

On Arbitration Amendments

I know of the seriousness of arbitrations, but how can I ask for a potential amendment to a sanction? NotReallySoroka (talk) 03:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

NotReallySoroka, amendments to arbitration cases are requested at WP:ARCA though it may be worth to discuss said request once with other experienced editors before taking it there. Java Hurricane 04:14, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Where to do so? NotReallySoroka (talk) 04:26, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

NotReallySoroka, I would suggest asking at the user talk page of the administrator who imposed the sanction, and at the user talk page of a more experienced editor you've interacted with. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 04:32, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Addendum to my reply: in case you are subject to a sanction imposed under WP:DS, the correct place to appeal/request for changes, etc. is WP:AE. WP:ARCA is used for requesting clarifications and amendments in arbitration cases; AE is used for appeals about sanctions imposed by administrators using DS. Java Hurricane 04:53, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

How about a clarification request? Do I need evidence and/or proof of discussion before I can raise one? For the record, it is that another editor has a topic ban lifted for half a year, and the time period has passed, but WP:AEDR still list the restriction as lifted. I would like to ask about whether a certain past comment of theirs violate the topic ban (if it's still in effect). Sorry for the confusion, NotReallySoroka (talk) 23:27, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Nature Of AFD's

In AFD debates, aren't editors supposed to either cast a vote with a reason, or contribute facts/information so we can reach consensus one way or the other? I'm confused by the comment here, and don't understand the nature of it since there was no vote cast or new info. Megtetg34 (talk) 23:10, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi @Megtetg34: which particular comment are you referring to - the bottom one (Kvng's)? Nosebagbear (talk) 23:43, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

No, I was referencing the one from Tlhslobus. Kvng has since replied to it since I posted here, but Tlhslobus has been on Wikipedia for nearly 10 years. I imagine the editor already knew what Kvng commented. I didn't, and since it really didn't have much to do with the topic it didn't make sense to me. Megtetg34 (talk) 00:24, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Explosive Reactive Armor - Jet Thrust

Several years ago I edited in the ERA section. My edit explained how the brisance (Speed of detonation) of explosives related to ERA effectiveness. I have worked with various explosives, both civilian and military. My edit was deleted, which I accepted. Then whomever was monitoring that section took it upon themselves to plagiarize my edit. They had made no reference to brisance prior to my edit. Afterwards, they incorporated brisance in the section, with a poorly written version of my explanation on how it worked to resist shaped charges. A couple days ago I tried my hand at editing once again. This time some bot deleted my edit, saying that my "score" was below that which is acceptable. Both times I gave valid explanations for details which were lacking in the articles. There are a few things in this world in which I'm an expert in. The ability to deal with exclusive clubs is not one of them. Perhaps this is one of the reasons Wikipedia has the poor reputation it has. A clutter of petty fiefdoms doesn't lend itself to credibility. It would be nice if someone, anyone could refute my edit on the merits. My explanation of how inertia makes jet engines function is nowhere else to be found, in terms most of your readers could grasp. Sources - I am the source, the expert. Joseph Darwin James Panamice (talk) 22:47, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Panamice Your addition to Jet engine was utter rubbish, and duly deleted by an automated program. Many editors are experts. None add content on their own say-so of their expertise. (Well, some try, and are reverted.) You are welcome to try again without the rhetorical question, with encyclopedia-tone writing, and with citations. Be aware that editors are strongly advised against citing their own publications as reliable source references. David notMD (talk) 23:12, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Panamice: To add to what David notMD stated, Wikipedia does not break the fourth wall. There are plenty of excellent sources of information that write at the reader, but Wikipedia is not one of those. Please see our Manual of Style's sections on instructional language and editorializing. As David also noted, any statement that could be contested must be verifiable by being cited to reliable, independent sources, as the project does not allow original research. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 00:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Company website

Would a company's website be reliable? I want to know because I've seen a article that has sources of the company's webste. Is this reliable? 🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 20:45, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

The companies own website would be a WP:PRIMARY source, which can be used for simple facts and uncontroversial material (e.g. finding who their CEO is). They do not, however, demonstrate that the company is WP:NOTABLE, and should be used in conjunction with reliable secondary sourcing. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:49, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@JennilyW: For more information about what 86.23.109.101 noted, please see WP:ABOUTSELF. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 00:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

What is sockpuppeting on Wikipedia?

Epictrex (talk) 00:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi Epictrex. See WP:Sockpuppetry. Here's a tip for finding relevant policies, procedures and guidelines, and most anything else you hear mentioned by regular editors, or come across in Wikipedia's interface. Type "WP: (an easier-to-type alias of "Wikipedia:") into the search box, followed by the word or phrase you heard (in this case "sockpuppetry"). Most of the time, this will quickly locate a targeted, behind-the-scenes information/help page, or how-to guide. See more at Help:WP search protocol. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

there's a book called 'the puzzle ring ' by kate forsyth but no matter how much i search i ton wikipidea ,it shows no content . what should i do ?

Cherry red dlf (talk) 02:09, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, Cherry red dlf, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia does have an article on Kate Forsyth, but we do not yet have one on The Puzzle Ring. This may simply be because the book does not pass Wikipedia's general notability guidelines for article inclusion or its book-specific notability guidelines, or it may be because nobody has thought about creating such an article yet. If it's the former, then the article cannot be created until such a time as it has enough reliable, independent coverage to meet either of those notability criteria, but if it's the latter, there may well be one someday, and – provided you take the time to learn about Wikipedia's article guidelines – you could be the one to make that happen. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 02:27, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Help reverting vandalism

2600:1702:7D0:54E0:84CA:B99B:4911:361D (talk) 02:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Are you asking for assistance in removing some vandalism you found? If so, please provide more details. However, if you're asking to learn how you can revert vandalism, then reading Wikipedia:Vandalism would be a good place to start. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 02:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Should I put my former username into my Wiki signature?

