Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1161

Archive 1155

←

Archive 1159

Archive 1160

Archive 1161

Archive 1162

Archive 1163

→

Archive 1165

Mind & Life Institute

The Mind and Life Institute should be the "Mind & Life Institute"; its website uses the ampersand (even though its URL does not; can URLs include ampersands?). Mind & Life Institute (mindandlife.org). At Mind and Life Institute, the title and the name above the picture on the right spell out "and," but the first sentence of the article uses the ampersand. I think that the title and the name above the picture on the right should be changed to an ampersand (it seems incongruous to have the first sentence conflict with the title), but I don't know how to edit those. Maurice Magnus (talk) 21:33, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Maurice Magnus. I have moved the article to Mind & Life Institute. Cullen328 (talk) 21:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. And I was able to change it above the picture on the right. Maurice Magnus (talk) 22:03, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Maurice Magnus: To answer your parenthetical question, the ampersand is a reserved character for a URL, to designate a delimeter between variable name=value pair parameters in a URL string; for example see the URL https://www.google.com/search?tbm=bks&q=shakespeare where an ampersand is used to separate the parameters tbm=bks and q=shakespeare. An ampersand cannot be part of a domain name. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:04, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328:, :::@Anachronist: I also changed the "and" to an ampersand in the article's references to "Mind and Life Dialogues", because its website has it with ampersands. https://www.mindandlife.org/convening-type/mind-life-dialogues/. Thanks for the explanation, Anachronist. Maurice Magnus (talk) 22:14, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Maurice Magnus: While your query's been answered, you may be interested in reading MOS:AMPERSAND, which allows the retention of the character in proper nouns. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:33, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

I have taggerd the article for excessive reliance on non-independent sources, and for possible failure of notability (I didn't spend long looking, but I didn't find any substnatial independent sources). ColinFine (talk) 15:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Book ref. template wants URL

While editing The Big Steal, I'm getting an error message for note # 5 because the book reference template has a field for a URL and I didn't provide one. How do I fix this? (This has happened before.} Pete Best Beatles (talk) 04:17, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: If you remove the access date, that error should go away. See Help:CS1_errors#accessdate_missing_url for more info. RudolfRed (talk) 04:52, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

To clarify, Pete Best Beatles, the access date in a citation template refers to the date that you read a website and verified that it supports the content. So, if you do not provide a link to the website, the template generates an error message. Offline paper sources are fine, but ignore the accessdate parameter. Focus on the bibliographic information about the reference: title, author, publication, publisher, publication date, page number and so on. Cullen328 (talk) 05:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

So it's the Access date parameter! In the past, an editor fixed the problem and didn't really explain fully what had happened. This then begged the question why the access dateparameter was there in the template to begin with. Why didn't you say you'd have the template people remove that? In answering that question, myself I've sort of gone down a rabbit hole - bear with me. I remember when filling out a bibliography section recently I used that parameter to link each book I added to Google Books (I didn't really know what I was doing, but I was following what had been done in the entry that was already there). Brilliant, instead of removing the parameter like you advise I thought I'd fill it out in order to be complete. But I think the original editor made a mistake. It turns out the author they cite, Ken Annakin, is not the author at all but someone merely quoted in the book. The real author of the book is a William Hare, so I've corrected in the citation in the article (let me know if that was wrong for me to do). But the snippet of the book shown in Google Books that quotes Mr. Annakin doesn't actually support the reference, so all the information in the article based upon that reference should really come out, right? I guess this is the meat and potatoes of Wikipediaing, but as a relative newcomer, this is sort of devastating because I had carefully woven new material into an existing section, adding context and creating something I'm proud of. I'm going to track the physical book down to find the relevant quote. Is it okay to leave the article and Reference section as it is while I do this? Further complication: over at Amazon Ken Annakin is actually listed as a co-author after all. That doesn't really change the situation or the question above, but I notice that the ref. cite template for books doesn't seem to allow for multiple authors. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 09:15, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

To your last point, Pete Best Beatles, {{Cite_book#authors}} works the same way as other key templates, {{cite journal}} and {{cite web}}. They allow multiple authors using (for 2 authors) |last1=Surname1 |first1=Forename1 |last2=Surname2 |first2=Forename2; and so on for more authors. You can also use Vancouver style |vauthors=[a list here] for multiple authors, although I don't like that method for reasons too complicated to discuss here. There are also provisions to cite authors in an edited book and give the name of the editor. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Pete Best. If the cited source does not support the claim it is supposed to, then ideally the claim should be removed unless another suitable source can be found for it. That is often a lot of work, so an interim solution is to tag it with {{failed verification}}, giving notice to the reader that there is something amiss. Some editors disapprove of such drive-by tagging, but it is an easy amelioration of the situation. ColinFine (talk) 15:09, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Ariel Rojas (weathercaster)

Hi, I just created the article Ariel Rojas (weathercaster) hours ago, and I am confused if a weathercaster and meteorologist are the sane? Please tell me if they are the same or not. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 08:36, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

A weathercaster presents the weather forecast on t.v. or radio; a meteorologist studies weather patterns, often with the purpose of forecasting them. small jars tc 09:02, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SeanJ 2007. A person can be both, but it depends on their education. A meteorologist will have a university degree in meteorology. Cullen328 (talk) 15:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SeanJ 2007, and welcome to the Teahouse. The biggest problem with Ariel Rojas (weathercaster) is not the title, but the lack of any sources that establish that he meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. The first source is a routine announcement, the next two are the same article, which appers to be based on a press release, and the last is based on an interview. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

Unless you are confident of creating an acceptable Wikipedia article on the very first attempt, I strongly recommend that you don't create articles directly in mainspace, but instead create drafts using articles for creation. ColinFine (talk) 15:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

How to make a draft of an article

I have been editing Wikipedia articles for a few months now, and I wanted to try creating my own. I have read several of the guides Wikipedia has about writing an article, so I think I have a general sense as to what to do. I picked a subject off of the United States Wikiproject requested articles list, so I think the topic should be notable.

Can someone explain the best way to start making a draft? I know that you can use a sandbox, but I don't know how that works. I did make a draft (not in the sandbox), but I want to be able to save it without publishing it yet. I did read various Wikipedia pages about how to do it, but I was overwhelmed because there was so much information, so I'm still pretty confused. Sorry if this is a dumb question, I did try to figure it out myself but I couldn't. A. E. Katz (talk) 16:53, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

There are no "dumb questions"...there should be everything you need here Wikipedia:Articles for creation. Good luck. Theroadislong (talk) 16:57, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! A. E. Katz (talk) 17:06, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@A. E. Katz, don't be afraid of the Publish changes button. It simply saves the edits to that page. So if you're working in your sandbox, for example, Publish changes saves your changes to your sandbox page. It does not "publish" the page to mainspace. Schazjmd (talk) 17:01, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! So if I'm working in my sandbox, do I just change the sandbox to a draft of the article, or do I make a subpage of the sandbox or something? A. E. Katz (talk) 17:16, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

To work on articles, you can create a page in the Draft workspace or you can create subpages in your user workspace or just work in your sandbox. When the article is complete and you believe it's ready for mainspace, you can move it to its mainspace title. The space where a page exists is indicated in the page title: User:A. E. Katz/my draft article is a user subpage, Draft:my draft article is in the draft workspace, User:A. E. Katz/sandbox/my draft article is a subpage of your sandbox page. For mainspace, the page would be moved to my draft article. (Obviously, I'm just using my draft article as placeholders for the actual title.) Schazjmd (talk) 17:21, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, that helps a lot! A. E. Katz (talk) 16:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@A. E. Katz: There is also a lot of good information in Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 01:53, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks! A. E. Katz (talk) 16:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing Vincent van Gogh

I would like to edit this page with the following paragraph, but the system doesn't allow it:

Van Gogh as a source of inspiration

Over the years, Van Gogh and his life have been a source of inspiration for various cultural expressions. The Flemish writer and visual artist Louis Paul Boon based his novel Abel Gholaerts (1944) on the life of Van Gogh, although he moved the action to Flanders. Various films have been made about the artist's life, including the 1956 film Lust for Life with Kirk Douglas as Vincent van Gogh. Vincent and Theo, a film by Robert Altman, was produced in 1996. In 2009, the IMAX film Van Gogh, een kleurrijk portret was released. Don McLean wrote the famous song Vincent (starry, starry night) about him, based on the painting The Starry Night. In 2009 the film Vincent van Gogh, een zaaier in Etten came into circulation, the director was Vincent Oudendijk. More than 100 painters collaborated on the animation film Loving Vincent (2017), who made a painting in the style of Van Gogh for each frame.

Smi953 (talk) 08:32, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia relies on reliable sources. Where are your reliable sources for that informaton? Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:35, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Smi953 Your editing history shows no contributions for the Vincent van Gogh or related articles. So what do you mean by the system doesn't allow it? There may be a case for adding something in the "Reputation and legacy" section of that article, or more likely within Cultural depictions of Vincent van Gogh, which could do with a lot of improvement. In any event, as Shantavira has indicated, whatever you add must be adequately cited. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I have added the reference:

Smi953 (talk) 14:45, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

References

@Smi953, Wikipedia cannot be used as a reference - not any version in any language. It is not considered a reliable source. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I cannot really understand your reasoning. Though the text is a translation from the Dutch Wikipedia, all hyperlinks in the text are from the English Wikipedia. These hyperlinks, which already exist many years, show that the text is truthfull as to its contents and are the references needed. I'll try to insert the texts in Cultural depictions of Vincent van Gogh, but shall also make a reference to this this page under 'external links', as this is missing.

Smi953 (talk) 16:06, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Smi953, a link to another Wikipedia page does not belong in external links (since it is not an external link, it is an internal link). It would go either in a "See also" section, which that article currently doesn't have, or as a sublink under one of the headings (possibly Vincent van Gogh#Reputation and legacy, where there's already a link to Posthumous fame of Vincent van Gogh; you could add it as a second link, like the multiple links under the heading Vincent van Gogh#Nuenen and Antwerp (1883–1886)).

As for your other question, a link to a different article on Wikipedia is not a reference. Those articles may contain references to sources which you could then borrow to support the information you're adding. The only exception I'm aware of to "a link does not count as a ref" is in list articles. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:27, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Radio Reloj

I lived in Barcelona in 1969 and 1970. I knew a woman who was a broadcaster for Radio Reloj, a station that Wikipedia currently says had only been in Cuba and is Cuba-based. I am quite certain that there was one in Spain, maybe not broadcasting out of Barcelona. Perhaps Madrid. Any clarification anyone has would be greatly appreciated. Thanks 2603:8090:1800:5801:ADF8:EFC7:314D:125A (talk) 16:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

You are possibly correct, IP editor, (see this link) but I think they just rebroadcast the Cuban station, so I'm not sure whether this has any relevance to our article Radio Reloj. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Notice can be removed on this page - Multidimensional Poverty Index

Hello everyone - I added some citations and corrected previous citation title errors on this page - Multidimensional Poverty Index. I feel the notices on top are 6 years old and they can now be removed since the issue seems to be addressed. I would love to have some opinions on this. I didn't want to remove the notice without having some opinions. Thank you. ANLgrad (talk) 03:27, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Removed the 2016 tags, as article length and referencing much improved since then. Article needs to be rated for class and importance. David notMD (talk) 03:57, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much User:David notMD. Totally agree with you. If you need me to find more references, please let me know and I shall do that. ANLgrad (talk) 17:50, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

This article is not yet rated. As I know nothing about the topic, I will not do that. Improve it if you wish. David notMD (talk) 18:49, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Sure, will do. ANLgrad (talk) 17:42, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

My Article

ive been trying to make a article about a video game yet its been declined even though its perfect material Jartfart (talk) 15:25, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jartfart. You need to provide properly formatted references to independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the game. Your current draft is not anywhere close to being acceptable. Read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 15:34, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Im new to editing btw, and i dont understand it much. If you could give me any links or forums or something that can help, then thanks a ton

Also, please elaborate on how its not close to being acceptable please and thanks Jartfart (talk) 15:37, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Slope Game

(edit conflict) I think you need more references to convince the reviewers that the game is notable enough for its own article. I opened up your four references, and the first one is an advertisement to buy the domain. Not too sure, but the second one looks like user-generated content. The third may be reliable, but I can't tell. The fourth looks like a primary source. So you should need more references (some essay I read somewhere called for three secondary ones.) A web search may turn up something interesting. Hope this helps. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 15:35, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

How can i add the refrences as primary sources Jartfart (talk) 15:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Primary sources are not going to help you for notability as Wikipedia defines it. We're looking for in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking. If those sources don't exist at this time, then we cannot have an article yet. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 15:40, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Do not resumbit until you learn how to reference properly (see Help:Referencing for beginners). The game's website and the owning company's website are primary, and so do not establish notability. This draft is either WP:TOOSOON or else about a game so obscure that no one has written about it. David notMD (talk) 18:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Image Licensing

okay so there's this page Ramesh Tawadkar There's a nomination for deletion which I don't agree.

I need an admin to check thr image and if it's okay to be posted with GODL-India license Rejoy2003 (talk) 16:23, 11 August 2022 (UTC) You're everywhere, anyways imma check on "commons" cuz your link you sent ain't workin' Rejoy2003 (talk)

As you were told on IRC this is something that needs to be done Commons-side as the image is on Commons. English Wikipedia admins have no powers on Commons. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 16:24, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

You're everywhere, anyways imma check on "commons" cuz your link you sent ain't workin' Rejoy2003 (talk)

Rejoy2003 According to the tag on the file in Commons, that license is only applicable to some works of the central government of India, and not to works by the Goa state assembly, see COM:TAG India, so I don't think it can be retained, irrespective of what happens to the article itself. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:04, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rejoy2003: If the link you have doesn't work, the link to the discussion is here: Commons:Commons:Deletion requests/File:Shri-Ramesh-Tawadkar.jpg. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:29, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Article on British artist Dorothy Adamson (1893-1934)

I'd be grateful for some advice please. The artist Dorothy Adamson, who I believe is notable as she was a member of the Royal Institute of Oil Painters and Royal Institute of Painters in Water Colours) has not got an article in the English Wikipedia, but there is one on the Welsh Wikipedia https://cy.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dorothy_Adamson. The latter is very minimal and has the wrong birth date. I would like there to be an improved article about this artist but don't speak Welsh - although I could work with a family member who does. Adamson was born in England and spent most of her life there so does not have a strong Welsh connection, although she died in Wales. Should I seek to improve the Welsh article or to get approval for one in English Wikipedia? Thanks for any advice. Buckland1072 (talk) 12:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

@Buckland1072: Welcome to the Teahouse. The policies and guidelines differ between the Welsh and English Wikipedias; the biggest one is probably notability as Wikipedia defines it. If you wanted to properly create an article about her on here, you would need to find reliable, secondary sources to establish that. It's probably easier to improve the existing article on the Welsh Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:05, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Buckland1072 Of the four citations on the Welsh entry, the first doesn't mention her and two others I can reach via their URL merely show that she exists, with no significant coverage. English Wikipedia has pretty stringent notability requirements which unfortunately these references won't support. You will have to look for decent sources before you can draft an article here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:59, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you both very much. That's very helpful. In my research I haven't found very good published sources so she's probably not notable enough. Buckland1072 (talk) 15:37, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Buckland1072. It's perhaps unfortunate that we use the word "notable" as it does not mean exactly the same as the normal undertanding of the word. (For this reason, I try never to use the phrase "is/isn't notable", but rather "meets/doesn't meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability). One way of looking at the difference is to interpret it not as "worthy of note" but as "has been noted (by independent commentators in reliable sources). Another way of looking at it is to ask "is there enough independent material published to base an article on?", remembering that the material must have ben published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact checking, and that nothing said, written, or published by the subject or their associates contributes to this. ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 9 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. That's a great way to think about notability and about the issues in a non-judgemental way. Buckland1072 (talk) 21:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

After a quick search [1] is the best ref I can find. It certainly by itself is probably not enough for an article. Maungapohatu (talk) 06:32, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. I haven't really come across Google Books before and you are the second person to have suggested it in as many days, so I'm learning alot. I will do some more research and think about where I might go with it depending on what I find. Grateful for all the help and suggestions received. Buckland1072 (talk) 21:06, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

What's up with this article?