If yes, how? Do I go [[User:NotReallySoroka|NotReallySoroka]] ([[User Talk:NotReallySoroka|talk]]) ~~~~~ (formerly DePlume)? Thanks, NotReallySoroka (talk) 02:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: You don't have to have it in your signature, but some choose to do it. A declaration on your userpage, like what you already have, is usually sufficient. If you still want to have your old username in your signature, go to your Preferences at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-personal and find the "Signature" section. Then, just add (formerly DePlume) to the end of what's already there. Do not add an additional four tildes, like what you have in the code box above. Remember to save your changes. Then, whenever you sign on a talk page with four tildes, it should render the Wikimarkup you put in your Preferences. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 02:59, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @NotReallySoroka: Welcome to the Teahouse! I think the explanation you have on your user page is sufficient. The only time I think the clarification would be helpful is if you were commenting on a conversation as NotReallySoroka where you previously contributed as DePlume, just to prevent any accusations of sockpuppetry. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I am here for quite a long time already - might as well stay until I become an admin or a crat or something - haha. Anyways, I have started quite a few discussions as DP (though most of them are closed), and I decided to still add it - how did I do? NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 03:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: Looks fine to me. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 03:48, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Create spanish article from existing english article

whats the easiest way to go about creating a spanish version of an already existing english wikipedia article. Keep in mind i cannot speak spanish and im not very tech savy or familiar with the codinging for building these articles 190.58.17.51 (talk) 12:54, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

190.58.17.51, if you don't speak spanish, then please don't. Machine translations are seldomly (almost never) of a good enough quality to be usefull. Victor Schmidt (talk) 13:24, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Like what Victor Schmidt says, don't translate if you don't actually speak spanish. While machine translations (i.e Google Translate) have gotten more accurate with languages such as Spanish, it is still not recommended as it may end up becoming Engrish (which is basically where you translate something from a different language and it ends up becoming something that makes no sense). Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 15:22, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

General guidance is at Translate us, but I agree with Victor. You might like to ask for help at es:WP:Café/Archivo/Ayuda/Actual. I confess I'm wondering why somebody who doesn't speak Spanish wants to create an article in es-wiki, and coming up with promotion as the most likely answer. If that is it, please don't! A Wikipedia article is not for the benefit of the subject. --ColinFine (talk) 15:23, 13 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I am a Spanish girl with translating experience I am on wikipedia with a "translating mission". If you link the article I would love to work on it.Pupypau (talk) 11:44, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh— good to know that merely any translator tool of internet is not as precise with regards to accuracyCaleb Jones Safley (talk) 04:21, 16 April 2021 (UTC)Caleb

Tutorial?

Hi everyone, I’m excited to get started but I want to learn more about how to cite things and use talk pages. Is there a tutorial I can use. Thanks Cnuftart (talk) 07:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Cnuftart and welcome to the teahouse. Please see Help:Introduction to get started and thanks for your interest in editing here. MarnetteD|Talk 07:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Cnuftart: I personally used WP:TWA to get started. Both are great resources to learn from. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Reporting Advertisment

Where do I report this person? Thanks, AnApple47 (talk) 17:42, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:ANI Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:46, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Will it backfire aka wind up encouraging negativity if I already clicked the link on the former edit of that persons personal page? Ask because subscribed to their youtube channel so now cold feet though not completely certain it would cause the persons misuse of Wikipedia — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caleb Jones Safley (talk • contribs) 05:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Caleb Jones Safley, and welcome to the Teahouse. Does your question relate to the section you put it in (about FalconsRockInstantLunch) or to something else? If it's about something else, it should go in a new section, and you need to say what it does relate to. Either way, I'm afraid I'm not clear what your concern is. But be assured that somebody else's "misuse of Wikipedia", if it happens, is 100% their responsibility, whatever you've done or not done. --ColinFine (talk) 09:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

BBB links

Would Big Blue Bubble links be an reliable source? 🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 23:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi JennilyW. Reliable sourcing is always contextual; without that context it's impossible to say. Can you specify? That being said it might be a reliable source for certain game information, but note that for an article on one of its games, it would be a restricted by our policy on use of primary sources, and would not function as an independent source; it would contribute nothing towards demonstrating notability.--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 01:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Fuhghettaboutit: BBB links has update's about there games. 🍓⋆JennilyW♡🍧 (talk) 01:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hey again JennilyW. Well that's already explained in general terms above, but doesn't provide the context needed. The context would be what facts are you wish to verify using BBB as the source (you may just be speaking in shorthand when you say "links", but we provide references using inline citations to sources, directly in relation to the material being verified, and we tell the reader attribution details of the source, not just "links"). Anyway, because these would be primary sources, they could not be used for self-serving material, nor any interpretation or analysis, but only for "straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the primary source but without further, specialized knowledge", and again, would not assist at all with demonstrating notability. Best regards--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 11:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

What should I do if I am being falsely accused of sock puppetry on Wikipedia? Can I get into legal trouble for anything I do on Wikipedia?

Epictrex (talk) 01:20, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I would be more worried about what to do if you are accurately accused of sockpuppetry, if I were you. You "just happened" to log in and check that article a minute after it was vandalized with content similar to things that coincidentally you yourself have posted in other articles. Edits are time stamped. But it's not just that those 2 IPS geolocate to Sparks Nevada, so does the one you used to vandalize Thadeus and my talk page on the 11th. Do you know what the odds are that all of that is a massive coincidence? If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, you know what? It's not a turtle, mate. It's a duck. Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Epictrex in an unusual edit war with themselves He iro 01:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Epictrex. If another editor expresses concern that you are using sockpuppets, then respond accurately and honestly. We cannot provide legal advice. Consult a lawyer where you live if you are in doubt. Avoid any disruptive or dishonest editing and you should be fine. Focus on improving the encyclopedia, and avoid suspicious activity. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 01:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Kinda imagine that there somehow is some kind of a way to appeal (with assumed use of good judgement etc for with regards of both use of such attempt of appeal & how to go or going about it) and/or explain why both how you understand why the penalty or result has occured and also how you are going to both be helpful as well as avoid voiding/making whatever applicable/said mistake or mistakes it was or are/were etc... however if were in that kind of situation probably would just avoid editing/wiki at least wikipedia for awhile— lest maybe end up possibly it getting ability to be sued — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caleb Jones Safley (talk • contribs) 05:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

CJS - not a useful comment. David notMD (talk) 11:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

ANI

Can non-admins post on WP:ANI? I know they can file complaints but I want to know if they can comment. I figured it must be an administrators' noticeboard for a reason, but it seems kind of pointless if non-admins can't post evidence. MEisSCAMMER^{(talk)^(contribs)} 12:16, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

MEisSCAMMER Non admins are more than welcome to comment on ANI if they have evidence to add to discussion or helpful comments, the entire point of the noticeboard is for non-admins to get help from administrators. I will warn you that I've seen quite a few newcomers in my time end up in hot water by jumping into ANI and replying to large numbers of threads with well intentioned but unhelpful comments, which tends to be seen as disruptive, so it's best to only comment on stuff you're actually involved in until you have a significant amount of editing experience. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 12:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Untitled question (which might be about flirting)