Was browsing Wikipedia, and I came across this article: Dirty War - it seems to have a bad problem with its infobox formatting, leading to a messed-up display. I'm not any expert in editing or fixing complex infoboxes, but I was wondering if anybody knew how to fix this display. It's such an important article for political/historical reasons that it seems strange to have been left like this. PetSematary182 (talk) 00:19, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

fixed, an ip screwed it up. PRAXIDICAE🌈 00:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

how do i change my sandbox name or title?

how do i change my sandbox name or title? Elmf1234 (talk) 02:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Elmf1234, and welcome to the Teahouse - if you hover over the "More" tab on the top right corner of your screen and click the "Move" button, you'll be able to rename your sandbox ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 02:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Book that is selling Wikipedia articles

I recently stumbled upon this; https://books.google.com.au/books/about/American_Mass_Murderers.html?id=cmTxCQAAQBAJ&redir_esc=y

This book is almost entirely copied from Wikipedia articles and is actually being sold as a paperback https://www.amazon.com.au/American-Mass-Murderers-Valrie-Plaza/dp/1312961406 Is this breaking any rules of Wikipedia such as making profits from other people's work here? Pyraminxsolver (talk) 03:00, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pyraminxsolver: Wikipedia content may be reused for any purpose, including selling it. The only requirement is that there must be attribution. RudolfRed (talk) 03:12, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Pyraminxsolver and welcome to the Teahouse! Wikipedia articles can be copied and distributed. There is also the chance that the Wikipedia article copied the book, instead of the other way around. If you think that this is the case, then leave a message on the article's talk page. Thanks and happy editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 03:26, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

No, 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝, the perpetrator of this Lulu.com product copied Wikipedia articles. Its producer https:// www.lulu.com/shop/valrie-plaza/american-mass-murderers/paperback/product-1mqd5wqk.html?page=1&pageSize=4 [join that up] says about copyright matters: "All Rights Reserved - Standard Copyright License"; but before we complain either to or about "Valrie Plaza", let us apply Hanlon's razor. -- Hoary (talk) 06:34, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Pyraminxsolver You may be interested to read about a case WT:WikiProject_Chemistry/Archive_50#Plagiarism in Elsevier book where a reputable publisher withdrew a book after editors here showed that it had copied large tracts of Wikipedia articles without attribution. In the case of Lulu.com, a "publisher-on-demand" of self-published works I'm not sure of how they would respond, assuming the book does indeed not acknowledge its sourcing. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:48, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pyraminxsolver: In addition to what Mike Turnbull said, your example is actually quite uncommon. There are a lot of sites that copy or modify Wikipedia content. A lot of these fail to follow the license (the most common is failing to provide attribution like your example, another example is making a derivative and putting it under something other than the CC BY-SA 3.0.) This has gotten so often that we have a list of sites that copy our content. If you take a quick look, you'll see that a lot are rated 'Low' in compliance (meaning they don't even say it was from Wikipedia at all).

If you really want to solve this, you can send the standard license violation letter to remind them that they need to attribute us. But sometimes it takes a lot of work to get them to comply.

Also, this ANI thread may be of interest. Hope this helps. (Sorry if this is a bit long, but I had a bit too much to say.)

(Note: The Wikimedia Foundation cannot legally resolve these cases in court or something, because the editors, not the Foundation, are the copyright holders. Only the copyright holder can file a lawsuit of infringement, at least in the US.) weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 15:30, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I just received this email after doing what you recommended.

"Dear user,

Thank you for bringing this to our attention. We have reviewed the matter and have concluded at this point that the Content in question is not in violation of our Membership Agreement. If there is any other information you wish for us to consider, please provide it to us.

Regards,

Questionable Content Team

Lulu Press, Inc. " Pyraminxsolver (talk) 02:43, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

INQUIRY

May i ask if is it okay for me to include my personal opinion or idea in making contents? Jhone2009 (talk) 02:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

No your personal opinion is never acceptable to include in an article under any circumstance. PRAXIDICAE🌈 02:56, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Jhone2009. The answer is "no". Please read about the Neutral point of view and the policy No original research. There are plenty of places online for people to discuss their personal opinions. Wikipedia articles are not such a place. Cullen328 (talk) 03:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

How do you Cite inside an info box?

I have been using the visual editor, which is intuitive and easy to use. However, I'm stuck when needing to cite references inside an infobox.

Any tips? Daisy Katz (talk) 04:10, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Daisy Katz, welcome to the Teahouse! You are correct that the visual editor does not allow you to add citations inside the infobox. They have to be added manually. If you know how to generate a citation in source mode, you can simply do that. Otherwise, a nice trick is to generate the citation with the visual editor someplace on the page where it doesn't belong, and then go into source mode and cut and paste it into the correct location in the infobox. ––FormalDude talk 04:14, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

aaah, cite somewhere, copy-paste the script, of course!

Thanks! Daisy Katz (talk) 04:20, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

templates

How can I change template from music artist to person (info box)? I need to add an "eduction" section to the info box Deric Angelettie. How do I know what to "clean up" on the wike page I've edited? SSP-TPP (talk) 03:57, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, @SSP-TPP: sorry your question took so long to be answered. If you just switched {{infobox musical artist}} with {{infobox person}}, that would let you use the |education= parameter, but it would render several other artist-specific parameters invalid. To get round this you want to create a person infobox and embed the original artist infobox within it, being careful move parameters like |birth date= out of the child infobox and into the parent. small jars tc 08:45, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

How to download videos

I try to download a video but it doesn't work 102.68.120.48 (talk) 08:34, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

From which WP-article are you trying to download a video? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:39, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

It's okay I figured it out thank you 102.68.120.48 (talk) 08:51, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

English-Chinese

Do all references need to be in English?  

And, following on from that, is Wikipedia sort of a series of entirely separate Wikipedias for each of the supported languages?

I tried to link something on the Chinese Wikipedia page and couldn't figure it out.

Thanks,

(from someone who has been editing for only a week) Daisy Katz (talk) 04:17, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Daisy Katz: References are not required to be in English. Each different language of Wikipedia is a different encyclopedia with different rules, guidelines, and policies, but they are all part of the Wikimedia foundation. If I want to link to an article from a sister project, like Spanish Wikipedia, I would type [[:es:Mexico|]] which produces Mexico. See Help:Interwiki linking for more info. ––FormalDude talk 04:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Sister projects, got it. nameinchinese Thanks again! Daisy Katz (talk) 04:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

• @Daisy Katz: two additional points to bear in mind:

1. please keep in mind that you should not cite a Wikipedia article (of any language) as a reference in support of a statement of fact, unless it satisfies the exceptions listed at WP:CIRCULAR. You can, however, re-cite references that you came across in the page from another language (but check that the reference says what the articles think it says before citing it).
2. when making interlanguage links in mainspace articles, you should probably use the template {{ill|name of the page|language code}}; as Template:Interlanguage_link#Link_to_one_foreign_language explains, this creates a link to the English page if it exists and otherwise makes it (somewhat) clear to the reader that the link will take them to a page from a different language. If I read an article about, say, Indian independence, and click on a blue link to learn more about an obscure figure, I would be surprised to land on a page in Hindi (a language I cannot read) without warning; that sort of thing is called an "Easter egg" link, and should be avoided.

Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips! Yea, I was thinking about that today. I have never hit a link to another language in all my years of using Wikipedia. Yet, soon as I did my first page, backlinking to the Chinese page was my first instinct for some reason. Daisy Katz (talk) 11:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

What counts as a News source?

Newbie Question 3…

Is there an approved list of journals/news sources for referencing?

If it’s a new site that is behind a paywall for example, is that OK?

In the semiconductor industry (where I’m editing), we use manly quite niche blogs, and zeens which I don't think would cut if for citing an edit. Daisy Katz (talk) 04:25, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

See WP:RSPS for some news sources that are commonly used. And yes, sites can be used even if they are behind paywalls. Blogs can’t be used though, since WP:BLOG applies as a rule. CollectiveSolidarity (talk) 04:27, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Got it thanks, so for example https://www.eetimes.com/ is probably the main news source for electrical engineering, but it’s obviously not on the WP:RSPS as its quite industry specific. Would I still reference this as a news article or just a general link? What’s the best etiquette? Daisy Katz (talk) 04:49, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Daisy, to answer your question more directly, no, there is no such list. In a way, it's more the other way around: there's a list of sources you *shouldn't* use, but everything else you can, as long as it meets the basic standards of Reliable sourcing. Another thing to keep in mind, is that Being Bold is a core principle here, so if you're not sure, just go ahead and try your edit. The worst that can happen, is that another editor will disagree with it and undo it. That happens a lot when you're a new editor, and even after you're quite experienced; it's quite routine, so don't take it personally when it happens. The best editors will give you an explanation of why they undid your edit, and if they don't, you can just ask them. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 04:46, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Yea that's super helpful. I had my second page knocked back and it stung a little, but I'm learning that’s the way with editing. It’s not personal it’s just the process.  Thanks! Daisy Katz (talk) 04:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

As you are new to this, consider using WP:YFA to create drafts that are then submitted to Articles for Creation (WP:AFC) for review rather than creating articles in mainspace. David notMD (talk) 05:22, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Got it, Daisy Katz (talk) 07:06, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Well it looks like you're creating new articles and thus the main issue is probably going to be meeting the notability requirement. I would say there is not really a rigid rule as to what's going to satisfy notability. You can expect that a lot of people will be looking to pounce on you for creating articles that they feel don't meet this criteria. Tread carefully. Fabrickator (talk) 05:22, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Daisy Katz, there are countless reliable sources that are not listed at WP:RSPS because they are uncontroversial. Examples might be daily newspapers in medium sized cities that have been published for many decades. Or various journals published by respected universities or historical or scientific societies. If nobody ever challenges these sources, there is no point in listing them at RSPS, because that page would become unwieldy. One of the skills that Wikipedia editors need to develop is the ability to go to the website of a publication and quickly determine whether or not it is reliable. There are borderline cases, but often it is very easy to look at pages like "about us" or "staff" or "history" and determine whether it has professional editorial control or not. And skimming a few articles will reveal whether the publication produces serious journalism, or it traffics in clickbait sensationalism, scandal mongering and spreading conspiracy theories. Cullen328 (talk) 06:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

That make sense. Daisy Katz (talk) 07:05, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the tip. I just thought creating stub pages for Billion dollar companies in English wouldn’t really be challenging for notability. Here's an example Rambus is a US semiconductor company and there giant billion dollar Taiwanese companies like, SPIL, EDOM Technology and a bunch of other ones that don’t have a page in English. Most of the content written about them however is in Chinese. Daisy Katz (talk) 07:21, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry if that sounded like a rant. I guess I have been using Wikipedia for years, relying on its validity as an impartial source of information. However, I never really appreciated the work involved until I stepped behind the curtain a little. I for sure never imagined the amount of work still needed to do in documenting our world.   Daisy Katz (talk) 07:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Most people can't imagine the amount of work required to create a decent well-formed article with adequate referencing, and they are surprised or angry when their submissions are declined or rejected. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:41, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I feel embarrassed, to be honest, for not thinking about it until now and taking Wikipedia for granted.

Two biggest surprises in two days of editing…

1.     The number of visits to banal pages that I thought only I was visiting.

2.     The number of individual editors involved in putting those pages together Daisy Katz (talk) 11:38, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Daisy Katz, I have access to the Financial Times and Washington Post, which are paywalled and will be of great use if you plan on writing company articles. If you need any of their articles, feel free to reach out to me and I'll be more than glad to send you the text over email. Are you familiar with WP:Resource exchange? — Ixtal ^{( T / C )} ⁂ Join WP:FINANCE! 11:59, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Daisy Katz Per your example, Rambus has been an article since 2004, and has accrued more than 500 edits from dozens and dozens of editors. For a draft to be accepted, it does not need to be that long, nor have that many references, but the references need to be independent of the company, from reliable sources, and more than just a mention of the company by name. As noted earlier, refs do not need to be in English, but having no refs in English will likely increase the time between submitting an AfC and it being reviewed, as reviewers pick what they want to do next. David notMD (talk) 11:53, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok thanks Daisy Katz (talk) 02:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft Article

Hello, Hope you are well, thanks for everybody helping in my queries in Wikipedia. It's great to be here editing and learning many new things. Today I have written an article; a draft article so before I submit it, I would like some feedback and whether it's is good enough to be an article of Wikipedia and if they are any copyright violations. Below is a link to my draft article. Thanks. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Blancpain_50_Fathoms#Blancpain_50_Fathoms Dane Khan (talk) 10:09, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Putting the matter of copyright violation aside for a moment, Dane Khan, no it's not good enough. It makes little sense (I don't even know whether it's about one model of watch, one "collection", or several "collections"), and it cites no reliable sources whatever. I infer that you don't understand basic facts about Wikipedia. Please digest Help:Introduction/All. -- Hoary (talk) 11:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Given that the article Blancpain about the watch company has a subsection about its Fifty Fathom watches, I suggest you tag your draft for immediate deletion by putting Db-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top of the page, and instead work on improving the Blancpain article - with references. David notMD (talk) 12:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

The murder of Adrian Donohoe

I have edited the wrong information available on the above subject with regard the name of the correct forensic pathologist who handled the entire case of scene visit and the autopsy of the murdered cop, Adrian Donohoe in Ireland. I was then informed by Wikipedia that my corrections are not verified. This is insulting and leaves one a lot of doubt about the quality of the information present on your web site. For your information it was not Marie Cassidy who handled the examination of the body of the Adrian Donohoe, RIP, but it was Dr. Khalid Jaber

https://www.anglocelt.ie/2020/02/06/gardas-wife-identified-his-body/ Kjpath (talk) 10:33, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy: Murder of Adrian Donohoe David notMD (talk) 12:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Kjpath Your first effort was reverted because while you removed the unreferenced content identifying Marie Cassidy as preforming the autopsy, you did not provide a reference in support of naming Khalid Jaber. You have since repeated the revision with two URLs that identify Jaber as having visited the murder site and performing the subsequent autopsy, but not in an accepted reference format. I converted one into reference format. David notMD (talk) 12:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

What does the discussion being archived mean? I saw no need to further discuss with you the topic of the murder of Adrian Donohoe. I am the forensic pathologist who carried the autopsy and visited the scene. I must admit I find you imprecise in your information and when you are told you are wrong you become defensive and persisting in being misleading. I have provided you references. The irony is that you quoted the story of someone else carrying the autopsy without actually verifying the information you have posted for years. Poor standard Kjpath (talk) 19:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

How to access .ris files from Wikipedia Library

I have a suitable resource I've found searching on the Wikipedia Library, but it's a .ris file and none of my applications can open it. I searched online, and apparently it's a sort of specialized bibliographic file format. I cannot download any applications to access it. Can you please help? Thanks, — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 12:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Vortex3427 There's a free online converter to standard .pdf format at this URL. Disclaimer: I haven't tried it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:30, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I hadn't heard of this format before I saw your question, but from what I can see, it's simply a way of storing superficial information about a reference, sometimes including the abstract, so there's probably no hope of retrieving the actual text of the resource from it. If you drag it into a simple text editor program like Notepad or Textedit, you should be able to read this information in a textual format. small jars tc 12:33, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I got the URL from Word, which led me to an open-access document. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 12:35, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Referencing

Is there any helpful way in which I can learn how to write in references which go alongside with a PDF or a book which doesn't have that much information on it (e.g its Authord and title aren't shown in a google books preview or there's no preview at all)? Because I'm trying to learn how to site those things for an Article which is currently in my sandbox. I appreciate any answers to this question and will take any tip.Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 1:02, August 12 2022 (UTC) Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 12:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Replying to my comment: I know how to site books like The rise Of animals, although the books which don't share a lot of information about who made it, authors etc. I don't.Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 06:58, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Rugoconites Tenuirugosus: your references included a rather obscure way to reach DOIs but the DOI themselves are fine and can be used to generate full cites. I've done one and will explain on your Talk Page what I did. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:37, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I checked it, I'll be using your method for future ways. Thank you so much for your help.Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 1:02, August 12 2022 (UTC) Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 12:02, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Editing semi-protected article

How can I edit semi-protected articles? Rrthakur22 (talk) 15:57, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Rrthakur22 and welcome to the Teahouse! Semi-protected articles can be edited only by autoconfirmed accounts, or accounts that are at least four days old and have made at least ten edits to Wikipedia. Please click the two links if you wish to find out more. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 16:01, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Your Power. I fulfill both the conditions (4 days old and 10 edits). I hope now I can edit semi-protected articles. Rrthakur22 (talk) 16:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rrthakur22. You are autoconfirmed. You can edit semi-protected articles as long as you follow the Policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 16:26, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

(Cullen328 probably meant WP:PAG instead of EP:PAG.) weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:42, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

I corrected my typo. Cullen328 (talk) 17:07, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Rrthakur22 What you have on your User page verges on webpage like content, which is not allowed. See WP:UP for what is and is not appropriate for User pages. David notMD (talk) 18:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Rrthakur22 has since revised own User page. David notMD (talk) 14:17, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Author: SUZY KLINE

"Herbie Jones and the Class Gift"/("illustrated by Richard Williams")/*Puffin Books*/(*Kline, Suzy. "Herbie Jones and the class gift." "Reprint. Originally published: New York: Putnam's, 1987." "Summary: Disaster strikes when Annabelle trusts Herbie Jones and Raymond with the job of picking up the class's gift to their teacher." "(1. Schools-Fiction. 2. Gifts-Fiction. 3. Humorous stories)" "I. Williams, Richard, ill." "II. Title." "PZ7.K6797Hg 1989 (Fic)" "88-30556" "ISBN 0-14-032723-1"* (*Set in Caledonia*) 12.179.110.169 (talk) 14:33, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse. Did you have a question to ask about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link to Suzy Kline, a seriously under-referenced and undeveloped article. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.196.45.159 (talk) 14:51, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

"Take it to the talk page" unresolved?