1st: Hi, 2nd: I- is it (maybe secretly?) like against the rules but if kinda acceptable to do so... flirt someplace via wikimedia ("divisions"?) ? Like as in just in general generally regarding speaking with one anotherCaleb Jones Safley (talk) 04:30, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I've now read this question (if it is a question) three times, and it still makes no sense to me. You may wish to rephrase it, Caleb Jones Safley, so that it will be understandable. In the meantime, this website is an encyclopedia. -- Hoary (talk) 12:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Keep getting error messages

Hi, I want to add a new topic to talk page of "traditional Chinese medicine". But everytime I try to add a new topic. I get this error message - (The topic can't be added due to an unknown error). Am new and no idea how to perceive and fix it. Casualfoodie (talk) 07:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Casualfoodie: I don't know why that's happening. There is a workaround: just go to "Edit source", which edits the markup of the entire talk page, and scroll to the very bottom. Underneath the last section, create a new line and add section header like so: == Header text goes here ==. Then, create another new line and write whatever you were going to write. Add a signature, write an edit summary, and hit publish. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

https://www.verywellhealth.com/traditional-chinese-medicine-what-you-need-to-know-88936 is on the spam blacklist. While you can technically can circumvent the blacklist as I have done here, doing so is often not a good idea. See WP:RSP#Dotdash for more info. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 07:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Ah I see. I guess I should keep in mind of links like www.verywellhealth.com/traditional-chinese-medicine-what-you-need-to-know-88936 being on the blacklist that can cause errors. I took away that link and no longer have any issues..thank you for your help. Casualfoodie (talk) 08:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Casualfoodie: I don't know if you're aware, but medical articles on the English Wikipedia have a special set of sourcing requirements, which are described in WP:MEDRS. Basically this means that medical claims in articles must be backed up by references to either peer reviewed medical literature, recognised standard textbooks or guidance from recognised expert bodies. Your edit to the Traditional Chinese medicine removed an intro sourced to a meta-review in one of the most respected scientific journals on the planet, and replaced it with unsourced WP:PROFRINGE content based on your personal opinion. I would advise that medical articles really are not a good place to get started with editing as the requirements on what can be added to articles are extremely strict, but if you do want to edit the article in a way that's going to be allowed to stay you need to find high quality peer reviewed literature backing your claims. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 11:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Anonymous IP user - Do you even know how anti-depressants work? Currently all scientists do not even know how even a heavily mass manufactured pill actually works. Just that it empirically works. https://www.discovermagazine.com/health/how-antidepressants-work-is-a-mystery-scientists-still-dont-understand

The thing about traditional Chinese medicine or stuff like Yoga. Is that it's heavily based on empirical trial and error. Currently there's no high quality evidence to suggest that things like meditation, accupuncture, Tai Chi, Astragalus herbs are helpful to us. But that's partly because of lack of research. However there's a vast amount of funding for pharmaceutical industry..but not so much on natural therapies.

It's more accurate to say that modern science hasn't yet been advanced or progressed enough to prove that things like accupuncture is ineffective or not. Just because a certain discipline lacks enough scientific research to understand it completely, doesn't automatically mean that it's definitely garbage.

Btw some research indicates meditation exercises is helpful. And Tai Chi is not useless. And accupuncture releases neuropeptides into the nervous system. "Neuropeptides are proteins produced by neurons in the brain, which play a role in affecting neurobiological responses, including mood regulation." There's clearly something going on but scientists are only beginning to study the physiological basis of acupuncture’s effects. So to definitely rule out the effectiveness of accupuncture in such an extreme manner, is wrong when the reserch is still ongoing and inconclusive. https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/1999/06/04/27924.htm Casualfoodie (talk) 12:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Btw I made just one edit to the article.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:MobileDiff/1018108246

How can you accuse me of adding unsourced WP:PROFRINGE content based on my personal opinion? My edit was NOT even my opinion and I was simply adding in a proper history intro of TCM in the most neutral possible way so don't make false accusations at me. I also removed a repeating opinion piece that was already mentioned in the critique section. A peer-reviewed journal like nature should still be taken within perspective. The guy has given no evidence that meridian points or accupuncture doesn't work. He clearly didn't even bother to research to find out. However the issue is that the information was already in the critique section. It doesn't need to be the top intro for the entire article especially when it's still just an opinion based on inconclusive evidence. Casualfoodie (talk) 13:03, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Casualfoodie: You added the content to the lead with the edit summary: "The intro is definitely biased and not appropriate. How can one EVEN know for a fact that herb ginseng or Tai Chi is harmful or yields no benefits? There's no real studies to yet claim that as a solid fact . Just lack of studies to support the benefits but lack of evidence does not really equate to everything about the Field being fraught with useless ideas. Ironically the few studies tend to show benefits of some therapies like Tai Chi, ginger, etc as they are natural and so, can't stereotype". You are making medical claims here but have not provided any acceptable sources to back up your assertions. If you want the article to state that herb ginseng and Tai Chi are harmless and they have health benefits you need to provide a high quality secondary peer reviewed source to back those aspersions. If there genuinely are no studies claiming health benefits then the article should not present it in a manner suggesting there are. If there are peer reviewed secondary studies that show health benefits of "some therapies like Tai Chi, ginger, etc" then put them in the article (or even better bring them to the talk page to discuss their inclusion), don't just hand wave and say they exist.

In your second edit summary you write about the nature source "Giving balanced context that there's currently a lack of research on the field as well as lack of quality evidence https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/1999/06/04/27924.htm and the description given, condemning it as 'having no logical basis" is still from an opinion piece from an author who has done zero research to prove that TCM is ineffective as a fact. Unlike other researchers". An ABC science article from 22 years ago is not an acceptable source for medical claims, we need WP:MEDRS compliant sourcing - scientific literature, standard textbooks and guidance from recognised medical bodies. The claim of it having "having no logical basis" is cited to an article in nature. Again you make the extraordinary claim that the the researcher who wrote the nature article has "done zero research to prove that TCM is ineffective as a fact", but have provided no sources to back up that assersion. Did the journal issue a retraction or correction of the article? Were there any responses published in reliable journals which dispute it's content or conclusion?