Repeatedly we are told to take proposals and potential changes to talk pages so they can be discussed and others can agree that something is good for the article. What are you supposed to do when you make a post on the Talk Page, and flat out nobody responds? For example if I make a post on a talk page along the lines of "I don't think this paragraph should be on this page, it's not relevant to the article", perhaps I made this post because I tried to be BOLD but my removal of the paragraph was reverted, but then nobody answers. I'm still sitting here strongly believing that the paragraph should be removed, but nobody is providing me any argument for why it should stay. Yet I know that if I try to be BOLD again, I'll just be reverted again and possibly even be warned for "disruptive editing". So, what do you do when a Talk Page request is left completely unresolved? 2604:3D08:7481:AF00:1D22:1331:97B:AE3E (talk) 02:48, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. There are various forms of dispute resolution available to you. Perhaps a Request for comment might be a good choice in your situation. RFCs draw in uninvolved experienced editors. Cullen328 (talk) 02:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

You and Sportsfan 1234 have verged on edit warring, have had discussions on each others' Talk page, and most recently (today) at Talk:The Amazing Race. Either wait to see if more people weigh in there, or per Cullen328 advice, go to RFC. Remember to be polite. David notMD (talk) 04:42, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

If it's a dispute between just two editors, Wikipedia:Third opinion is a good option, and the response time is pretty good too. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:43, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, create a subsection on the article talk page where each of you presents their position as succinctly as possible (don't expect uninvolved editors to read all the past talk page discussion!), and ask for a third opinion. It works great. ☿ Apaugasma (talk ☉) 09:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

A revert does not equal an edit war, please be careful with your words. Sportsfan 1234 (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Image copyright for AlertWildfire camera images

Hello! Not sure if this is a Wikimedia or WIkipedia question specifically. I'm trying to suss out whether it's acceptable to upload and use still images from the AlertWildfire camera system for articles. Some already do, like Electra Fire (2022), and they're frequently used in news articles (example). Many wildfires don't have very good images available through firefighting agencies (who have bigger priorities, I guess!) or or civilians/press, since they're often remote and inaccessible. Being able to use AlertWildfire stills would be a big help, but I'd rather not find out when someone more discerning has to delete my image.

The copyright situation seems tricky- the organization is a consortium of a couple western state unis, utilities, and CA government institutions. No copyright details have been found anywhere, to my knowledge. Penitentes (talk) 15:10, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Penitentes: It looks like the images are from various sources (as from the watermarks). The example you have linked claims to be from California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, which would be a government photo from California (public domain) You can click on the image to reveal more details. For example, the copyright information for your example can be found at File:2022-July Electra Fire south of Sacramento.jpg. 0xDeadbeef 15:32, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

The name beneath the photo corresponds to the account that moved the camera last (usually Cal Fire or other firefighting personnel, sometimes utility companies, etc.). So I wasn't sure if that meant they 'owned' the photo. I suppose it may be a difficult question for the Teahouse, I might email them to ascertain copyright. Penitentes (talk) 15:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Need help for clean up

need help on clean up and copy edits on Tolibian Dorathy Nnaji (talk) 11:43, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! I've gone through it a bit. It is overall a pretty good article :). Not everyone at the Teahouse has the time to go through random articles. In the future, you can either tag it with copyedit or ask someone in the GOCE (which I am a part of) to do it. However, those measures are usually only taken with long/especially important articles. Have a good day/night!

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you and i really appreciate you time, God bless, please quick one what does it take for the article to be reviewed, Thank you so much once again! Bless Dorathy Nnaji (talk) 13:55, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

You did not go through Articles for creation (WP:AFC), instead creating Tolibian in article main space. Hence, no AfC review. This will probably be looked at by a person from New Pages Patrol (WP:NPP) who may decide to approve, convert to a draft for more work, or delete. There is a large backlog of articles at NPP, so this may take months. David notMD (talk) 14:13, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

You would be much more likely to pass NPP if you placed whichever citation you think covers Tolibain in most depth and is WP:INDEPENDENT of him into the WP:lead, since that's the bit most likely to be read. Although your article follows the correct formatting of inline citations, the current reference #1 is a mere sentence about him and many of the other citations I clicked were either based on interviews or were links to his music in various online places, which could be construed as WP:SPAM rather than references. Have any reputable critics reviewed his work (or part of it) in detail? The reviews don't have to be in English and given he is Nigerian they may not be. Currently, I don't think that WP:NMUSIC is met. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:31, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Name of God

When I google what does Hashem mean in arabic or in islam ,I get a listing from Wikipedia that it means name of God.When I look at the Wikipedia page it tells me this is the name of God in Hebrew and mentions something about arabic.I think there is something wrong here. 213.205.197.128 (talk) 10:31, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Please do not post the same question both here and at the Help Desk. Any answers should be posted there - Arjayay (talk) 10:50, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

For what it's worth, Hashem is not the name of God in Judaism. More correctly, it is a euphemism or substitute for God's various names. Highly observant Jews only use the actual names during formal worship. Hashem literally means "the name" and is used as a substitute in more casual conversation. See Names of God in Judaism for more information. Cullen328 (talk) 16:41, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft Declined (2)

Hello! I posted this Draft:Brenda Matos Fadholi and it was declined for not being notable. I am looking for some feedback for how to improve both issues as I felt everything was properly sourced and not biased in any way.

Thank you so much in advance! :) Tosoratto (talk) 17:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tosoratto:, if a topic is not WP:Notable, then it doesn't get to have an article on Wikipedia, because it isn't important enough. Notability is about the topic itself, and not about what is, or isn't, in the article. For example, there will never be an article Blue screwdrivers in Wikipedia, because it is not a notable topic. So, to answer your question: there is *nothing* you can do to the article. On the other hand, if you believe the assessment of the topic not being notable is incorrect, you could challenge it on that basis; but that has a different focus than just "improving the article". It's a bit subtle: do you see the point? However, the people who assess notability of new drafts are pretty experienced, and rarely get it wrong, so it would be an uphill battle, especially for a new editor. Hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 17:33, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tosoratto: Have a look at Wikipedia:Golden rule, which provides a brief overview of what's expected before an article can be published. Your draft is insufficiently sourced. If that were published, it would be speedily deleted in accordance with WP:CSD#A7 because there is no credible claim of significance given. Being a model who has had a secondary role in a television series doesn't qualify for notability; see also WP:NACTOR. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:11, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft declined

Hello! I posted this Draft:Elliot Tebele and it was declined for not being notable and not in a neutral tone. I am looking for some feedback for how to improve both issues as I felt everything was properly sourced and not biased in any way.

Thank you so much in advance! :) Strawberrytsunami (talk) 16:29, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Strawberrytsunami:, You can improve a non-neutral tone, but if the topic is not notable, it would be a waste of time to improve the tone, because a Draft for a non-notable topic will never be accepted, no matter what changes you make to the article. Your only choice is to challenge the notability of the topic (difficult, not impossible); see the next section below. Mathglot (talk) 17:22, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Strawberrytsunami: - I just improved the article by adding more independent third party media coverage, and removing the poor sources. Social media influencers are treated harshly here, because so many of them try to boost their cred by getting a Wikipedia article, when followers is their only sign of notability. In this case, with the related media coverage I found, there's enough about him to get this approved. But I'll let fresh eyes decide to resubmit it or move it to mainspace. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 20:09, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Draftspace

I need help with making a draft for Maiocercus. somehow, when I tried to move it into being a draft from sandbox it got fused with rugoconites tenuirugosus and I cannot undo that. I'm trying desperately in order to get it back and I'll thankfully appreciate any response as fast as possible since i'm extremely worried I won't be able to fix it. Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 19:07, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Rugoconites Tenuirugosus! I moved the talk page for Rugoconites tenuirugosus back to its original title, and the draft talk for Maiocercus back as well. I haven't done many moves, so I may have missed a redirect or two and you may want to check that everything's on the right page now, but I think they're separate at this point. Best, Perfect4th (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Don't worry, you did everything correctly and I would also like you thank you a lot for fixing it. Best, Rugoconites Tenuirugosus (talk) 20:45, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Autoconfirmed

I've tried to edit a semi protected page but it seems I need to be autoconfirmed. I have made over 10 edits and have been a wiki registered editor for a lot longer than four days. Any ideas why this is the case. Beautifulscarlet (talk) 19:57, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

What is the article? PRAXIDICAE🌈 20:03, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

You are absolutely autoconfirmed:[2], so that's not it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:16, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Beautifulscarlet, welcome to the Teahouse. Maybe you saw a red box saying "Note: This page is semi-protected so that only autoconfirmed users can edit it. If you need help getting started with editing, please visit the Teahouse." It's just a note. You can still edit the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:44, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

SpongeBob SquarePants episode list edit request

I notice that the season 12 segment count on the SpongeBob SquarePants episode list says 48 segments. However, I counted 49. I have an edit request to fixed that, and nothing else. So, can I fix that? LeotheBoy1110 (talk) 05:18, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@LeotheBoy1110: If the number is obviously incorrect, then yes, go ahead, be WP:BOLD and fix it, unless the article is protected so you can't, in which case an edit request is the best option. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:38, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

In general, LeotheBoy1110, I'd second Anachronist's advice and recommend that you directly fix things that are apparently errors—just be aware that being reverted isn't meant as a personal slight. Bold edits and reverts are a healthy part of community editing.

In this particular case, however, SpongeBob SquarePants (season 12) also says that It consists of 26 half-hours of 48 segments so I counted myself and got 48. Perhaps the discrepancy comes from you counting the two-episode but single segment "SpongeBob's Big Birthday Blowout" twice? — Bilorv (talk) 15:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh okay. I didn't know that "Big Birthday Blowout" was all one segment. Thanks for letting me know. LeotheBoy1110 (talk) 22:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Disambuguation

How do I address a disambiguation page? While there are several pages with the name Greg Williams. The one that matches my person appears to be abandoned and incomplete and never published. (The disambiguation page for the primary name is Greg Williams (disambiguation) Kamdigroup (talk) 00:16, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kamdigroup: There's no reason for you to address a disambiguation page; you're better served telling us what Greg Williams it is rather than being completely and pointlessly vague. I would also very strongly advise you to rename your account to one that doesn't imply corporate/shared use. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Kamdigroup, welcome to the Teahouse. I see you've created Draft:Gregory Williams; I'm not sure which article you're talking about being abandoned, incomplete and never published, since I couldn't find any other drafts about him in a quick search. The disambig page currently has a listing for him which links to Switch (band). Since the band has an article and he doesn't yet, that's the correct way to do things. What problem do you see - what are you trying to fix? 97.126.103.107 (talk) 00:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

And with that draft in hand.... oof.

• We never cite Wikipedia. Circular referencing is an academic sin.
• We can't use IMDb (No editorial oversight). IMDb is effectively an open wiki.
• Your third source is missing critical bibliographical information (publisher, year of publication, page(s) cited)
• We can't use https://www.allmusic.com/artist/switch-mn0000048757/biography (no editorial oversight) and even if we could it wouldn't help for Williams' notability (wrong topic). You need sources about Williams specifically, not about him as part of Switch.
• We can't use https://www.whosampled.com/Switch-(Band)/ (too sparse) and, once again, this wouldn't help for Williams' notability (wrong topic).
• https://eurweb.com/2020/04/10/gregory-williams-authors-new-book-switch-debarge-motown-me/# is useless for notability (no editorial oversight). I can't find a staff listing or editorial policy.

The draft is also impenetrable as written, written as more or less a whole chunky section of text, and is woefully undersourced to boot. There is no chance this article gets accepted under any circumstances in the state it is presently in. What is your connexion to Williams? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 01:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Constructiveness

I edited a page to turn the name of a topic into a link. The topic was more obscure than the links surrounding it, yet it was reverted as non constructive. What makes a link edit constructive? 2600:1700:1043:4270:9125:53CE:63CF:F305 (talk) 00:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

IP, you're going to have to be more specific (i.e. link to the diff or indicate the page), as this section is the only edit under this IPv6 address. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano Just as a point of information: when you want to see the edits made by an IPv6 user, you need to look at not just their current address, but the entire /64 range they're likely to have used. To do that just add /64 to the end of the url at their special contributions page. That would have given you this set of edits. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm absolutely ass when it comes to actual range calculation. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:53, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, here's the link. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bodyguard&oldid=1104138811 2600:1700:1043:4270:9125:53CE:63CF:F305 (talk) 00:46, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

My guess would be due to the link not being on a single line? The closing double-squares for the link come after a newline. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. Would have been easier if I was told my mistake. 2600:1700:1043:4270:9125:53CE:63CF:F305 (talk) 00:51, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Another point of information for you, IP editor. To make a standard wikilink display in the plural, you don't need to add a pipe and repeat the text in the plural form. Instead, just put an 's' immediately after the closing double square brackets. The software will recognise this is a plural, and display it as such. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 00:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

For example, [[PK machine gun]]s becomes PK machine guns. There was no reason to warn you. I suspect the user who warned you didn't detect what your edit did. The diff [3] may at first look like you removed or broke something. Editors should examine diffs better before giving warnings but they don't always. There has been more than a billion edits to the English Wikipedia and sometimes things go too fast. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:08, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The warning [4] was made with Twinkle, a tool which can revert edits and post such warnings in seconds. We get millions of bad edits and such tools are helpful but require care. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Requesting an article

I am trying to request an article be written about me Aleu123 (talk) 02:07, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Aleu123, I'll be straight with you. I doubt you would be considered notable according to Wikipedia standards. Wikipedia has a fairly high bar to reach to have an article about someone. For someone in a sport like basketball it would require them to have played in the NBA or similar league and have multiple reliable sources write and publish articles about them. Until you can provide any evidence of these criteria an article will most likely not be in your future. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 02:14, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

So many people want others to write articles about them, Aleu123. Spectator sports is a blank to me, so I'm not qualified to judge from your user page whether you're a notable basketball player; but if you are, then basketball-appreciating editors will eventually create an article about you without any prodding. -- Hoary (talk) 02:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

The sources on your userpage are utterly useless, doubly so in a post-individual-games world where professional play is not a marker of notability. We need more than statlines, bleacher reports, and wishing for an article. If an agent is demanding a Wikipedia article for you, fire them because they and anyone who relies on Wikipedia for personnel decisions in professional sports (where there is far better and far more detailed information available from more reputable sources) is a *(%^&$% idiot. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 02:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Aleu123: I see you’re going into your senior year. I hope you have a great season. It’s TOOSOON because there’s not enough written about you yet. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 03:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

speedy deletion

Could somebody give me the link to where I can nominate an article for speedy deletion? Not the rules or a guide or a template or anything like that but the place where I can. I've been looking for more than 45 minutes! Dutchy45 (talk) 05:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Dutchy45 — there is no place to request speedies (or at least I don't know of one!); you do it by tagging an article individually, using the relevant db template. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 05:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

ah, ok thanks. I've already done that. Dutchy45 (talk) 05:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Dutchy45 Welcome to Teahouse! I would recommend installing WP:TWINKLE if you haven't already. It simplifies nominating articles for deletion and also notifying the article creator. I noticed many of your edits do not have an Help:Edit summary, which I would strongly encourage to make it easier for people checking a Watch list or in my case, searching for what pages you may have nominated for deletion. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 09:16, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Will this article pass if I submit it for review?

I want to know Draft:Baqibillah Mishkat Chowdhury Is the article worth submitting for review? Prince Tuhin13 (talk) 15:00, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Prince Tuhin13: the best way to find out, is to submit it for review. There's no harm in getting a "decline" on a submitted Draft; in fact, it can help you by giving you an evaluation by an experienced editor about exactly what needs to be improved. Before you do, though, have a look at Help:Your first article; do *you* think your Draft meets all the recommendations there? If not, go improve it. If yes, submit it! Mathglot (talk) 17:38, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

I would clean up the Name and lineage section. It is difficult to understand the writing in that section. If I am understanding the writing and the cited references, this information is mostly about Chandpur, so it might be helpful for a Wikipedia article on Chandpur, but most of it is not needed for an article about a person from Chandpur. Good luck to you! Larry Hockett (Talk) 17:51, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

As someone who works on Articles For Creation (i.e. reviewing draft articles) it is close but there is some text that needs work to make it more neutral and read better. Gusfriend (talk) 10:32, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

How to get Draft AfC Submissions reviewed faster

I am trying to figure out a way so that Draft AfC submissions can be published to mainspace in less than 4 months. May I know how article review works as well? WikiNarco (talk) 05:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@WikiNarco: The review process works the same way everything else on Wikipedia does - a volunteer will get to it when they get to it. There is no formal queue, and reviewers are not assigned to articles. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 05:30, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:Lucas Lynggaard Tønnesen has not been submitted yet? Theroadislong (talk) 05:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Not yet @Theroadislong apparently it didn't fit the guidelines (WP:NOACTOR and WP:GNG). Is there any other source that I can use to fit this criteria? (articles that encompasses this subject is hard to find) WikiNarco (talk) 05:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

if sources are hard to find, it is a sure indication that the topic is not yet notable. Theroadislong (talk) 05:57, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, WikiNarco. Here is how to get an AFC draft accepted quickly. Write your draft about an indisputably notable topic, namely one which has received significant coverage in multiple, independent reliable sources. These need to be sources of such high quality that no reasonable Wikipedia editor would challenge them. Present these sources as clean, well formatted references with complete bibliographic detail. Now, write neutral prose that summarizes what the reliable sources say about the topic and makes it clear why the topic is notable. Add your references inline. Do not try to pad your draft with mediocre references because quality is far more important than quantity. Do not write anything even slightly promotional and do not add endless detail. Be concise but briefly summarize all the main points that the reliable sources make. Drafts like this are accepted rapidly. On the other hand, editors who try to push through puffed up drafts about topics of dubious notability, crammed full of references to unreliable sources, and unreferenced praise or criticism of the topic, should not be surprised that their draft ends up stalled or rejected. Quality over quantity. Cullen328 (talk) 06:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328 WikiNarco (talk) 08:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

It is also worth noting that most drafts are looked at within a week or so and 4 months is generally for the problematic ones. Also AfC averages over 100 submissions a day so the 31 that were submitted 4 months ago are all that is left from over 3,000. Gusfriend (talk) 10:42, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Article pending publishing

I have written a biography on an existing person. It is now pending review. Could someone here assist with reviewing so that the page goes live? Leo Muzivoreva (talk) 09:44, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Leo Muzivoreva Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. If you have an association with this person, please read about conflict of interest and paid editing for information on required formal disclosures. Declaring paid editing or a paid relationship is a Terms of Use requirement.

I assume you refer to Draft:Abel Tatenda Nyawanhu. It is far from ready to be accepted, as it does not summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the person, showing how they meet the special Wikipedia definition of a notable musician. 331dot (talk) 09:50, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Unlikely to be that draft, which was declined in December after submission and doesn't seem to be currently awaiting re-review. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Or are you referring to the content on your user page(which actually is not for drafting an article, but for telling about yourself as an editor). 331dot (talk) 09:52, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Leo Muzivoreva WRONG PLACE! The draft you created on your User page is about to be deleted, with no record of it ever existing. Quickly copy if to off Wikipedia or to your Sandbox if you intend to create an article. Then, use WP:YFA to create and submit a draft. If it is deleted before you are able to transfer it, you can ask the deleting Administrator to help recover it. (Note: If there was a copyright infringement, i.e., content copied from a website, then it cannot be recovered.) David notMD (talk) 14:01, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Note - NONE of the references establish notability. The draft has lots of information about him that is not referenced. All content on living people needs to be verified by references. Referencing individual songs not needed. Delete all APPLE MUSIC refs to the actual songs and albums, which equals all of your references. David notMD (talk) 14:05, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Translation/Karasuma Strret

Hello! Please, delete redirect with mistake, thanks. Станислав Савченко (talk) 10:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

You have already tagged it for deletion. An admin will most likely delete the page soon. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:15, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Admin en-wiki, thank you for your deletion and thank you for your help!  Done--Станислав Савченко (talk) 14:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Guidance About Giving References For Article

Hello all there, greetings. Kindly guide me how to give reference for an article what is an SOP for giving reference on wiki article? shahzad 18:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hussayn.Shahzad (talk • contribs)

Hi Hussayn.Shahzad, welcome to the Teahouse. See Help:Referencing for beginners for some guidance on how to create inline citations, and for some information on the kind of sources reviewers will be looking for. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 20:17, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hussayn.Shahzad: If you prefer to edit using the Visual Editor, you may find this guidance page of use. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

reception on Boss Baby: Back in the Crib

Any good sources on where to find Boss Baby: Back in the Crib? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 19:37, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @BMA-Nation2020, welcome to the Teahouse. I think you're asking where to find sources about that series? You can try the following search links: Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 20:22, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Found one. Common Source Media. Does that help? BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 22:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

What is "Common Source Media"? is it a website? If so, please give us a URL. The only "Commonsourcemedia" I can find is the name of an Instagram user. If that's who you mean, then no: unless tha user represents an organisation which publishes articles with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking, then it is not a reliable source. ColinFine (talk) 22:48, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

If you meant Common Sense Media, then this discussion on the Reliable sources noticeboard in 2019 doesn't seem to have reached a conclusion about whether it should be regarded as reliable or not. (Note that the last posting there, which says "Generally reliable" is, I think, one of the opinions advanced in the discussion, not the conclusion of the discussion). ColinFine (talk) 22:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

that's the one. Common Sense Media. i've seen a few articles that have this kind of thing. BMA-Nation2020 (talk) 19:26, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Question about WP:BLP and similar in relation to two extensive "crime" list articles

Greetings,

I was by coincidence made aware of two related, in my view very difficult list articles: List of major crimes in Singapore (2000–present) & List of major crimes in Singapore (before 2000). They both seem to contain a significant amount of "regular" crimes, or crimes where the name of victims and/or perpetrators might reasonably not appear on Wikipedia. I'm not sure about our exact policy as I had yet had little to worry about WP:BLP and similar, so I'd like the input of the expertise frequently to be found around here. I'm especially worried about phrases like "If found guilty", which indicate that the accused (with names given!) are sometimes not yet even convicted.

I'd like to add that we don't have anything remotely similar for other countries, e.g. only listing terrorist incidents and serial killers with their own article for France. -- LordPeterII (talk) 11:11, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Both articles begin with a link to the article Crime in Singapore, which iself starts its lede with "In Singapore, crime rates are some of the lowest in the world."

Perhaps therefore the standard of what constitutes "major" (and indeed 'notable') crimes in Singapore is lower than what might be the case elsewhere.

[Personal disclosure: as a small boy I lived in Singapore for a year – but for chance, the three deaths in the first incident entered for 1965 would have been five, with my mother and myself included.] {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.196.45.159 (talk) 20:31, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

I did some cleanup on the most recent years, removing names of those not convicted and one police shooting as it did not seem to match the theme of page. The Crime in Singapore page could use some love, which would make it clearer whether the lists are needed. Slywriter (talk) 23:49, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

If my article was moved to Draftspace, shouldn't the language that I copied from also be moved?

You see, I had made a translated page from Russian to English, and it got moved to draftspace. I added every cite there and it was still moved. Therefore, shouldn't the russian version be moved to Draftspace as well? Kxeon (talk) 17:22, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kxeon: Each language Wikipedia is different and operates by different rules. Something that is acceptable for main space on a foreign language Wikipedia may not be acceptable on the English Wikipedia, because the English Wikipedia has more stringent criteria for inclusion than other language Wikipedias.

If you are referring to Draft:Vitaly Pishchenko, it violates multiple guidelines: WP:CREATIVE, WP:BLP, and WP:GNG. See Wikipedia:Golden rule for an overview of what is required for main space articles here. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:28, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

And on top of all that, @Kxeon, I'm afraid there's one more thing - you didn't attribute your translation. Please take a look at Help:Translation. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:38, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

The other thing to say is, you may well be right. Many (probably all) Wikipedias - including English Wikipedia - have many many substandard articles which, if they were presented for review in en-wiki today, would not be accepted. Unfortunately, few editors are interested in spending the time going through them improving or deleting them. See other stuff exists. ColinFine (talk) 17:58, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

And while I'm at it, what about the Ukrainian version? That has no cites AT ALL. Shouldn't that be deleted? Or is the rule just missing from the Ukrainian wikipedia entirely? Kxeon (talk) 20:59, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

@Kxeon: Same situation. You can try to nominate it for deletion there if you want, and see what happens. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 21:13, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

And how would I do that??? Kxeon (talk) 22:02, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Kxeon, English language Teahouse hosts cannot provide detailed instructions about Ukrainian Wikipedia. You will have to read their deletion policies and procedures. Cullen328 (talk) 22:18, 11 August 2022 (UTC)

Kxeon, please follow the guidance at uk:ВП:КРВИЛ and uk:ВП:ВИЛ. Mathglot (talk) 01:25, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

discussion

unable to create my article 2407:1400:AA42:1968:A116:1B17:28C7:F3DE (talk) 01:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Looking at your contributions, it looks like your only edit was to open this thread. I don't see more edits from the whole /64 CIDR range. So please provide more details about what you were trying to do. Thank you. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 01:38, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

hi ip user! if you're trying to create an article, I'd suggest you read Reliable sources (which details what reliable sources are, which are essential for an article), Notability (which details what kinds of articles about which subjects can be created), and finally Your first article (which actually goes into detail about how you can create an article). happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:07, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Is it possible that you tried to create an article while logged into an account? Or was it Speedy deleted, thus showing no evidence in your history of edits? David notMD (talk) 02:18, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Source

Are movie reviews considered reliable if used as a source while creating a celebrity page? PravinGanechari (talk) 15:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Movie reviews usually comprise mainly of feedback about the movie, with very little focus on the actor. It may praise their performance, but that is a passing mention. The subject should have significant coverage, which directly addresses them. So though they can be put in an article about a celebrity, I do not think that they can be used to establish notability. Kpddg ^(talk) 15:52, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

They can be, if they are from a WP:RS. They don't necessarily help they case for WP:N. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:56, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Like many sources, it depends on the depth of coverage of the celebrity in question. If you look at our page WP:RSPS, PravinGanechari and search for the word "film", you'll see how we view individual sources in general. So IMDB is no good but Rotten Tomatoes is usually fine. You can ask about a specific source that does give an in-depth review you are thinking of using at the reliable sources noticeboard. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:58, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, PravinGanchari, and welcome to the Teahouse. Others have addressed your question; but (at the risk of sounding pedantic) I want to suggest that you think of the activity you are doing not as "creating a celebrity page" but as "writing an encyclopaedia article about the celebrity". ColinFine (talk) 17:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine , Vidisha (actress) page has four movie reviews of two movies. I was going to bring that page to Afd as GNG is not passing. So I asked that question ( But now I have found two sources and added them to the page). Thanks for answering the question. PravinGanechari (talk) 02:22, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Merge two Articles

Can anyone please help me in merging two articles. The articles are Manju Warrier and Manju Warrier filmography. The article Manju warrier is not big and both the articles can be combined each other. So it will be helpful for the readers also. Also I am trying to make the article by adding citations and making it a good article. Anyone please help me outPaavamjinn (talk) 09:51, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Paavamjinn, and welcome to the Teahouse! Personally, I would recommend against merging these two articles (they are actually both quite large, and shouldn't be merged per WP:NOTMERGE, as the resulting article would be rather large). I'd recommend having a good look at WP:MERGE nonetheless, as it has a lot of useful information about merging. Good luck with improving the article, and have a great day! HenryTemplo (talk) 10:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I disagree with the proposal to merge those two articles, and add that the separate article listing her awards does not need to be merged either. Readers of Manju Warrier are clearly directed to the other articles if they wish to see details. David notMD (talk) 11:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

As for raising the quality from current C-class to nominating it to be a Good article, I recommend checking all the existing references to confirm those are valid, adding references whereever there is a citation needed, or just text without references (quite a bit), also consider cutting, moving text, etc. In my opinion the 2015-present section is far too long. David notMD (talk) 11:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

How do i report an IP

Hello how do you report an IP @ Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Edit warring?

I wanted to report an IP for the 3RR violation and edit warring on Amhara people article. However i couldn't report the IP, it showed red. Wanted to this yesterday, then gave up. Saw today more useless edits by this IP. Can someone tell me how to report non users? YonasJH (talk) 09:34, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Just as you'd report anyone else, I think, YonasJH. An IP number isn't a "non user"; they're a user who isn't logged in. Click on the link there that says "Click here to create a new report". You're asked to specify the user. Well, follow "User:" not with a username but instead with the IP number. -- Hoary (talk) 09:54, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

YonasJH, please note that the username showing in red merely means that the user has not created a userpage, which cannot be done as an IP and is optional for registered users. The userlinks template works for IP addresses too, e.g. {{userlinks|127.0.0.1}} results in 127.0.0.1 (talk · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log) Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 12:39, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Farhat Abbas Shah

pride of performance

Extended puffery

Farhat Abbas Shah is one of the most leading distinguished 'and popular poet of Pakistan. He started writing poetry from a very early age. His writings were published in distinguished literary magazines of our country ' Nayarang e khayaal and Nai Qadrian due to its standard of creativity and the poetic force. His entire work is characterized by excellence in terms of subject, and craft His Urdu poetry books have won paramount acclaim by breaking new ground and held in high esteem by the great critics of our time, who have considered his poetry as a landmark addition to the great tradition of Urdu literature. It is worth mentioning here that his books have been given different awards from time to time. Mr. Farhat Abbas shah is a dexterous trendsetter in Punjabi poetry. His punjabi poetry books banners new standards of Punjabi poetry. He is a promoter of social democratic and progressive platform. In the landscape of literature he has brought finest contributions. His books of critical essay and his novel idea of Takhleeqiat Passand Tehreeq was widely appreciated. His work is an emblem piece of art rich in excellence and wisdome. Mr. Farhat Abbas shah has annexed the poetry with phenomenal superior diction and fanciful symbols. Mr Farhat Abbas Shah has written more than 70 urdu and punjabi poetry books. His books on new economic theories and policies is another feather in his cap. It is not out of place to mention here that Farhat Abbas Shah, in his poetry has always spoken out not only against wars around the world but also economic injustice poverty reduction and equality in human social rights. Farhat Abbas Shah appears to be the only poet who has translated his economic vision not only into economic theory and microfinance model but also got recognition from an institution like Oxford University by doing practically successful pilot projects. A Book by Farhat Abbas Shah World Economic Crisis, Analysis And Resolve Contains details of his poetry being brought into the process of vision.

Mr Farhat Abbas Shah is a distinguished poet. He is a thinker ' social reformer His poetry has been translated into different languages. Mr Farhat Abbas Shah is one of the most popular and noted poet of our country . — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:EA:5725:C00:511F:CF41:785A:C16E (talk) 12:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP user, welcome to the Teahouse. This is not the place to submit an article - please read and follow the directions at Help:Your first article if you'd like to submit a draft article on Farhat Abbas Shah for review. You will need to provide reliable, independent, secondary sources with significant coverage of him to prove his notability and support your facts. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 14:10, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

District 9 multiple edits

An IP editor has made around 70 separate sequential edits on this article, all being unexceptional but trivial, and I wonder why. Doug butler (talk) 14:42, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

You could ask on their Talk page at User talk:222.127.36.97 which they might respond to. Or you could just see if their contributions stray into disruptive editing at some point in the future. As far as I can see, this hasn't happened yet, so I'll assume good faith. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:08, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

update page

I am supposed to leave requests for edits to "Nancy Raabe" at the talk page there, but I don't think anyone sees my request. Nancy Raabe

My update request still stands, and here is an additional cite for that spot. Thank you.

https://www.thereporteronline.com/2022/08/12/local-pastor-named-president-of-association-of-lutheran-church-musicians/ DaneCoGuy (talk) 15:24, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @DaneCoGuy, welcome to the Teahouse. No one is likely to see your request unless you use the {{Request edit}} template or the Edit Request Wizard. Both of those put your request into a queue for the attention of other editors. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 15:28, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Molang article almostly blanked

Report:

I saw that the Molang article in Wikipedia is almostly blanked leaving just the lead section, plot and series overview (the latter was just simply "

Season	Episodes		Originally aired

Closed the template to prevent syntax highlighting from acting up. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Organization - how to?

How to create a wikipedia page for my organization 47.187.215.246 (talk) 16:40, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

47.187.215.246, I strongly recommend not doing so because you would have a Conflict of Interest. However, if you really want to do so, use the Article wizard to submit a draft. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:44, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, please be sure that your organization is notable enough for an article, as non-notable articles are frequently declined at Articles for creation or deleted at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 16:46, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

And note that, if your organisation does meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, and somebody creates an article about it, the article will not belong to or be controlled by your organisation, will not be for the benefit of your organisation, may contain material that you would prefer it didn't, and should be amost entirely based on what people unconnected with your organisation have chosen to publish about you (favourable or unfavourable) and not on what you or your associates say or want to say. ColinFine (talk) 16:52, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Ardennes Fury is not a True Story!

Why haven't you taken away the category of "World War II films based on actual events" if you are supposed to know that Ardennes Fury is not a True Story?  2600:1700:63D1:630:35F0:E855:146A:3A75 (talk) 18:13, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place for new editors to ask questions about editing Wikipedia. Ardennes Fury's poster says that it is based on true events. Even if it is not an accurate depiction, nor was the movie meant to be serious (as it was a mockbuster), it is based on the German Ardennes offensive, so it does belong in the category "World War II films based on actual events". Have a good day/night!