In your third attempt at rewriting the lead you write "Not watering it down mate. Read the ABC article https://www.abc.net.au/science/articles/1999/06/04/27924.htm it's only recently that more and more research is trying to figure out if there's a physiological basis behind meridian points and accupuncture. We don't even know for a solid fact that it doesn't exist as we don't have enough research and that should be noted and NOT CENSORED". Once again a 22 year old ABC science article is not usable for anything related to medical claims - it most likely will not have been written by an expert in the field and will not have been through a peer review process. WP:NOTCENSORED applies to offensive and objectionable content, it does not mean that we include every viewpoint into an article and that we should be adding poorly sourced fringe content to medical articles, see WP:Due weight. If "more and more research is trying to figure out if there's a physiological basis behind meridian points and accupuncture" then we wait until that research has been published, peer reviewed and included in secondary literature such as a meta-analysis, then it gets added to the article. You also need to include the studies as sources - you can't just hand wave and say they exist. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Why don't we take this to the talk page of that article. Regardless my edit summary was CLEARLY a question. There's no solid research stating that it doesn't Work. That's what I am saying and here is one example to show that assertion as true.

This is the first review of reviews that explores acupuncture’s effectiveness in treating components of the TSR. Based on the results of our review, acupuncture has demonstrated benefit for the treatment of headaches; however, safety needs to be more fully documented in order to make any strong recommendations in support of its use in treating headaches. Though more research is needed to determine whether acupuncture is useful in treating anxiety, sleep disturbances, depression and chronic pain, it does seem to be a promising treatment option. Based on our results, acupuncture does not seem to be effective for treating substance abuse, and there needs to be more high quality data before we can determine whether acupuncture is an appropriate intervention for fatigue or cognitive difficulties.

https://systematicreviewsjournal.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/2046-4053-1-46

Clearly more research is needed before jumping to a solid conclusion. if research is still needed, it would be closeminded and premature to not make that part clear for the public. If however lots of research concluded solidly that it's ineffective. Then the current intro would be fitting except we are not EVEN there yet and so you should be careful to write off those exotic non western disciplines as useless..show me evidence and studies conclusively stating that they're ineffective? You can't yet you seem more than okay for the intro to go make that sweeping and solody conclusion despite lack of peer reviewed evidence to support that TCM is ineffective. Casualfoodie (talk) 14:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Uploading Videos

Hi everyone, I would like to find out how I can upload a long video with a duration of 1hr or more on wikimedia commons. I struggle to do that, as result of this I have to cut the videos and make it shorter to upload on wikimedia commons. I will be glad if the community show or teach me the best way to upload a long video on wikimedia commons. Thanks. Jwale2 (talk) 21:38, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello, Jwale2, and welcome to the Teahouse. COmmons is a separate project from Wikipedia, and you should really ask there. I suggest starting with C:Commons:Video, and if you can't find the answer there, ask at C:Commons:Village pump. --ColinFine (talk) 21:55, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

Thank you ColinFine — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jwale2 (talk • contribs) 22:50, 14 April 2021 (UTC)

You can't do that because a one-hour-long video wouldn't be suited for an article on Wikipedia. 10 minutes is probably the longest you would need for a Wikipedia article. If you really need an hour-long video, I would say that you put it on an online video sharing service. Littleb2009 (talk) 15:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Blocking an Individual from making Edits

We have an individual that makes changes to the Clan Cunningham page, these changes never provide Reference for his edits. Is there a way to block this individual? This is the second time that I have had to delete his changes.

I have asked to be notified when changes have been made, I did not receive any notification that changes had been made to the Clan Cunningham page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by CSCunninghamCCI (talk • contribs) 15:50, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

You do know that Wikipedia is the encyclopedia anyone can edit, yes? -Roxy the grumpy dog. wooF 15:53, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I think that this could be a case of vandalism. Wikipedia has bots that revert vandalism and if a user continues to vandalize Wikipedia, they will be automatically blocked from making edits for a certain period of time. Read WP:Vandalism for more details. Littleb2009 (talk) 16:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@CSCunninghamCCI: Your username leads me to believe you have an undisclosed conflict of interest in editing this article, as your username appears to be a WP:ORGNAME (CCI: Cunningham Clan International). You do not own this article, nobody is required to notify you about changes made to the article (though you can add it to your watchlist should you so choose), and you cannot determine who does and does not edit the article about your organization. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:08, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Protection locks disappearing

Sometimes I go to articles that are protected. But then, like 1 month later, or more (or specifically 1 year), I go to the article that WAS protected, and now it is not. Like, for example, I went to the article Tunisia about 2 or 3 months ago. I saw that it was extended-confirmed protected. But then, in the middle of February, the protection lock of Tunisia is gone. Why is this happening? Joshua's Number9 (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Joshua's Number9 Pages are only protected for long enough to stop whatever disruption caused the page to be protected in the first place - it is rather rare for a page to be protected indefinitely and should only happen to pages that have been long term targets of disruptive editing. You can see how long a page has been protected for, the reason for the protection and the level of protection by looking in the protection log of the page 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. Joshua's Number9 (talk) 16:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Citation styles

What are the acceptable citation and referencing style on Wikipedia? Temilolub.52021 (talk) 12:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Temilolub.52021. You will want to enclose your references in <ref></ref> tags, and place them after punctuation marks. So let's say that you want to cite this URL: https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/world/asia/hong-kong-martin-lee-jimmy-lai.html There are multiple ways to do this, and the first is to cite a bare URL like so.^[1] Another way is to include a little information in the citation like this.^[2] However, the one I use (and I'm sure many others use as well) is something called a template, which automatically generates a citation when you input some parameters like website and author. This citation uses {{cite web}} templates.^[3] Note that you still have to enclose the template in <ref></ref> tags. For more information, see WP:Citing sources. Hope this helped! Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1 !11 !! (talk) 13:38, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

References

^ https://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/world/asia/hong-kong-martin-lee-jimmy-lai.html
^ Ramzy, Austin. Hong Kong Court Sentences Jimmy Lai and Other Pro-Democracy Leaders to Prison New York Times.
^ Ramzy, Austin (April 16, 2021). "Hong Kong Court Sentences Jimmy Lai and Other Pro-Democracy Leaders to Prison". New York Times. Retrieved April 16, 2021.

@Temilolub.52021: Of course, you'd italicize New York Times (or move it to a parameter such as |work= or |website= that automatically italicizes the text). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Table

Hello,

I am trying to add a new head-to-head poll from Data for Progress to 2021 New York City mayoral election. However, it is not formatting correctly. Can someone go about helping to fix this?