Courtesy link: Ardennes Fury

Asparagusus (interaction) 18:22, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Isn't pretty much any WWII-drama based on actual events? For a certain value of "based" anyway. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:40, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

It's a matter of judgement – the Doctor Who episode where River Song tries to assassinate Hitler would require a very low value for "actual events", for example. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.1905} 90.196.45.159 (talk) 20:35, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Agree, Inglourious Basterds comes to mind. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:37, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

If we are looking for well-known World War II films which are pretty far from actual events then I offer Captain America: The First Avenger. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:37, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Not my favorite MCU-film, but still ok. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I see neither of the films have a "historical accuracy" section, that's comforting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Mole's World vs. Mole Manor

These 2 pages should possibly be merged: Mole's World and Mole Manor. I am not sure how this should be done, whether one of them should be submitted to an AFD or not? What do you think? Freezejunk (talk) 04:00, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Freezejunk and welcome to the Teahouse! you can read Merging which details how this process works, then you can start a discussion in Proposed merges. absolutely don't delete articles that have been merged, since their history contains information from previous contributors and contributions that would be copied over to the other page, although after being merged you can turn one to a redirect to the other, which also preserves the article history. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, I will propose it on the merge page then. Freezejunk (talk) 06:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia

I’m looking for someone to write up a Wikipedia on me and my business. Where can I find someone to do this for me? 47.34.236.106 (talk) 19:31, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Most likely you cannot. Take the time to read what's at this link: Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing.

That said, WP:s basic rule for "Should WP have an article about X?" can be read here: WP:GNG. So based on that, what are the 3-5 best sources you know that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of you and about you in some detail? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:58, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, IP, if anyone offers to write an article about you and your business in exchange for money, they are preying on you. If you or your business are notable, eventually someone will do it for free. Valereee (talk) 20:32, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Like you would ever do that... (and that's a joke, people) Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 20:35, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm free, but I ain't cheap. ;) Ba-dum-tsss. Valereee (talk) 20:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

It is not against policy, to hire a paid editor if they disclose it. I have done some paid editing myself with disclosure. The first thing you need to do is determine if you have significant news coverage. You can search Google or freelancer sites for such service providers, but just make sure they follow the rules and disclose that they are a paid editor. They should be able to tell you if you qualify and should not actually take you on if you do not have much news coverage. Freezejunk (talk) 04:06, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

But remember that no matter how reputable the paid editor, there is no guarantee their text will survive. In the general scheme of things, paid editors are treated with extreme suspicion by everyone else, and at the least hint of promotional writing, everything will get deleted or re-written by an unpaid and possibly unsympathetic editor. Unless your business is notable beyond doubt, a paid article will likely get nominated for deletion. You could easily end up spending your money for nothing. And if an article does appear, your business had better remain squeaky-clean and never have a scandal, because if it does, the scandal may be preserved here for ever. There is a lot to be said for sticking to social media for your advertising. 79.64.7.127 (talk) 08:44, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Template of "Original Research" on "Paul Hartal" article

Hello,

We can help with documents, references to improve the Paul Hartal article in Wikipedia. Even in its present state the Original Research template is not justified. Among the available supporting material: Plaque of Appreciation for commissioned design of the 24th Olympic Games (Seoul) sport art album project; award winning Dutch short film based on Paul Hartal's poem, "Subway'.books by noted scientists, Clifford A. Pickover, Moses Feingold on Hartal's notion of time challenging the conventional mainstream theory of time as a flying arrow. We are requesting your help.

Pranek Pranek (talk) 23:19, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Paul Hartal

@Pranek: I'm going to remove EVERYTHING that has no source from that article. Do not readd any of it without in-depth, non-routine, independent news/scholarly sources written by identifiable authors and subjected to rigourous fact-checking. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:55, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

And with the obvious bographical errors removed, I can see two serious issues: First, what I didn't remove is almost entirely novel synthesis (especially as regards lyrical conceptualism) and second, the article relies far too heavily on Hartal's own writings. None of the sources you offer above are any good (and if anything, gives cause to look at the whole situation here with an eye towards sanctions). —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:11, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano I'm glad you removed "lyrical conceptualism encapsulates no less a fusion of polarities than the term-amalgams of lyrical expressionism". It makes my head hurt. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 08:55, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pranek: Welcome to the Teahouse. On a rather unrelated note, I would like to kindly inform you that if you are sharing the account with someone else to please stop doing so, as that contravenes the encyclopedia's sockpuppetry policy. If you have any conflict of interest in regards to Hartal, please disclose that on your user page at User:Pranek. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:13, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Great minds think alike; I dropped a warning to disclose along with the ARBPS alert. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 00:19, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

WikiWho

I use the WikiWho extension, and run into issues where it does not work on many articles, with a notification saying "Failed to retrieve valid WikiWho data." Why does this happen, and is there a way to fix it?

If it helps any, this is an example of an article where WikiWho does not work. TheGEICOgecko (talk) 04:23, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

TheGEICOgecko We can only help you here with editing Wikipedia. To report an error with a third party app you would need to contact them. There is an email address on their webpage. Shantavira|^{feed me} 08:24, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Depending on what you are using WikiWho for, you might find WP:BLAME an equally useful facility that's fully supported as a tool here, TheGEICOgecko. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

generate citation from isbn

As I recall, at one time I would put only the isbn in a citation, and a bot did the rest. Then I started using OttoBib. Now neither of those methods work.

What is currently the best way to generate a wikipedia citation from an isbn? Comfr (talk) 21:53, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Comfr. In the source editor, click "Cite" in the toolbar above the edit area, then "Templates" and "cite book". Fill out the ISBN field and click the magnifying glass. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Actually, there is a template for ISBN, You can also insert Template and search for ISBN, then insert the ISBN number. Freezejunk (talk) 06:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Comfr, there's also the WP:Citation expander gadget that can do books, and is super-useful for journals. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Reliable Sources

I used an in depth film review from Variety Magazine as a reliable source, which I've seen in many Wikipedia articles and would also be accepted at the academic level. The film is by a notable director, as well, with an extensive Wikipedia page. I've seen comparable pages, so I really don't understand why it's not enough. Any help is appreciated. Thanks in advance.

Draft:America: Land of the FreeKS 2pisces28 (talk) 17:57, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, 2pisces28, and welcome to the Teahouse. The draft was declined not by "Wikipedia", but by the particular reviewer HenryTemplo. If you don't understand, or disagree with, the decline, the thing to do is ask HenryTemplo to explain. ColinFine (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

@2pisces28 leave a message at my talk page :) HenryTemplo (talk) 18:49, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for clarifying that! 2pisces28 (talk) 12:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Question about magazines and journals for referencing

Hello! This is the first time I ask a question after going through guidelines for Wikipedia. Is it possible to use journal or magazine for an article that has no much in newspapers? Maniboy77 (talk) 10:29, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Maniboy77 and welcome to Wikipedia editing. Yes, of course. Many of the articles on science topics use almost exclusively journal and book references. See {{cite journal}} for one of the most important templates to do this. You might also like to read WP:CITE. (initially forgot to sign!) Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:04, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

What matters is not the format of the source, but whether it is published by somebody with a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking. Many newspapers meet this requirement, but not all. Equally, many magazine, journals, websites, and books, meet this requirement, but many don't. ColinFine (talk) 12:52, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Content Removal

I could not understand why my edits to the page Aam Aadmi Party removed. I had added information from reliable sources and that pertains to the topic, although it was critical information. Please restore the information under the Funding section. Rrthakur22 (talk) 14:15, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Pinging Venkat TL in case they'd like to expand upon their edit summary for the edit in question. — Bilorv (talk) 14:54, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Better place for a dicussion would be the Talk page of the article. David notMD (talk) 09:39, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Bilorv thanks for the ping. @Rrthakur22 You should raise the matter on Talk:Aam Aadmi Party. The content was basically opinions sourced from newspapers and WP:UNDUE for the article. If you disagree with removal make a case on the article talk page. Venkat TL (talk) 15:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

To: @Venkat TL @Bilorv @David notMD The information that I added under the Funding section of Aam Aadmi Party is not opinion. It is from reliable news stories and this crucial information must appear on this page which at present exists as a PR pamphlet of Aam Aadmi Party. I am surprised to note that many other pages related to Aam Aadmi Party are also not editable. Please restore the information immediately. Thanks. Rrthakur22 (talk) 15:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22, this is not the right place to discuss this. Venkat TL (talk) 15:11, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22, you have been given a link to the talk page: Talk:Aam Aadmi Party. That is where you need to make your arguments, not here. If you cannot reach an agreement through talk page discussion, continue with other forms of dispute resolution - WP:30 and WP:DRN are options, but talk page discussion comes first. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Social media verified Link

• Social media verified account link can be added to Wikipedia page under which rules? ( WP:NOSOCIAL , WP:ELOFFICIAL )

> A Senior editor with sixteen years of Wikipedia experience had deleted a social media link from a page. [5] >A user with one year experience added that social media link again in that page. [6] PravinGanechari (talk) 14:02, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari you correctly cite WP:EL. This is a good example where policy understanding trumps any notion of seniority. If they disagree, they should raise a discussion on the talk page. Happy editing and dispute resolving! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 14:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari If there is a pretty offical website, you can use that instead, but if you can't find any, Instagram is perfectly fine, it has the blue checkmark and everything. Note also WP:ELMIN and don't add more such socialmedia EL:S. Similar discussion at Talk:Johnathon_Schaech#Facebook_as_External_link. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari I agree with @Shushugah. However, I feel that any 'official' link by a person or company should come at the top of a set of external links, so I would swap the position of the IMDB EL and the Instagram EL. And Gråbergs Gråa Sång has just dropped by as I was drafting this and said the other point I was going to make about only including the bare minimum of 'official' links. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Company username?

I just set up an account for the company I work for, I chose the company name as a username. Is this not allowed? Do I need to change my username? The rules are confusing! Gopher Sign (talk) 14:38, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Gopher Sign, welcome to the Teahouse. That is, in fact, not allowed - the account belongs to you, not the company, and the user name needs to represent you, not the company. Something like "Susan at Gopher Sign" is acceptable (though there's no need to use your real name, or anything remotely resembling it). Since this is your only edit, it may be easier to simply abandon this account and start another one. Be sure to disclose per WP:PAID, whatever you choose to do. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

So I cannot just delete the account? How can I "abandon" the account when I need to use my email to start a different account? Gopher Sign (talk) 15:31, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Gopher Sign The email you use with an account is not relevant. You may use whatever email you wish, you don't need a different email with different accounts. All you need to do to abandon an account is stop using it. You can remove your email from it if you wish, but it's not required. 331dot (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The alternative is to WP:RENAME the existing account. See that link for the details, Gopher Sign. It is possible to have multiple accounts lined to a single email address and some editors do so (see WP:VALIDALT). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Michael D. Turnbull I've seen varied opinions on this, but the account of the OP had only one edit; we renamers usually recommend that such an account simply create a new account so that we have more time to address rename requests with more substantive edit histories. 331dot (talk) 16:20, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Gopher Sign, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please forgive me if you are already aware of what I'm going to say, but experience indicates that when somebody creates a "company account" they nearly always fail to understand this.

Wikipedia does not permit promotion of any kind - and "promotion" is interpreted more widely than in the world in general. If your company meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability (but not otherwise) then there can be an article about it. Such an article would not be "a company page", as on social media. It would not belong to your company, would not be under the control of your company, may be edited by almost anybody in the world except somebody associated with your company (anybody with a conflict of interest is encouraged to make edit requests, rather than editing the article directly), and should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with your company have chosen to publish about it, not on what the company or its associates say or want to say. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

If, having read this, you decide to go ahead with the (much more difficult than it looks) task of creating an article about your company, and you have found the substantial, reliable, independent sources necessary to establish that it meets the criteria for notability, then you may try. First you must formally declare your status as a paid editor, then you should read your first article, and use the articles for creation process to create a draft. ColinFine (talk) 16:03, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Suggested edits aged over 3 months - No response

Regarding this Talk Page Talk:Software Guard Extensions#Conflict of Interest Edit Request

The article about Intel Software Guard Extensions has a large number of inaccuracies and poor information but as an Intel employee, I cannot edit directly due to a conflict of interest. I submitted a list of edit requests back in April 2022 and it looks like no changes have been made by the editors. When I submitted in April, it said the backlog was 156 edits and now it is 210. Every week we have to dissuade customers about errors they read on Wikipedia about on Intel Software Guard Extension. I am trying to be respectful of the conflict of interest rules and understand Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, but is there any way to get editor attention on this page and get some of this misinformation fixed? Please advise. Thank you! MFJpdxOR (talk) 20:42, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MFJpdxOR. You should provide reliable sources that are independent of Intel. A Wikipedia article about a company product should not be a company brochure. You have your own website for that. Cullen328 (talk) 20:57, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, MFJpdxOR, you need to make the mandatory Paid contributions disclosure. Cullen328 (talk) 21:01, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328, @MFJpdxOR It seems that this one is tricky, because Intel certainly knows more about how Software Guard Extensions actually work than anyone else. Regarding sources that are independent of Intel, Intel knows the facts. And yes, the temptation is always there for a company to write glowingly about its own products.

Even a write up at Tom's Hardware or a similar site, which could be used as a reference, might be based on info from Intel. We don't want a company brochure, but inaccuracies in technical articles don't help anyone.

Would a paid contributions disclosure, along with edit requests, achieve the objective -- if the edit requests are ever worked on? 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:45, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I have owned a successful small business for 29 years and think in my own mind that I have a far deeper understanding of the challenges and opportunities that my small business faces than anyone else. But that stuff simply does not belong on Wikipedia. An acceptable Wikipedia article summarizes what reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic say about the topic. Unless we are firm and unswerving about sticking to this core principle, the encyclopedia would rapidly devolve to a massive collection of marketing brochures with zero credibility. Intel is perfectly free to express their expertise on their own website. Not here. Cullen328 (talk) 08:23, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I suppose the proper sources need to study the Intel literature and work with the software guard extensions themselves, then write that information up in a reliable publication. I know the guideline... I must have had a momentary lapse of reason. Mea culpa. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 08:46, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, @Cullen328. I also see another editor commented on my suggestions. From their remarks, the main issue doesn't seem to be the content of what I'm suggesting, but rather the use of sources and citations that are Intel pages. I'll get to work revising my suggestions with non-Intel citations. Appreciate your consideration.

Question for you - What do I do if there is a statement about the design of Intel Software Guard Extensions that is incorrect, and the correct information resides in the public design specification published by Intel? Can I cite the design specification as a resource? No objective third party publishes the design spec. Appreciate any insight here. MFJpdxOR (talk) 16:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, MFJpdxOR. Perhaps an External link to the design specification could be added to the end of the article, as opposed to using it as an inline reference. Cullen328 (talk) 16:34, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Venerable Aureliano of the Blessed Sacrament

Please correct the article by spelling AZCUTA to AZCUETA 2603:6000:A402:F900:2983:D3B5:5D07:E7F1 (talk) 17:17, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Pedro Landeta Azcueta - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

 Done. You could have done that yourself, IP editor, since it was a simple typo, given the title of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:30, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

North Korea: Reliability of sources

A long while back, I made this RfC on the source Daily NK. In the discussion, we discussed how sources are generally unreliable when it comes to the topic of North Korea due to the country being so closed off, so much so that even reliable sources like New York Times often reports false information on the topic. Here is an excert of the closing admin's remarks:

The Daily NK has been shown to be wrong multiple times; however, it has noticeable WP:USEBYOTHERS by some of our most reliable sources, not to mention the South Korean government, which you'd think would be the most interested ... For the area of North Korea we should treat all sources with a great deal of skepticism ... Certainly we don't use Daily NK alone for information in Wikipedia's voice, but does that mean "don't use" or "use with attribution"? It has to depend on the specific instance. That's not going to be an easy rule to follow, but a) we don't really have the option to write nothing about a nation of 25 million people that regularly makes front page international news, yet b) to be absolutely safe we'd basically have to do that, because there are no good sources. DailyNK seems as good as any, which isn't very. (There are plenty of worse ones!) We are here to present the world's knowledge, and the world talks a lot about North Korea, but what it says is often wrong.

In the discussion, it was brought up that perhaps there should be an addition to policies or guidelines, such that it addresses these specific issues. In particular, if it is the case that there are no reliable sources on something that needs to be covered (in this instance, modern internal affairs of North Korea), generally unreliable sources may be used without attribution, albeit with great caution. Should there be a discussion on making additions to policies or guidelines in regards to this? Or perhaps a different set of actions should be taken? If action should be taken, how would I go about initiating it? TheGEICOgecko (talk) 04:47, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

TheGEICOgecko, the "Teahouse" is a place where people new to English-language Wikipedia ask questions about the basics of using it. It is -- rather obviously, I think -- not the place to ask your (reasonable) questions. Not because it's rude to bring them up here, but because you're less likely to be read by people who've thought hard about these matters. Try WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 12:12, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Or, for policy/guideline change discussions, visit WP:VPP (maybe after starting off in the idea lab). 97.126.103.107 (talk) 12:19, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, that's better than WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 12:27, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Gotcha, thanks! TheGEICOgecko (talk) 17:50, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

how to create a new article

how to create a new article Sumukha Bharadhwaj (talk) 17:48, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Sumukha, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your first article is the place to start. ColinFine (talk) 17:53, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Afar Triangle Democratic Republic State

Afar Triangle Democratic Republic State Wollo Media (talk) 20:50, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? That's what this page is for.

Incidentally, your user name looks as if it is representing an organisation: that is not permitted. All accounts are individual (though you do not have to use your real name). Please either change it, or abandon it and create a new account with a name which represents you as an indvidual. See SHAREDACCOUNT. ColinFine (talk) 21:08, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Issues with Captcha not showing up, preventing publishing.

I was reading the Pinkerton Academy page and noticed some outdated info and links, so I made an account and fixed it, but now in order to publish the changes I have to fill out a captcha. Only problem is, the captcha image does not show up. So I just have a textbox to type in letters that I cannot see. Reloading the page doesn't work. Lretc (talk) 04:42, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

nevermind, I guess it just needed to wait ten minutes, because all is well now. Lretc (talk) 04:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

discusion

i had in lonely hil lonely legs beat me

210.1.105.34 (talk) 04:50, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Do you have a question about how to edit Wikipedia? Cullen328 (talk) 05:09, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

css in userpage

Hello there,

does anyone if it's possible to change the style sheet of my userpage ? And if yes, how ?

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 12:05, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

I believe this is only possible in the template space. See TemplateStyles. Why are you trying to change the CSS on your userpage? Please remember that distrupting the MediaWiki interface is not allowed, even on userpages. small jars tc 12:18, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

hi,

thank you for your answer,

I just wanted to change the styling of my userpage, just for design purpose ... Vincent-vst (talk) 17:50, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

Or perhaps are you referring to your common.js/common.css page, or just changing the design or layout of your userpage? Kpddg ^(talk) 12:43, 14 August 2022 (UTC)

i found this recently : https://2015.igem.org/Wiki_Requirements/Using_HTML,_CSS,_and_Javascript

but when i try to put a <html> tag, it doesn't render properly. i can't seem to edit the html/css in my userpage.

i can put some <div> but when i start to insert some div in another div, well, it doesn't work anymore... Anyway, i was just curious if some users succeded to make pretty userpage with html/css. Vincent-vst (talk) 19:09, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vincent-vst: you can't use high-level tags like <html>, <head>, or <body> in your userpage code, because they're already part of the page. Whatever you put on your userpage is stuffed into the <html> tag in the MediaWiki interface, and nesting <html> tags is invalid. All you can really do for styling is to use inline styles or get fixed aspects of css functionality (eg. hover effects) from certain templates. small jars tc 22:02, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 06:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

not sure to understand watchlist

Hello,

I'm a bit new here and I still struggle to understand what whatchlist are.

Is there a way to save a page for when I find an article that is worth reading but do not have time ?

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 19:22, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

The whatchlist updates you when a page on it is edited; It's not a static list of articles. Maybe you could add a "to read" section to your userpage and save them there. small jars tc 19:42, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you ! Vincent-vst (talk) 19:43, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Vincent-vst. Read Help:Watchlist. Experienced editors use their watchlists to look for possible vandalism or disruptive editing on articles they care about, and to look for ongoing discussions that they may wish to contribute to. Your watchlist can be very useful once you learn how it works. Cullen328 (talk) 19:47, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Vincent-vst and welcome to the Teahouse! You can choose articles to be on your watchlist so if you press "watchlist" above you can see the edits made to them. To add an article to your watchlist, press the empty star near the "edit" button on a page. It will turn blue, indicating that it is now on your watchlist. Happy editing! 𝙷𝚎𝚕𝚕𝚘𝚑𝚎𝚊𝚛𝚝 👋❤️ (𝚃𝚊𝚕𝚔🤔) 01:24, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vincent-vst: Welcome to the Teahouse. Adding on to what people have said about the watchlist, should you decide to use that to keep track on articles you're interested in, please note that by default it marks X changes made in the past Y days, where X and Y are positive integers. If a page you've added to your watchlist hasn't been edited in a very long time, you won't see it. To see the whole watchlist without that constraint you can click on the "View and edit watchlist" link near the top of the page, or go directly to Special:EditWatchlist in Wikipedia's search bar. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:28, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you Vincent-vst (talk) 06:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

No profane word in TimedText namespace.

Can't not use profane word due to errors can be use Asterisk symbol (*) is use. 2001:44C8:4204:946D:B52E:108A:4C14:BC8C (talk) 02:25, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It's unclear what you are trying to say but Wikipedia is not censored so I have reverted [7] your removal of correct lyrics. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:37, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

We do not bowdlerize words in direct quotations. Never. Cullen328 (talk) 02:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

undo pls 2001:44C8:4204:946D:B52E:108A:4C14:BC8C (talk) 02:43, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

 Not done Cullen328 (talk) 02:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Not a social media captions. 2001:44C8:4204:946D:B52E:108A:4C14:BC8C (talk) 03:01, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

We have no control over how social media networks (ab)use our content as long as they comply with Wikipedia's licensing. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 03:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Offensive material#How to treat offensive material in articles says "words should never be bowdlerized". The lyrics are displayed at Stay (The Kid Laroi and Justin Bieber song)#Composition and lyrics when the audio sample is played so the rule applies. When a rule says "articles" it generally means all reader-facing material. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:14, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I wonder what "TimedText" signifies. It doesn't really matter, because the policy has been explained three times. It won't change, and it shouldn't. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 05:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

To understand TimedText, please read Commons: Timed text. It is closely related to Closed captioning for hearing impaired people. In the spirit of full disclosure, my wife is deaf. I object to the notion that hearing people can listen to "bad words" but that deaf people cannot be allowed to read "bad words". That is a condescending and patronizing attitude that I have opposed for 40+ years. Cullen328 (talk) 05:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Cullen328 Thanks for that info. And I know that the Deaf community have rich, full lives, and some of them who I knew had a "ribald" sense of humor. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 10:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Looking for a specific barnstar.

Is there a barnstar for reviewers of good articles? — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 05:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

There are several reviewer's barnstars (though good articles don't generally need reviewing). Take a look at Wikipedia:Barnstars. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Those reviewer barnstars are for pending changes and such. I wanted to thank a reviewer who has gone unrecognized in his GA reviews. — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 10:42, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Vortex3427 Why not just add a personal comment on his Talk Page? I think that barnstars are a bit naff and a proper thank-you a better way of expressing your recognition of someone's work. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vortex3427, I found this template, which might be what you are looking for. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Linking to Spanish version of wikipedia

I am trying to link a person to his spanish wikipedia article as he does not appear in the English wikipedia. But having trouble doing this. So when your click on his name it redirects to the spanish wiki.

I am trying to link from an english wiki page) to https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enrique_Florescano

Can anybody help with the code please. Yozick72 (talk) 12:52, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Use template:ill. {{ill|Enrique Florescano|es}} will produce "Enrique Florescano" small jars tc 12:57, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Guess that will have to do.

I did actually try that before but was hoping one could do it without the es, so it would link straight through.

Thank you. Yozick72 (talk) 13:03, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

You can do just that, but it's not ideal because people will think it's in English and become confused when they end up on a Spanish article. small jars tc 13:11, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

i messed up

I tried to upload an image on my sandbox, and now it's in commons.wikimedia.org

I don't know why it's there, how can I delete it ? (also i thought it was an image i made with an AI and i claimed it as mine but after a quick reverse search on google image it was clear that the image was not one of mine, Hencewhy i don't want to claim it as mine.)

Thanks in advance Vincent-vst (talk) 10:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Vincent-vst Add the template {{Db-author}} at the very top of the page Commons:File:Lofi2.jpg. It will then be speedily deleted by an admin. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

thank you ! Vincent-vst (talk) 13:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Academic article

Good afternoon.

If I would like to publish an article (New Knowledge) which references my PHD, would I be able to host that article on Wikipedia.

It will have links to the the body of work hosted at the University library, as well as additional journal references.

Kind regards

Craig Craighorne (talk) 12:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. What do you mean, by new knowledge? Could you clarify what "referenc[ing] my P[h]D" means? Are you going to talk about yourself in the article? If so, that would be a conflict of interest and/or an autobiography which goes against Wikipedia guidelines. What university? It is hard to understand what you are asking. Have you started a draft already?

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:14, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Craighorne, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you mean what I think you mean, the answer is No. Wikipedia is not a publisher of original thought. If your research is part of a larger subject which is already documented in a number of reliable published sources, you may write an article which summarises those, and one of those sources could be your thesis (though if you did that, you should declare a conflict of interest). But if you do that, you should not include any argument or conclusions which are sourced only to your own work. ColinFine (talk) 13:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Commons image changed

Hi, please see this discussion at commons [8]. Someone at commons changed two images of Olivia Newton-John, blurring the background. The new blurred images are terrible. Note one of the images is in the infobox at Olivia Newton-John which is currently listed in RD on the main page. I tried to revert the changes but the images appear to be protected - it also seems the blurring affects previous versions of the images for some reason. Does anyone here use commons or have sufficiently elevated rights there to revert the two images back to their original state? Polyamorph (talk) 12:21, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah, looks like the one in the infobox at Olivia Newton-John has already been reverted. Polyamorph (talk) 12:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

And Now reverted back to the crap version. Polyamorph (talk) 12:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I think you should ask about this either on the Commons, or at wp:Graphics Lab. small jars tc 13:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I did ask at commons. All sorted now, thanks Polyamorph (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I've reverted both back to the originals and have left an edit notice explaining how many different Wikis they are affecting (over 20 in one case). Told them to upload blurred version as a derivative work. - X201 (talk) 13:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

thanks for sorting it Polyamorph (talk) 14:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Relevant information to include

Hello everyone. Lately I have been wondering, when it comes to artists, poets, photographers, and people like that, is it relevant to list books that their work appears in? For example, if a poets work is included in something like a "Best poems of the decade" book collection, if that is considered an accomplishment or something note-worthy. Wimpkitty (talk) 14:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Wimpkitty Not usually, since Wikipedia is not supposed to be an indiscriminate collection of all information on a topic. If there's something particularly unusual or notable about it though, by all means go ahead. For example, if the poet was an unknown before appearing in a "best of" and this made them famous; if the "best of" is an extremely notable list in its own right; if this appears to be the highest recognition any of the creator's pieces have achieved; etc. For a very famous classic work that appears on many such lists you might go for something like "The novel still regularly appears on major 'best novel' lists, like [example], [example], and [example]." -- asilvering (talk) 18:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Inline interlanguage links

When is it necessary to put an inline interlanguage link in english Wikipedia? I've seen a lot of inline interlanguage links in english articles with a rather "local" subject (e.g. Indonesia's Next Top Model, Vietnam Idol, etc), especially links to a person's biography (mostly celebrities) that don't have their english article counterpart. These links don't include a language code either. Should they be unlinked (black)? I personally think the majority of english speaking public will not find a non-english page useful for them, and putting them under a blue link in an english article might lead them to think it leads to another english article when it's not. Your input would be much appreciated for my future edits. Thank you! 「HypeBoy」^TALK 14:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

If the person is notable, I prefer to use a red link with a small link to other language Wikipedias. This can be done using {{interlanguage link}} (shortcut {{ill}}). See Ludwig Ferdinand Huber for a couple of examples. I find direct links to foreign Wikipedias better than nothing, but some people prefer them in some contexts where the formatting of {{ill}} is inconvenient. —Kusma (talk) 14:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

That's the thing, most of the people linked in those articles I mentioned are not known outside their country, and definitely are not known worldwide/among english-speaking public. How am I to determine their notability? From what I noticed, celebrities that are actually notable in their own country almost always have their english article. These people who don't (only having an article in their own language), are not as notable. 「HypeBoy」^TALK 14:53, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Being known outside their home country is not a requirement for notability. But whether celebrities are notable can be difficult to determine (most reality show participants should not have standalone articles, but many actors should). The general rules are at WP:N. —Kusma (talk) 16:38, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you. Based on MOS:REDLINK, too many red links leads to overlinking and unassuming black text color is the "most productive". Since many of these names are cluttered together on the same paragraph, I will stick with not linking them. I believe notable people (particularly the ones in the articles I mentioned) will have their own english article anyway, so I'll use that as an indicator. 「HypeBoy」^TALK 18:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Question of typography

Dear all,

I am in creating a contribution for the English Wikipedia. See: User:Alexander Peren. The subject of this article is for a recently installed museum in Germany (Place of Remembrance Badehaus), treating the special place Camp Föhrenwald from its beginning to its change towards a "regular" living quarter. It is mainly the translation of the same article of the German Wikipedia "Erinnerungsort Badehaus". However, I face some problems with typographic questions.

In my contribution appear names of associations/institutions and groups, so what is normally called "proper name". Addtionally, it appears names of books, films, exhibitions, which are as well "proper names", but s.th. completely different. And finally it appear some German expressions, for which no "official" counterpart exists in the english language.

I would like to distinguish these three typs of "proper names" (associations/institutions; titels; German expressions) with typographic medium.

My first idea was to put associations/institutions in italic, the titels in 'apostroph' and the German expressions in "quotation marks". You can see this version in looking older versions of my contributions

But then, with the help of Adakiko, my attention was attracted to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MOS:FOREIGNITALIC. Inside this link I found (citation) When not to use italics Shortcut MOS:NOITALIC Italics are generally used only for titles of longer works. Titles of shorter works should be enclosed in double quotation marks ("text like this"). This particularly applies to works that exist as a smaller part of a larger work. These include but are not limited to: Articles, essays, papers, chapters, reference work entries, newspaper and magazine sections or departments, episodes of audio-visual series, segments or skits in longer programs, short poems, short stories, story lines and plot arcs; songs, album tracks and other short musical works; leaflets and circulars. (See WP:Manual of Style/Titles § Quotation marks for details.) (citation end) This means for me: titels belonging to a serie/sequence have to be written in quotation marks

In the same link it is written: (citation) Quotations Further information: MOS:QUOTE and MOS:WORDSASWORDS Shortcut MOS:NOITALQUOTE It is normally incorrect to put quotations in italics. They should only be used if the material would otherwise call for italics, such as for emphasis or to indicate use of non-English words. Quotation marks alone are sufficient and the correct way to denote quotations. Indicate whether italics were used in the original text or whether they were added later. For example: "Now cracks a noble heart. Good night sweet prince: And flights of angels sing thee to thy rest!" (emphasis added). (citation end) means for me, that German expressions (like Hitlerbeton) also have to be put in quotation marks.

And italic, as far as I believe having read in this link, is exclusively for standing-alone titels of books etc.

Per consequence, I face now the situation for my contribution that mostly the quotation mark is used, rarely the italic and not at all the apostrophe.

Can someone of you help me with my difficulties to distinguish the three different "proper names" in my contribution by help of typography? Which way is acceptable not to viol against the Wikipedia rules? As I already wrote, my preferred solution would be apostrophe for titels, italic for associations/institutions and quotation marks for German expressions without official english counterpart.

Furthermore, my contribution is - with the exception of these typographic questions - more or less ready. Might it please be possible for someone of you to have a look to my article and to make suggestions for improvement, if necessary, or if the article is already good enough to move it towards the regular Wikipedia.

This would be great. I already thank you in advance so much for all your help and your proposals.

Best regards, take care and stay healthy

--Alexander Peren (talk) 13:41, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Alexander Peren, and welcome to the Teahouse. Your user page is not an appropriate place to draft an article, and I have moved it to Draft:Erinnerungsort Badehaus. You can move it to Erinnerungsort Badehaus when it is ready, or if you prefer to ask for review, paste {{subst:submit}} at the top. (I have not answered your question because I find it difficult to get any interest in questions of technologytypography. I'm sure somebody else will do so). ColinFine (talk) 13:49, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Alexander Peren This rather technical issue must be something that's been discussed before by members of WP:WikiProject Germany, so I suggest you post on their talk page and also look at their archive. The draft article seems to be coming along well, although I did notice several Wikilinks to disambiguation pages rather than the best targets. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:56, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Alexander Peren Titles of books go in Italics. For German-language text, you can use Template:lang-de. This template has the added bonus of helping text-to-speech programs read the words more correctly. -- asilvering (talk) 18:33, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Help moving a page

I created Draft:The Forever Story and I need help moving it to The Forever Story. Castlepalace 10:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

FYI - JID's previous two albums, The Never Story (2017) and DiCaprio 2 (2018), exist as articles. Those have much more detail than this draft. David notMD (talk) 10:58, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I know that. The album hasn't been released yet, that's why it lacks detail. @David notMD Castlepalace 19:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm obviously going to update the article with a lot more detail once it's out and more sources are available. @David notMD Castlepalace 19:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

vandalim

Hey guys,
I came across some vandalism at World Clown Association going back to the last edit of user:Materialscientist, so not easily reversible with undo. I'll leave the info here for some better skilled editor to deal with. Dutchy45 (talk) 21:18, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you; I've reverted back to the last good revision. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 21:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Potential vandalism

Good afternoon. I am concerned about vandalism made to the article for the Great Pyrenees. A recent edit has introduced the term "swag retriever" to the article, however, I can find no evidence of the breed ever being referred to by that name.

I apologize if this is the wrong avenue for this report; I was unable to find a report button or a designated method for communicating these types of issues.