Thank you, Pennsylvania2 (talk) 17:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Giving warnings

Hi Teahouse people! I've been in Recent changes for a few days now and encountered my fair share of probable vandalism, which I've reverted, however I'm not sure if anyone is allowed to warn others or if I should hold off warning others until I get more experience. I know WP:BOLD exists but I don't want to accidentally mislead people (as I have done in the distant past). MelecieDiancie talk! 05:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello SoaPuffball and welcome to the teahouse. You don't have to wait to warn users about vandalism. You can read about the general guidelines and policies at Wikipedia:WikiProject User warnings and you can see the templates to use at WP:WARN. It is worth noting the difference between the subtle vandalism warnings and the blatant ones. Thank you for your editing here at the 'pedia. MarnetteD|Talk 05:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Pinging MelecieDiancie. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 06:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hiya Ganbaruby Did you notice that the OP is actually SoaPuffball. For some reason their signature reads [[User:SoaPuffball|MelecieDiancie]]. Now we do have an editor named MelecieDiancie so the situation is a bit odd and may need some untangling. I just didn't want you thinking I pinged the wrong person on purpose. MarnetteD|Talk 06:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Oof I only just found the redirect Ganbaruby. That explains my confusion (facepalm) I don't know if pings work through a redirect so your post was most helpful. MarnetteD|Talk 06:40, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

MelecieDiancie. You might want to fix your signature so that other editors don't make the same mistake (in this case a copy paste) that I did. MarnetteD|Talk 06:43, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

MarnetteD, I was slightly confused too. Hope they clear this up, since I'm not sure about the pings either. ◢ Ganbaruby!  (Say hi!) 07:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Done and thanks! -Melecie- talk! 07:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

It would be better if it were related to your actual username. Also (on relation to the topic), if you are using Twinkle, on a user's talk page, go the the TW dropdown menu and there will be a warn button which you can press and it'll allow you to give a warning that will fit most situations. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:31, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Wiki Writer

Hello Guys, Hope you all will be fine, and passing this tough time well. I'm totally new to Wiki, could you please suggest me any resource where I can learn how to write good articles that wiki admins allowed to be published. Abdul Aziz Yousufzai (talk) 09:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

You have already been given advice on your user talk page, including not to try to write an autobiography. If you wish to write about a subject which is notable under Wikipedia's definition, you'll find advice at WP:Your first article. David Biddulph (talk) 09:14, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

??? AAA's User page redirects to his Talk page. Wouldn't it be better to blank his User page and let him start over? David notMD (talk) 12:17, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I mean, that can be useful but it is indeed better to just not have it like that. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

How do I do the "This article is a stub" and "This article is still on development, you can help by expanding it"?

Hello. I decided to make a page for "Engineer Gaming" (Clearly in a serious and unbiased way, just to report on the Internet meme around, not as a way of Shitposting.) (I still have not published the page, obviously, as you can see, the link for "Engineer Gaming" is empty, and the page will not be visible untill I finish a draft.) (I might also publish the draft as " Engineer Gaming (Internet Meme))

however, I don't know how you put those fancy "This article is a stub" and "This article is still on development, you can help by expanding it" squares to show everyone that this is not a finished work and that they give their wrecking ball for deletion of articles for informality a hold.

(I make a pseudo-draft first, to then put quotes and make it a bit formal to make it an actual draft so that THEN it can be peer reviewed by Wikitors [which are not nescesairly IRL or Virtual peers] and if I put the "This article is a stub" and "This article is still on development, you can help by expanding it", I will be able to properly explain that without ruining the actual article text.)

Thank you very much to whoever reads this and also to whoever can answer (or at least try to) my question Sincerely, --Teuf0rt (talk) 15:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Teuf0rt (talk) 15:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Teuf0rt: use Template:Stub versacespace leave a message! 15:04, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Another thing, you might wanna check out WP:Your first article for more help on creating the draft. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

81.214.246.103 (talk) 15:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@[User:VersaceSpace] Thank you!

Question about blocks

if someone were to do something bad how bad would it have to be to get banned by a vanguard, im asking for a friend, and school project, its definitely not for me. I promise, i swear its not for me Zitzooo (talk) 16:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Zitzooo: Alright, I have to admit I laughed at you designating yourself a 'wikiterrorist' on your user page. What I will say is that this seems like a case of WP:BEANS, where you want an editor to tell you what bad things you would have to do to get blocked from editing. All I'll say is that you can count this as your warning for vandalism such as the kind you engaged in over at Madison Pettis. If you want to turn over a new leaf and become a reformed, deradicalized 'wikiterrorist', you're welcome to participate in productive editing, for example at WP:TASKS. TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:58, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I have blocked Zitzoo for violations of the policy on biographies of living people as well as vandalism and self-promotion. They were also lying. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 17:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

That's kind of ironic honestly. (you can delete this comment and/or move it to a talk page if you deem it necessary) Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Wikipedia

Hello I'm new to Wikipedia how does this how does this app work Eep Crood (talk) 15:31, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

Welcome, Eep Crood! The English Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, and it is edited and expanded by its users, instead of by an editorial board. If you want to learn more on how to edit, please see WP:HI. Sungodtemple a tcg fan!!1 !11 !! (talk) 16:01, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

There's also a training adventure game called TWA (The Wikipedia Adventure). Hope you have fun editing! EditJuice (talk) 18:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

You can make articles too and practice editing or making articles in your sandbox. Be sure to avoid vandalism and be civil. EditJuice (talk) 18:41, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

How to use SuggestBot?

Could someone tell me how to make SuggestBot give me suggestions on a regular basis? I don't like continuously asking SuggestBot to give me suggestions. Littleb2009 (talk) 19:05, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello Littleb2009, The instructions for setting it up are at User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 19:10, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Wondering why my article was not accepted

I just wrote a draft and it said something about it not having significant coverage if someone can break down what that means for me OfficialMarkets (talk) 19:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hello @OfficialMarkets:. In order to qualify for a Wikipedia article people have to demonstrate that they are notable, which means that they have to pass the General notability guideline. This means that the person must have been covered in multiple substantial, reliable, independent sources.

Substantial means the source must contain a significant amount of coverage about the subject, think full length news articles, pages of converge in books.
Reliable means the source must have some kind of editorial control and have a reputation for fact checking and accuracy
Independent means the source must not have any relation to the subject, paid press releases and interviews are not independent sources.

A source must pass all three criteria to count towards establishing notability, and the guideline requires multiple sources. As it stands your draft contains a single source, which is a reprint of a press release from accesswire and therefore is not reliable (as there is no editorial control involved) and not independent of the subject. Your draft also has significant Tone issues, Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia, and is not to be used for Promotion. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Nominating FL for deletion

Hi. I have recently nominated a featured list for deletion (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of international cricket five-wicket hauls by Danish Kaneria) because it badly fails WP:NLIST. Many people there are arguing that because it is a featured list we can't delete it. Is there any such policy/guideline which prohibits deletion of featured content? Are they set in stone (no one can object)? Looking for a thorough reply. Störm (talk) 20:35, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

WP:NLIST is not definitive. The list may also meet notability requirements through GNG or other criteria. The fact that the list passed Wikipedia:Featured_list_criteria and was found to have met all the criteria required for Wikipedia content would mean that it also passed the notability test. You will likely have a very hard battle ahead if you want to argue that it is now not notable. RudolfRed (talk) 20:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

While there is no policy against listing featured content for deletion, the featured list/article process is generally fairly good at vetting content and it would be extremely unusual for content that should be deleted to pass. Personally I would have started by sending the list to WP:Featured list removal candidates, explaining any concerns about failing notability criteria. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 20:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)

@Störm: I disagree with the comments above in general, as there are a lot of FLs/GAs from a decade ago (or even more recently) where subpar notability/SAL checks were done. I would find it a little bit (not overwhelmingly) surprising if an FL promoted as recently as 2017 was non-notable. However, this should not stop someone from opening an AFD when they believe it is non-notable—an AFD is only a discussion, so not much harm can come of it. I don't agree that an FLRC should be done first (sometimes a page may be appropriate for FL for every reason other than notability, in which case FLRC is not the venue), but discussing any active editors involved in FL promotion and maybe a talk page notice at WT:FLC would be the polite way to go about it. In this case, I see there's some socking behaviour that's a bit over my head, so maybe bypassing that stage is acceptable. — Bilorv (talk) 21:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Inserting a horizontal rule line across the entire length of an infobox?

I am currently trying to make a footnote notation on an infobox and trying to draw a horizontal rule line across the width of the *entire* infobox, however nothing I seem to do seems to work - I can only seem to draw a horizontal line across only part of it. It doesn't matter whether I use markup ( four dashes ) or html ( <hr /> ). Can anybody help with this? Please and thank you. QuakerIlK (talk) 21:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Hi QuakerIlK, welcome to the Teahouse. At which position in which infobox? PrimeHunter (talk) 21:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Welcome to the Teahouse, QuakerIlK. Whilst you could ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Infoboxes, I've taken a look and really don't think there is anything in our Manual of Style that permits a line to be drawn across an infobox. But if anyone would know, PrimeHunter's your man/woman/neutral entity. Quite why you would want to do that for a footnote is beyond me - these should surely all be at the bottom of the page, even when included in an infobox. You should probably refer to WP:REFGROUP on how to group footnotes together. Nick Moyes (talk) 21:46, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Using Twitter as reference for live persons

I have a question regarding sources and live persons. Could their tweets be used as references on their Wiki pages, especially if preceded by something like "So-and-so has published on Twitter that...." or "According to their Twitter page,..." ? KBijelic11 (talk) 20:57, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Yes, sometimes, KBijellic11. WP:TWITTER starts "Self-published and questionable sources may be used as sources of information about themselves". Read that link to get the whole story. --ColinFine (talk) 21:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I would add that for such uses, the tweet would be a primary source, and thus would be restricted by the limitations on their use set out in the linked section of the original research policy. (It's really good that this thread happened, because reading that section of the verifiability policy leads me to the conclusion that it needs tweaking to refer to the additional limitation set out at the main policy defining use of primary sources; that this was glaringly missing there.)--Fuhghettaboutit (talk) 22:13, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Template links to images

How do templates such as Speciesbox create images in the template when a letter code such as EW is entered into the status field? And where could I view the code to this process so I could learn how it works? I tried viewing the source for Speciesbox and I could not see any code for this process (I presume it's somewhere else). I'm trying to become more fluent in template syntax so your help would be much appreciated. Mad Mismagius (talk) 22:06, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mad Mismagius: on pages you can't edit, you can click "View source" rather than "Edit" to see the source text. Then you need to have an eye for working out which of the text is important (some of it is for something meta, like <noinclude>{{documentation}}</noinclude> generating the documentation when you look at Template:Speciesbox)—no easy task but it gets better the more experience you get. Whatever you enter in the infobox in the "status" field is given to the template in the parameter {{{status|}}}. If you trace it through, by looking at the comment at the top to see that these parameters are sent to Template:Taxobox/core, and look at that code to find the information is then sent to Template:Taxobox/species, you can look at that last template's documentation to finally see the actual images and layout design that generates the conservation status segment of the infobox. However, this took me maybe 10 minutes to work out and I've been here for 7 years, so don't feel stupid about not understanding something. You've stumbled on a template design on the more complicated end, for what it's worth. — Bilorv (talk) 22:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Bilorv: Thanks so much for your timely and detailed response! :) -Mad Mismagius (talk) 22:28, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Mad Mismagius: The speciesbox template is mostly just a wrapper, all it does is pass the parameters from one template to another to put them in a more human readable form and sort out those that are relevant. Most of the code to actually generate the infobox is in Template:Taxobox/core, but there are several other sub templates and modules (which allow you to use Lua code in templates) involved in producing the output, the one that produces the classification circles is Template:Taxobox/species. I will warn you that this is a monster of a template, and really is not a good example to look at if you want something easy to reverse engineer. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 22:29, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Writing and Publishing Articles

When a contributor authors an article but doesn't have all of the information available on the person or topic, can the article be published anyhow, with additional information to be added later or will the article be kept on "hold" until more information is included? Mtarra (talk) 20:33, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Mtarra Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You do not need every piece of available information in an article in order to submit it(I would strongly advise using Articles for Creation to submit a draft), but you do need to have multiple independent reliable sources to support the content of the draft. 331dot (talk) 21:00, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Mtarra: You do need to have enough information to demonstrate how the person or topic meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". For more information, see Help:Your first article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:53, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

To add to this, all articles are works in progress and I would argue that less than 1% of them are "complete" or have "all available information" or meet the standards that we strive for. Nonetheless, articles do have to establish that they meet strict notability criteria, so that we know that this "complete" status can be reached one day. — Bilorv (talk) 22:01, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

One little thing new editors should know - "Publish changes" means Save, not Publish. The second - reference as you write. David notMD (talk) 22:45, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Broken navbox?