Pyrenean Mountain Dog

73.54.194.23 (talk) 21:54, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

An editor has reverted that addition. Thanks for pointing it out! Schazjmd (talk) 22:06, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Poland page: can someone add mention of their poor Press Freedom Index

In light of how the media has acted during the crisis on the Oder river, I believe it would be prudent to mention Poland's poor standing in regards to freedom of the press on the intro section to their page. The page mentions their "very high standards of living, safety and economic freedom", so I feel it is only appropriate, and fair, to mention their issues in this area also.

https://rsf.org/en/country/poland johnnycat (talk) 19:44, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jmschilling: I have done so. Thank you for the suggestion. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 20:00, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jmschilling @Kaleeb18 welcome to Teahouse! In this case, I find [[Freedom of press] less helpful than a specific article that can contextualize Poland's freedom of press specifically. This section seems relevant. I encourage you to directly edit it yourself: Freedom of speech by country § Poland. Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah... I did not see that article, but I still think it was good to mention a little bit of it in the lead. ― Kaleeb18^Talk_Caleb 00:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

When to warn?

At Academic studies about Wikipedia, I reverted two edits I thought were vandalism. Should I also add a warning to the user’s talk page? If so, which level? What would you do? LumonRedacts (talk) 04:35, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @LumonRedacts and welcome to the teahouse! when reverting a disruptive edit, it's best to warn so the user may be able to take notice about the reversions and why those edits were reverted. in this case, you can use {{subst:uw-disruptive1}} to warn them. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 04:47, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, @Melecie! I just ran out brain space there for figuring out that next step. Happy editing! LumonRedacts (talk) 04:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, LumonRedacts. When to warn is a personal decision, since every action that a Wikipedia editor takes is voluntary. In this case, a warning for changing Wikipedia's founding date from 2001 to 2021 is justified. But the editor is an IP editor who made two edits in one minute and disappeared. That's what happens with many IP vandals. The effort to warn needs to be balanced against the fact that many IP vandals never see the warning. A benefit of a warning is that administrators, in general, are quicker to block if warnings have been given and the vandalism continues. So, I would recommend that you focus your warnings on editors who are more likely to respond positively to your warnings or to those whose disruption is ongoing. Warning fleeting vandals may be a waste of your time. In the end, that decision is yours. Cullen328 (talk) 05:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, Cullen328. I definitely appreciate your insights! — Preceding unsigned comment added by LumonRedacts (talk • contribs) 01:18, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Inserting custom flags

'Hey! How do you get https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Flag_of_Swedish-speaking_Finns.svg as a flag image when inserting a flag via , and how would I link "Finland Swedish - Wikipedia" via [[ | ]]? Gamazations (talk) 07:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Gamazations: {{Flagicon|Swedish-speaking Finns}}. ––FormalDude talk 07:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

How about inserting the page "Finland_Swedish" via [[ | ]], like "Finnish"? Aside from this, thank you! :) @FormalDude Gamazations (talk) 08:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Gamazations: It looks like the template automatically links to Swedish-speaking population of Finland and I don't see a way to change that. ––FormalDude talk 08:11, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

This is perfectly fine my friend, thank you so much for what you have provided me. Have a great day! :) Gamazations (talk) 08:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Trying to check references

Hello! I am trying to get Draft:Justin Brown (author) checked :) I have noted this in the reference help desk too, but would like to know your help and feedback. Thank you! Note: It has been improved with strong sources. AyrtonHolloway (talk) 02:56, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I am not a reviewer, but it looks good to me. However, I'm not that experienced at looking at drafts, so I'll leave it to somebody else to decide. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 02:58, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you! Last note was, This submission is not adequately supported by reliable sources. Reliable sources are required so that information can be verified. If you need help with referencing, please see Referencing for beginners and Citing sources. - I think it's been improved. Hoping to get this checked again :) --AyrtonHolloway (talk) 02:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

AyrtonHolloway,:please note that you've been asked more than once to add material which has been written about Brown. As long as that material is lacking, your article will be problematic.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:52, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

WAY OVER-REFERENCED to no benefit; does not need two to six refs for each book. Much of the rest are refs that are mere name-mentions, or to stuff he wrote (bowling in India, etc.) Unless there are publications ABOUT Brown, will be declined again. David notMD (talk) 09:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

How to create page?

How do I create a page Wikikoolr (talk) 07:40, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikikoolr Hello. You asked this at the Help Desk; please only use one method of seeking assistance, to avoid duplication of effort. 331dot (talk) 07:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

sorry Im new and I thought this might give more help but now I know so that's good Wikikoolr (talk) 07:43, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

so now I know the rules and I won't do it again. Wikikoolr (talk) 07:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikikoolr So far, all of your article edits have been reverted, and your attempt at creating a draft has no references. Per the advice you got at Help Desk, become more skilled at improving existing articles before creating and submitting a draft to AfC. Also, in your draft, you capitalized many words which should not be capitalized. David notMD (talk) 10:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Article part unreadable on mobile

The timeline of events on https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/University_of_Texas_tower_shooting are very hard to read on mobile and isn't properly formatted 58.170.101.142 (talk) 11:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello IP! Could you specify what you mean? I'm not seeing any issue with the text (although it may be due to me using a PC and viewing the mobile version of the website). ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 12:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm not seeing any obvious problems reading on Firefox Mobile on Android 12. It might be helpful if IP lets us know what device and browser they are using as well as more details about what issues they are seeing someone will be more able to help. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 13:37, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Erased sandbox

I have been using my Sandbox to draft a new wikipedia page for publication, which I understand is the proper way to use this page. Admin Bbb23 deleted the page giving the reason "U5: Misuse of Wikipedia as a web host". I do not understand what I did wrong and how to avoid further deletions of my work in progress. Newklear007 (talk) 12:19, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Newklear007: I can restore your sandbox and move it to draft space if you wish.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

That would be great, thanks. Newklear007 (talk) 12:22, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

It's done, Draft:Miroslav Beblavý, but you are aware that there is already an existing article. Why do you call it "new" and what are you planning on doing with the draft?--Bbb23 (talk) 12:28, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry, I misunderstood. I thought "I can restore your sandbox and move it to draft space if you wish." meant restoring my Sandbox page and giving it some tag to let other admins know that this page is used for drafting of wikipedia pages and is not misused as a personal page. I had indeed already published the article I have developed in my Sandbox before it got deleted so the draft page can be deleted. My apologies for the confusion, I am still learning how things work around here. Now I see I do not need to use sandbox, because I can create a draft page when I want to create a new article. What would you suggest for editing an existing article when I want to develop a full article in the place of a stub as opposed to just making a small edit? Should I create a Draft page or make many small edits directly in the article? Newklear007 (talk) 12:37, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I've deleted the draft. I'll let others answer your question.--Bbb23 (talk) 12:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Newklear007, welcome to the Teahouse - it's usually best to make smaller edits to the existing article rather than drafting a replacement somewhere else and replacing the whole thing in one fell swoop. This is so other editors who might be interested can track the changes you're making more easily and revert/discuss individual ones they may disagree with. Huge additions are more difficult to work with and sometimes send up red flags. You can still work on parts of the article in your sandbox if you wish, then copy the text over in small chunks (but review the rules on copying within Wikipedia). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:07, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, this is very helpful. Newklear007 (talk) 14:16, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Reference or link to Wiktionary

Hey, I'm working on the dutch aticle about discrimination (discriminatie) the definition is a mess (it not very clear imo and there are/were no ref) and I'm trying to clean it up how do i refere to Wiktionary with a interal link or a external ref?

Thank you for the help! EM's96 (talk) 14:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @EM's96, welcome to the Teahouse. On English Wikipedia, {{Wikt-lang}} can be used to link a particular word to Wiktionary, or {{wikt}} can be used to create a little box off to the side with a Wiktionary link. Dutch Wikipedia may not have these templates, however. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

But if those templates are not available, you can use a wikilink, like wikt:discriminatie. I'm guessing that if you use that from nl-wiki, it will point to nl-wikt; but you can even use wikt:nl:discriminatie to be sure.

(I usually start wikilinks to other projects with a colon: this is always permissible, though not always necessary. But in cases where a link is treated specially, such as a File:, a Category: or another-language Wikipedia, the colon says to treat it as an ordinary wikilink). ColinFine (talk) 15:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

What's the correct thing to do when someone has requested that an article be improved by translation, but the original has no references?

The case in question is Appenzeller_string_music. It's been tagged for improvement by translation from the German article, which I would happily do. But the German original is supported by no citations. It's almost certainly accurate and decent text, so I could translate and add a citations needed template, but I don't want to waste my time if someone's simply going to revert all the changes as unsourced. 79.64.7.127 (talk) 08:38, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Each language version of Wikipedia is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another. I don't know if what you speak of is acceptable on the German Wikipedia, but here an article must be supported with citations to reliable sources. 331dot (talk) 08:46, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@331dot:, thank you for the reply. It sounds as though there is no point in doing the translation. I'm guessing we leave the tag on the English article suggesting that it could be improved by translation of the German, on the grounds that the German article may, one day, grow citations and become usable - otherwise the template seems a bit pointless? 79.64.7.127 (talk) 09:05, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

I have not heard of "improvement by translation". An article could be translated, and/or improved by adding references or improving the text, and these things could be done at more or less the same time. But I don't understand what "improvement by translation" is supposed to mean. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 09:10, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

"Improvement by translation" is a reference to Template:Expand language. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:15, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Shantavira Thanks for that. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 03:00, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It's normal for a poor article about a Japan-related subject to have a template suggesting improvement by ransacking the Japanese-language article about the same subject, and for the Japanese-language article to be terrible. Maybe the templates are added by editors who can't read Japanese and can't be bothered to feed the Japanese-language article into Google Translate, or similar, and who instead just appreciate bulk. I could investigate, but fear that I'd be depressed by what I'd discover. So usually I leave the templates in place. But I've been known to remove them. -- Hoary (talk) 12:25, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hoary: Google Translate returns "blind idiot" translations when it comes to Japanese (or any other East Asian pictographic language) for anything other than small snippets of text. The same goes for any other automated translation service. Japanese is a bit too convoluted and context-dependent. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 20:49, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

Jéské Couriano, please, no language is pictographic. (A script might be pictographic, but Japanese script is only tenuously and trivially pictographic.) Problems with machine translation from Japanese come from such features of the language as a lack of a grammatical requirement for a main clause to have an expressed subject. (This lack isn't at all unusual, of course.) My poorly expressed point was that Category:Articles needing translation from Japanese Wikipedia takes us to concoctions such as Alice or Alice, and that Google Translate is easily good enough to tell anyone that while the corresponding Japanese-language article may outweigh the English-language thing in bulk/cruft/trivia, that's about the extent of its superiority. -- Hoary (talk) 21:45, 15 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jéské Couriano: You say that jp → en automatic translation is crap, but I have to ask, compared to what? If the standard is a professional translation, or even translation by a advanced student of the language, sure. But it beats "I cannot read/speak the language" by a large margin, and that is the state of a non-speaker browsing the internet. I once had to "read" a scientific article written in Japanese; automatic translation produced some text; it was awful English, but it was sufficient for me to discern the general outline and find the information I was looking for. Sure, scientific articles usually follow a standard structure, I knew what the article would talk about and what I was looking for etc.; but an en-wp editor searching for usable sources in a jp-wp article has the same kind of meta-clues (I concede that checking the sources found would probably require better-than-machine translation).

In fact, I would say that the surprising fact is not that automated translation between English and Japanese yields mediocre results, but rather that automated translation between loosely-related languages (such as English and French) works at all, let alone almost flawlessly. For funsies, I copy-pasted the lead of machine translation into DeepL, a tad above 2000 words, and asked for a French translation. I could find zero clear translation mistakes; there is one weird turn of phrase "en premier lieu et surtout X", but that is the translation of "first and most notably" which arguably is not idiomatic English either. (There were grammar mistakes / ambiguities, but those were in the original; I corrected one.)}} Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 16:08, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I remove these, with the edit summary "not suitable for translation as de-wiki article has no citations" or similar. -- asilvering (talk) 18:39, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Who wrote original article

I'm trying to find out who wrote the original article about Carlo Roselli. How do I do that? I'm not an editor, just an interested reader. Mhmillerr (talk) 14:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mhmillerr: At the top of any article page (if you are on a desktop browser) there is a "History" tab. Click on that and you will see a list of every edit ever made to the article. Scroll to the bottom to see the oldest edit. If there is a link to see the "Previous 100" or "Oldest" at the bottom of that list, then the list of edits is too long to fit on one page and you must click that link to see earlier edits. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Anachronist: I'm fairly sure by default it's "Older 50" and not "Older 100" but it's the same thing. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 14:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Mhmillerr Often the best and fastest thing to do is to go to the "view history" tab and then click on the "Page statistics" link, which gives this output. That saves faffing around in multiple edits and provides an overview that includes the name of the first editor and the one who has made the largest contribution. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: For me it's "over 500". I recall that's a user account setting. It's been at least a decade since I looked at it. ~Anachronist (talk) 14:55, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Mhmillerr. There is no article Carlo Roselli. If you meant Carlo Rosselli instead, that article was started on September 15, 2006 by editor T L Miles, who last edited in February, 2022. Cullen328 (talk) 16:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

And that's what I assumed the OP meant when I provided the link in my response above Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

My husband’s Wikipedia page disappeared

My husband, Skeeter Zachary Reece, an American clown, had a Wikipedia page. Several months ago, the links to the pictures disappeared, but the biography of him remained. Two months ago, we noticed it had been taken over by something called “people pill” and no longer shows up as a Wikipedia page. Does anyone know anything about this? Can it be restored to Wikipedia with the links to the pictures? What is this “people pill”? Is it connected to Wikipedia? Thank you. Mamadancer (talk) 14:07, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It was deleted as the result of a community discussion here: Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Zachary "Skeeter" Reece, it is unlikely to be restored as consensu was reached and after looking for sources myself, I fail to see how he meets notability criteria PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:10, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

His career happened before the internet. He is 70 now and mostly retired. He did perform at the White House. He was with Ringling for 10 years, then worked for 20 years in Las Vegas performing in several hotels. He was on a news segment in Palo Alto, California in 1982. All of this was before YouTube or any online links. He was in the Geo magazine April 1981 which is on the Internet but has his name listed INCORRECTLY as “Skeeter Heece”. He is in several books: “Clown Alley” by Bill Ballantine. “Jokes My Father Never Told Me” by Rain Pryor. “A Very Young Circus Flyer” by Jill Krementz. Mamadancer (talk) 14:26, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Mamadancer, you are free to recreate the page as long as these extra sources can establish notability. Sungodtemple (talk) 14:46, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The caveat being it needs to go through WP:AFC, @Sungodtemple. Please do not tell people to outright create AFD'd articles. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Praxidicae: The AfC process is optional, though it should also be used by anyone with a conflict of interest (link in original), which Mamadancer has essentially disclosed in the opening post. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:15, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The AFC process is optional but for COI editors and for articles that have been DELETED AT AFD, it is strongly encouraged to the point that we nearly require it. It was bad advice. Period. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:17, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

It wasn't great advice, but saying that it needs to go through WP:AFC (link in original, emphasis added) is incorrect. Necessity is not the same as vehemently recommending it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:27, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

You're missing the point that I was correcting bad advice and trying to actually help the OP and save them from immediately getting a G4 slapped onto their article. PRAXIDICAE🌈 15:29, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I didn't miss your point; I'm saying that in your plight in helping the OP you misrepresented the optionality of AFC. OP can choose to go the same route again, but potentially suffer the consequences you mentioned (or worse). It's like telling people they can't write about themselves on here; they can, but the result is virtually always going to be disappointing for them, which is why we strongly discourage, not forbid. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:32, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree @Tenryuu, and I misrepresented it as well when I said that @Mamadancer must go through the AFC process. I said that because I was trying to help the editor avoid the disappointment of doing all the work and the results being the same. It may be the inevitable ending but in my desire to help them I misspoke. AFC is optional but strongly recommended. --ARoseWolf 16:20, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@ARoseWolf@Praxidicae, other interested. I've got these:[9][10] (see [11] on what that is) [12]. Not brilliant but we've seen worse. Also, these from ProQuest (via the WP-library) [13][14], am I getting the full text or just an extract?