I think the article COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines is somewhat broken. I don't know if other users could observe this phenomenon or error, but if you would take a look at the lowermost portion of this article (below {{COVID-19 pandemic}} and {{COVID-19 pandemic in the Philippines}}, you would see the template {{Rodrigo Duterte}} not working correctly and only showing a link to it (here's an example: "Template:Rodrigo Duterte"). Now, my theory is that {{Graph:Chart}}, for whatever reason, is behind this error. This might affect navboxes and citations if either are long enough. You can also check out my sandbox (right here: User:HueMan1/sandbox; FYI, I have removed this chart from the article above) where I demonstrated how this error occurs by adding a huge number of citations.

One more thing (somewhat unrelated), I am confused on why the same article above isn't appearing at Wikipedia:WikiProject COVID-19/Popular pages despite it having an average of 2,139 daily page views. Is this article really broken? —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 14:16, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

hueman1 The problem here is that you've gone over the template limit. To avoid DoS attacks on the servers there's a maximum amount of templates that can be used on any one page, to stop people creating pages that become enormous when the templates are expanded. The only real way to fix this is to remove some templates from the page, e.g. remove a navbox or two, manually format the citations or remove the graph. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 14:37, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

It's a common problem for COVID-19 articles. 45 of 56 current articles in Category:Pages where template include size is exceeded have "COVID-19 pandemic" in the title. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:23, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

PrimeHunter It's a shame that the parser limits can only be set as a sitewide variable AFAIK, it would be really convenient if there was some kind of whitelist where you could set specific pages to have a higher limit. I doubt 50 pages having an extra 50% template limit would bring the site to it's knees, and these medical articles do require huge numbers of citations. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 16:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

It's not the citation templates but the data templates which are the main culprit. {{COVID-19 pandemic data/Philippines medical cases chart}} alone uses half of the 2 MB limit on transclusions. Some articles have moved some of the data to other articles in Category:Statistics of the COVID-19 pandemic. There are far more than 50 articles where the editors would have liked a higher limit but worked to go below limit. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:35, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

I find it ridiculous and unnecessary to make separate articles for these statistics. Thank you for your comments PrimeHunter and 86.23.109.101 (I can't ping you). —hueman1 (talk • contributions) 23:26, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Entering a new biography

Courtesy link: User:Honza Giles/sandbox

I am relatively new to Wikipedia editing, although I have recently made some additions to existing biographies which I hope are genuinely helpful. I would like to submit a brief biography of my father which is partly based on a full-length academic biography (hardback book) published a few years ago. I am of course happy to declare my personal relationship to the subject. Before submission, I would like to get an opinion on the aspect of notability and on my use of citations. Is there someone who would look at the draft text which is in my sandbox and comment on it?

My account name is Honza Giles. Honza Giles (talk) 19:56, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Please see WP:PROUD and WP:COI before you continue creating a biography about your father. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:11, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Just so you know, it is not necessarily a bad thing, it's just that it would be wise to have another editor do it for you as you have a major conflict of interest. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:12, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Honza Giles, it is perfectly acceptable for an editor with a declared conflict of interest to submit a draft article through the Articles for Creation process. Please study Your first article. Cullen³²⁸ Let's discuss it 20:16, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Oh ya that would also be a useful link. Blaze The Wolf | Proud Furry and Wikipedia Editor (talk) 20:22, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Honza Giles: Welcome to the Teahouse! Now that you have read WP:COI, please disclose your conflict of interest on your user page - you can use {{UserboxCOI}} for this. I suggest you add a lead section to your draft - see MOS:LEADBIO. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:51, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Honza Giles, you should definitely add that lead section. Also, do make sure that nontrivial assertions are explicitly referenced. Some of those that aren't yet referenced are major, as an example: He published it in Britain as "Without a Shot being Fired", which caused great consternation among Western governments. Presenting evidence for publication of Without a Shot being Fired is trivially easy, but evidence for such consternation doesn't immediately pop up as the result of a Google search. Which is not to say that it doesn't exist (it may very well exist only on paper and microfiche), but it's your job to present it. -- Hoary (talk) 23:39, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Question about a source

I'm caught up in some ridiculous dispute about the Quinton Flynn debacle (he's been accused of sexual harassment, but according to some the accusations have been debunked and there are claims circulating that his wife may be involved in attempts to debunk the entire thing and that the primary accuser is actually a malicious ex who has a protection order filed against her by Flynn...) and, upon looking into things a bit more, I do agree that including everything about this should be put on hold until more concrete information comes out. However, it is irrefutable fact that his lines as Kael'thas Sunstrider in World of Warcraft are being removed from the game and replaced by another voice actor's work (reading the same lines). The main source I have for this is Wowhead, a community site that noted these changes on the PTR (testing area for the game) that will be implemented in the next patch. My question is this: is Wowhead good enough of a source? The post isn't from the forums or whatever; it's an official news post from the site admins, and this site has been a trusted source on Warcraft information for well over a decade now. Is it reliable enough for Wikipedia's occasionally higher-than-average standards, however, or should I/we wait for Polygon or whoever to report on this? And if they don't, will the information on his removal and replacement from arguably his most famous role not be on his page? Thanks in advance for your answers, and if you have any further questions, let me know. Pecanurdu (talk) 23:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

YOu should probably take this to WP:RSN, that board deals with this kind of thing specifically. He iro 23:49, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Contact authors

Hi: I was just wondering if there is a way to contact the author of a particular page if you have a further question or information that might be interesting or useful (or not). TIA marilyn CybercroneCA (talk) 02:12, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Use the talk page of the article. David Biddulph (talk) 02:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@CybercroneCA: Wikipedia articles are usually written by dozens, if not hundreds of different contributors! As such, no single person is responsible for the content on any given article.

If you have a suggestion for how to improve an article, you should open a discussion on that article's talk page. You can also be be bold and make the change yourself! Do note that talk pages are intended for improving articles, and are not forums for general discussion about the article's subject.

If you want to ask questions about a subject and learn more, you should check out the Reference Desk which aims to provide useful answers and information.

Hope this helps, and happy editing. RoxySaunders (talk · contribs) 03:06, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

how to be listed in wikipedia listings?

how does one gets listed in the wikipedia listings? thank you. Ncanetti (talk) 03:08, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@Ncanetti: Welcome to the Teahouse. I should stress that Wikipedia is for articles about subjects that are notable by Wikipedia's standards, which is done by providing reliable, secondary, independent sources. Creating an article as a means of advertising is prohibited and is more likely than not to result in frustration. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

How long does it a new version of file on Wikipedia to appear?

How long does it a new version of file on Wikipedia to appear? ItsJustdancefan (talk) 02:59, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

If a file, or an article, is already published on Wikipedia, then a new version thereof usually appears as soon as its uploader or creator clicks on "publish". There are exceptions. Are you having trouble with a new version of something? -- Hoary (talk) 03:19, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Citation style

Are you ever supposed to mix citations templates like sfn, harvnb, etc.

Also, can I make note of a page or chapter using a template like harvnb for one source and not use the template for another source if there's no need for a page number? TipsyElephant (talk) 02:00, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@TipsyElephant clarity is king here. studying Wikipedia:Citing sources ought to bear fruit for you. If you feel it does nothavethe answers you seek please come back here, ideally to this thread, and ask for clarification Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^{Talk to me} 06:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Can Anyone Help meto Submit a Draft for Review?

Really appreciate if anyone could help me to submit a draft for review. Draft:NVT Phybridge Randfiskin (talk) 15:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC) Randfiskin (talk) 15:32, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

@Randfiskin: It has already been submitted for review (see the very bottom of the article.) Hope that helps. NightWolf1223 (talk) 15:42, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

And... Declined (wow, that was quick). Creator has since declared PAID. Next step is fix and resubmit. David notMD (talk) 16:36, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

There is a lot more they need to disclose including a case of sockpuppetry. GSS ^💬 16:38, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

Whether sock or not, Randfiskin is suspected of previously creating articles without declaring PAID for those. David notMD (talk) 16:47, 16 April 2021 (UTC)

That'll be Randfiskin. Maproom (talk) 07:22, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Help with Wikipedia essay, please!

I am currently writing User:NotReallySoroka/No such redirect as "Dorian Fried", which aims to express my opposition to middle and last name only redirects (such as the deleted Gamaliel Harding).

How to find Wikipedians to improve this essay? Am I canvassing if I find only people who stands with the content of the essay?
Are there any XfD cases involving middle-and-last-name redirects, even if they were keepers? If yes, please show me them!
If I am confident with the essay how may I propose to turn it into a formal guideline or policy?

Thanks, NotReallySoroka (talk) (formerly DePlume) 04:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

@NotReallySoroka: Hello, in response to your questions.

Wikiproject and talk pages of relevant guidelines or policies are all good places to ask. In your case I would leave a message at Wikipedia talk:Redirect, Wikipedia talk:Redirects for discussion and Wikipedia:WikiProject Redirect
I'm not aware of any cases personally, but all previous RfD discussions are archived in a searchable log at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log.
Wikipedia:Policies and guidelines#Proposals gives an overview of the process for proposing a new guideline or policy. There's also an essay at Wikipedia:How to contribute to Wikipedia guidance which may be of interest.

Hope this helps. 86.23.109.101 (talk) 09:36, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

"This article has multiple issues" - How can I have this removed?

This concerns the Bud Powell page.

I have written the following elsewhere but, as I am unsure that it will reach the editor(s) who have issues with my contributions, I repeat it here. I apologize to anyone who has read this elsewhere, at Talk or somewhere else; I find navigating Wikipedia user pages difficult:

"I hope to resolve the matter before us to your satisfaction. That is, I would like to have the banner that now appears at the top of the Bud Powell page removed. (I continue to have trouble understanding how to move about Wikipedia's user pages; I'm not confident, e.g., that these words will be seen by you or by anyone else who chooses to get involved in the matter.)

"I submit (as support for my position) one contribution to this discussion, coming as it does from someone whom I don't know. I read it as I clicked from page to page, hoping to learn how to get the banner removed:

" http://www.wailthelifeofbudpowell.com/powell-chronology/ is a great source for anyone interested in learning more about Bud or editing this article Adamilo (talk) 23:30, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

"Elsewhere I saw a reference to The Complete Bud Powell on Verve, a five-CD set.

"That chronology, which is the source for many of the facts on the Powell Wiki page - as well as that CD set - is entirely my work. (The latter was cited by NARAS with a nomination for Best Liner Notes of 1994.) I constructed the chronology over the fifteen years that I spent in researching my book. Its findings have been accepted by the author of the University of Pennsylvania Press-issued Powell biography, by all authors of magazine articles, by all scholars in the field, by the person whose transcriptions of Powell compositions is linked to the Powell Wiki page, and by Tom Lord, whose discography is the standard for jazz discography online." Powell biographer (talk) 11:09, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Courtesy: Article is Bud Powell and there is a discussion on the Talk page about the use of the biographer's book as a reference, conflict of interest, etc. David notMD (talk) 12:10, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Category for my first draft article submitted for review.

Two days ago I submitted my first article about a disaster event. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chala_LPG_tanker_disaster Could you recommend suitable Category for this article? How does category help reader interest for an article? Also please suggest if there is any thing that I need to improve? Ssumesh (talk) 12:02, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Categories do not get assigned until drafts are accepted as articles. Four of the images have already been tagged for deletion for copyright violation because you claimed as your own work, dated 2021, even though the event took place years ago. David notMD (talk) 12:19, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

AFD Withdraw

Please check if I have withdrawn AFD properly or not. Andrea_Massa_(electrical_engineer). Sonofstar (talk) 15:46, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

All looks good to me. Theroadislong (talk) 16:15, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Editing

How can I edit semi-protected articles. Thanks. Pullar56(talk). — Preceding undated comment added 16:11, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

Pullar56 Your account is not yet four days old. In the interim, you may make an edit request on the relevant article talk page. Just FYI, the "talk" link in your signature does not go to your user talk page. 331dot (talk) 16:17, 17 April 2021 (UTC)

[1] Sprangler, Nicholas (April 24, 2019). "Report envisions modernizing Hauppauge Industrial Park". Newsday.

[2] www.google.com

[3] ttps://www.nytimes.com/2021/04/16/world/asia/hong-kong-martin-lee-jimmy-lai.html

[4] Ramzy, Austin. Hong Kong Court Sentences Jimmy Lai and Other Pro-Democracy Leaders to Prison New York Times.

[5] Ramzy, Austin (April 16, 2021). "Hong Kong Court Sentences Jimmy Lai and Other Pro-Democracy Leaders to Prison". New York Times. Retrieved April 16, 2021.

[1]

[1]

[1]

[2]

[3]