This [15] doesn't help with WP:N but has some useable info. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:58, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Mamadancer, welcome to the Teahouse, I know it seems our responses can be a little harsh sometimes and Wikipedia policies can be extremely confusing for experienced editors much less someone just wanting to know why something disappeared that was there a short time ago. Please know that every editor responding to you is a volunteer and they are taking time out of their day to respond so by them replying they are trying to help you with your question. As Prax explained, the article on your husband was deleted after a discussion by editors came to the consensus that the sources in the article were not sufficient enough to prove your husband's notability. Wikipedia can not make someone notable, they have to already be notable. Of course, seeing as your husband's career was mostly before the internet then online sources may be scarce. Written sources can be used, such as books and newspapers. Extra care must be given when providing these sources because all information must have the ability to be verified. That does not mean it has to be freely accessible to the public at any point as some written sources may be in specific university libraries or behind a pay wall. These sources are still valid and can be used to prove notability. As you have an obvious COI being the spouse of the subject in question it is strongly recommended that you not try to create or edit an article on your husband. If you do decide to recreate the article then you mustare strongly encouraged take the article through the Wp:AFC process. However, I would suggest you try going to WT:BIOG, which is the talk page for WikiProject:Biography, and see if anyone there might be willing to take on the task of seeing if the sources you know about would prove his notability. Remember that we are all volunteers here. I understand your frustrations, just know that if your husband doesn't have an article on Wikipedia that doesn't mean that your husband isn't important to you or any of the children or adults he may have brought joy to during his career. Thank you for asking your question at the Teahouse. --ARoseWolf 14:56, 16 August 2022 (UTC) --edited 16:31, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I got curious about this "people pill" thing. When neither your husband's name nor "people pill" turned up in a search here, I Googled your husband's name. I found a short piece about your husband on a website called "people pill." Without having looked further into the site, I'm supposing it has little write-ups on ... well ... PEOPLE. It's not at all unusual that when you Google something you'll find sites with write-ups that are word-for-word the same as a Wikipedia article on whatever you Googled. I believe that these sites have just copied the Wikipedia article. And sometimes they've copied an old version, with errors that have since been corrected--in Wikipedia; those errors might or might not get corrected on the sites that lifted the articles from here.Uporządnicki (talk) 15:06, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

If you do decide to create a new draft, see List of clowns for many examples of articles about individual clowns. David notMD (talk) 15:08, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

I had never encountered people pill before. And the website looks strange. Mamadancer (talk) 15:42, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mamadancer It's one of several so called Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks. Basically, they take WP-content and put it on their own website. It's allowed if they do it right. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for your kind reply. I will work on it. Mamadancer (talk) 15:41, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Premeditated Chaos: Since you're the deleting administrator, and given the discussion above, the additional sources found, and the low participation in the AFD, would you object to restoring the article to draft space for improvement? @Mamadancer: If it was restored to draft space, it would be an easier starting point than starting from scratch. I'm happy to remain involved too. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:35, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Three people arguing for delete plus the nominator is not low participation IMO. The additional sources found are not good in my opinion. The NY Daily News is not about Reece, it's about some lady who got to be a clown for a day and Reece put her makeup on for her. Uncle JR is explicitly "community-driven" and supported by the family, so I'm not sure it's independent. The Sarasota Journal source is barely about him, it's essentially an ad for the show (and it's like 60 words tops). I haven't been able to locate the full text of the article from The Oregonian so can't evaluate that for SIGCOV at this time. The Tampa Tribune article is about the show, not about Reece. Even if The Oregonian is SIGCOV (which to be honest I doubt), a single piece of SIGCOV isn't enough to support a claim to notability.

Given the level of sourcing, I don't think the subject would survive a second trip to AfD, so no, I won't restore to draft. I won't object if you choose to, but fair warning, I will watchlist the mainspace page and take it back to AfD if it gets mainspaced with this level of sourcing. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 20:02, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Premeditated Chaos, thinking about the AfC implications being discussed, I have been trying to deal with a new bio slipped-in via the back door straight to mainspace, by a novice (but longstanding) editor. If it had been submitted through AfC, IMO it would likely have been declined with guidance; is there any flag that informs an author to consider the AfC way, instead of mainspace?--Rocknrollmancer (talk) 09:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Since this isn't related to the current discussion, I've replied at your talk page. ♠PMC♠ (talk) 17:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Username

I observed that most of the Usernames that I have seen so far does not indicate or relate to the owner. I s it advisable not to use family name as username in Wikipedia? Just asking. OdilaG (talk) 14:09, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

The "owner" meaning what? Usernames can be whatever you want within reason and certain restrictions. There are no "owners" on Wikipedia. PRAXIDICAE🌈 14:15, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I am assuming that by 'owner', you mean yourself. Using your real name is not prohibited, but should be considered carefully, as it may have the potential for harrassment. See WP:REALNAME. Kpddg ^(talk) 14:17, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I use my IRL name since that's what I've done whenever I've published anything else and I like the idea that after I'm long gone people will still be able to see my contributions to Wikipedia. However, as Kpddg said, there are valid reasons for not doing so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:03, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome, OdilaG! I don't use a name connected to me for privacy reasons, as I personally try to be pretty careful about what information there is about me on the internet. Others do use names connected with them; it's really up to you as long as you follow the username policy. Perfect4th (talk) 17:38, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

On an entirely different point, I suspect that what you have created at User:OdilaG/sandbox is a copyright violation, as it appears to be a verbatim copy. If true, delete all copied content and insteat paraphrase the information in your own words, using the source as a properly formatted reference. David notMD (talk) 18:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hoax/false statement in article

Hi all! I was recently rereading an article that I'd read a while back and I think I may have found a hoax (I think it was a clear and deliberate attempt to deceptively present false information as fact) planted in 2018. Is there anyone who manages this type of stuff (hoaxes) that I can reach out to, because maybe they could confirm whether it truly qualifies as a 'hoax' or not and then document it on the 'list of hoaxes on Wikipedia' page. Thanks! Marcustcii (talk) 03:20, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I think if it's an obvious hoax, you can put {{Db-hoax}} on top of it to get an administrator to delete it. Otherwise, go to Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Although, if it survived for four whole years, it may eventually get archived at Wikipedia:List of hoaxes. weeklyd3 (block | talk | contributions) 03:25, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the response! Would tagging it like that work if the 'hoax' I'm talking about in the article is not the whole article but rather a misleading portion? Marcustcii (talk) 03:29, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Marcustcii, in order to properly answer you last question, please tell us which artile has the problematic content. Thanks.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:39, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Of course — [it is]. The reason I'm not sure if it qualifies as a hoax is because it's just one word but someone clearly deleted the true singer's name and replaced it with their own and then may have added citations to make it look legitimate. Marcustcii (talk) 03:43, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

• here it is* sorry Marcustcii (talk) 03:43, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, the citations were there earlier — got ahead of myself. Marcustcii (talk) 03:49, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Marcustcii, you found an example of "drive-by" vandalism, from 2018, by an unregistered user from a suburb of Washington, DC. It was the only edit from that particular IP address. Probably done at school to impress friends. Thanks for finding that; I've manually reverted it.--Quisqualis (talk) 06:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, yeah that makes more sense since it was just one word! Thanks for clarifying! Marcustcii (talk) 22:59, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Cyber

What is cyber Danish KUTE (talk) 23:34, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Ask Wiktionary. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University no longer exists, has merged with Partnership to End Addiction

Good afternoon, I work for Partnership to End Addiction. A few years ago The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University was subsumed by Partnership to End Addiction as the result of a merger with another similar nonprofit called (most recently) Partnership for Drug-Free Kids.

While the page for Partnership to End Addiction does make reference to Partnership for Drug-Free Kids becoming Partnership to End Addiction, that page makes no reference to the subsumption of The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University by Partnership to End Addiction.

Similarly, the page for The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University makes no reference to the fact that (a) Center on Addiction is defunct, and (b) has, along with all of its staff and platforms become part of Partnership to End Addiction.

I think that it would be considered not appropriate for me or someone else from my org to edit these pages, even just to add basic facts to them to make them more accurate, as this could be construed as self-promotion and this is the wrong space for that sort of thing.

That being said, I am right now trying to determine who, if anyone, might be compelled, if they learned about the need for these edits, to uphold them. Any thoughts are greatly appreciated.

Best regards, Zblockattoendaddictiondotorg (talk) 15:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Zblockattoendaddictiondotorg: you are correct that it is not appropriate to edit pages directly if you have a Conflict of Interest, as you do here with Partnership to End Addiction. However, you can essentially draft what changes you would make, give a detailed edit request on the talk page of the affected article (e.g. Talk:Partnership to End Addiction) and someone should come along and respond (whether quickly or eventually... there is often a backlog). In an edit request, you can't be too specific: say things like "replace this sentence [sentence here] with this one [sentence here], adding the following sources". Everything you say must be attributable to a published, reliable source and not just information you know from your professional work.

On your talk page, I've left a generic (if not wholly applicable in your case) welcome message about dealing with conflicts of interest and beginning to work within Wikipedia. Thanks for your question! — Bilorv (talk) 15:53, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Can I just clarify: By "In an edit request, you can't be too specific" Bilorv means that in an edit request you must be as specific as you can, not that you must not (it's possible to read this advice as the exact reverse of what Bilorv meant). Whoever responds to the request won't want to do a lot of thinking: they'll want to know exactly what you would like to write, and to see evidence that the new text is correct. 149.155.219.44 (talk) 16:57, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

FWIW, the about us link on the The National Center on Addiction and Substance Abuse at Columbia University article redirects to [Partnership to End Addiction drugfree.org], suggesting this is reliable info. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 00:29, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Trouble with simple editing, and receiving daunting messages. I don't want to get banned from editing. Any assistance would be appreciated!

U.S. Route 62 in Ohio

I'm just trying to expand the route description. I was trying to cite my source using a template for citing a website, and I'm getting all kinds of crazy messages. So, I'm getting frustrated. I'm just a novice editor so please don't roast me too bad. Thanks for helping me learn! C2 J45driver16 (talk) 22:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, I know typically word press is advised against. It said to discuss it in the forums first. The information seems to be reliable enough to use THAT specific blog about the source I'm attempting to cite. I triple checked the accuracy of the information. — Preceding unsigned comment added by C2 J45driver16 (talk • contribs) 22:45, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, C2 J45driver16. The Bridgehunter's Chronicles in a one person blog operated by Jason D. Smith, with occasional articles contributed by other writers. That is pretty much a textbook example of a Self-published source that is not permitted for use on Wikipedia. The only exception would be if Smith is a widely acknowledged expert on bridges whose writing on bridges has previously been published in indisputably reliable sources. Cullen328 (talk) 00:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, C2 J45driver16, triple checking the source on your own is of no value. That is a form of Original research which is not permitted on Wikipedia. Do not worry about getting "banned" for such a minor unintentional mistake. Consider it a learning experience instead. Cullen328 (talk) 00:35, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Reason of reverting the information I added to a page.

I would like to know the reason why my recent edits to the page Ramagundam has been reverted. I added all correct information based on the government sources. The original page is missing a lot of information about the city. Biswabandan Satpathy (talk) 11:12, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The editor that reverted you left a message in the edit summary "Rv mass of totally unsourced additions + deleting templates", which sums it up pretty well. Any additions need to be supported by reliable source. See WP:V. - X201 (talk) 11:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

The article was already tagged as having an excessive amount of intricate detail but instead of tackling that problem you added a mass of more detail, including in the WP:LEAD, which is supposed to summarise the rest of the article, not present independent information. All additions must be WP:CITEd with inline sources, so readers can verify the information themselves without working out which "government sources" you actually used: express specific information in your own words but cite sources to back up what you add. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:48, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Should the "intricate detail" tag be removed now? The article looks a lot better. Wow, there was a lot of stuff there before @Arjayay trimmed it. I have never seen such a mass of detail. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 06:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. That tag was added when the page looked like this (in 2018). It's not much different now: the "stuff" you saw just before Arjayay reverted it was that added by the OP for this Teahouse thread. I'm no expert on Indian cities, so I'll leave it to those who are to decide on what tags are currently warranted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Yes, it looks much cleaner now, after the reversion. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:24, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Your vote for keeping an article

Hello to all Wikipedians, members of the TeaHouse! I need your professional support and guidance about the article Mikhail Lomtadze It is a second nomination for the delition. I would be grateful for your advises and best of all your recommendations on the talk page or even improvements. And of course for your honest position and vote on the AfD page. Thank you in advance! Deviloper (talk) 05:52, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Declined article / request for more feedback

Hello! My first article has been recently reviewed and declined because "it appears to read more like an advertisement than an entry in an encyclopedia." I'd be happy to make the appropriate edits. It would be most helpful, though, if somebody could help me identify the parts that could have raised a concern. Is it more about the phrasing of specific paragraphs or the external sources I used? If so, which? I would appreciate any details so that I can prepare the article for resubmission. Thank you!

Here's the article in question: Draft:SUBTLE – The Subtitlers' Association Nyjja (talk) 09:02, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Nyjja, for one thing, its "Aims and activities". Most organizations have praiseworthy goals. They're often written up in "mission statements" and the like, and are reliably soporific. Wikipedia isn't interested in this stuff (unless it is so awful, accidentally amusing, parodic, etc, that it gets in the news). What we need are disinterested, reliable accounts of what the organization does and in particular what it has achieved. Language aside, I suspect that you're going to have great trouble satisfying one or other of the criteria for notability. -- Hoary (talk) 09:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I would recommend the essays Wikipedia:Identifying PR and Wikipedia:Identifying blatant advertising. The opening sentence "SUBTLE – the Subtitlers'​ Association is an association that brings together professional audiovisual translators from around the world" is pure marketing speech, and it doesn't get much better after that. —Wasell^(T) 🌻 09:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

How to add my Company on Wikipedia

My article is deleted from wikipedia. Wanted to know that How can I add my company on wikipedia? 3dpower.nitin (talk) 09:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

3dpower.nitin Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The short answer is- you don't. Wikipedia is not a directory of companies where mere existence warrants inclusion, nor is it a place for companies to tell the world about themselves. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, called notability. For companies, that is written at WP:ORG. Wikipedia is not interested in what a company wishes to say about itself, only in what others completely unconnected with the company choose on their own to say about it, with significant coverage in independent reliable sources. Please read WP:COI and WP:PAID for information on required formal disclosures. 331dot (talk) 09:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

vandalism on Warwick Valley High School

there seems to be vandalism, please check it, im noob. jindam, vani (talk) 09:50, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I've reverted all the section blanking, but that article needs some serious work, it's basically an advertisement and I think it fails the notability test for schools. - X201 (talk) 10:02, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Looks like @Wasell: has cleaned up the advertising. - X201 (talk) 10:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing this out — there was a lot of unsourced, non-notable WP:NOTCATALOG-voilating stuff. I have now removed it. —Wasell^(T) 🌻 10:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Trying to add translation to an Arabic page

Hello,

I have always wanted to give adding articles to Wikipedia and wanted to start by translating some pages between Arabic & English. One particular page I found (annoying) was the following page:

أيمن بن توفيق المؤيد - ويكيبيديا (wikipedia.org)

The reason it is annoying is because this is a page for a Bahraini Minister in Arabic, when I go to the English page, it takes me to the Cabinet page instead of a page about the person in English - this is the page Wikipedia takes me to : Cabinet of Bahrain - Wikipedia

How can I fix or report this issue> and can I contribute with a translation in English if this can be fixed?

Also, will be happy to see if there are top pages that need to be translated from or to Arabic so I can choose and help with the efforts?

Many thanks,

Al Khuzaie Alkhuzaie (talk) 11:11, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Alkhuzaie: it's not an 'issue' (as in, error or problem); there has been an article (two attempts, in fact) on this person, but he was not deemed notable enough, so the articles were replaced by a redirect to the one on the Cabinet. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 11:46, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Alkhuzale, and welcome to the Teahouse. What you have found is a redirect: at the moment, nobody has written an article on Aymen Tawfeeq Almoayed, but somebody has created an entry so that if you search for that name, it takes you to an article which might be useful.

It is certainly possible to replace the redirect by an article, and you have done the right thing by creating a draft Draft:Aymen bin Tawfeeq AlMoayed. When a reviewer accepts your draft, they will sort out replacing the redirect.

But there are some problems with the draft, as you have realised.

Please read Translation. Two important things stand out here. One is that the sources (which I see you took from the Arabic article ar:أيمن بن توفيق المؤيد) are not adequate for an article in English Wikipedia. You need several sources, each of which is all three of reliably published, independent of the subject, and containing significant coverage of the subject. Your sources may all be reliable, but they are all either not independent of AlMoayed, or do not contain significant coverage of him.

The other problem is that you have not stated that the text of your draft is a translation from another Wikipedia: this is a violation of the licence. You should add a message to the draft's talk page explaining this.

I suggest that you study WP:NPOLITICIAN and WP:NBIO to understand the kind of sources you need. ColinFine (talk) 11:48, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Further to my previous reply: I had not seen (as Double Grazing pointed out) that articles about him had previously been deleted and replaced with the redirect. This means that unless you find adequate sources to establish notability, you are wasting your time working on this draft. Note that the fact that there is an article on him in ar-wiki has no bearing on the matter: each Wikipedia has its own policies, and they are not all the same. ColinFine (talk) 11:51, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the quick response, fantastic details and will help me learn more and hopefully get successful contributions in the future. Will make sure to go through the links and educate myself more about the requirements Alkhuzaie (talk) 11:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

SPI Case

> Whether action is taken against the filer for repeatedly filing SPI case?

> Are warnings given before taking action? PravinGanechari (talk) 13:30, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@PravinGanechari hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I can't infer what you mean exactly with "repeatedly filing SPI case", however, normally the only ways to get blocked for filing an SPI is when one repeatedly files baseless SPI's (calling other people a sockpuppet without evidence is a personal attack) or if one repeatedly files the same or a very similar SPI because one doesn't like the result. With regards to the second question, sometimes affected users are notified on their user talk page, however this is seldomly done and certainly not for bad-faith-sockpuppetry. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 15:04, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, Thank you PravinGanechari (talk) 15:47, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

This question seems oddly similar to one you asked in what's now archive 1159. -- Hoary (talk) 21:42, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, sorry last time I asked the question PravinGanechari (talk) 11:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

This subbmission is contrary to the purpose of WIKI

Hello, Could please anyone help me with this? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Bianca_Dragusanu

Are many things i have to add but this is why its draft. Thanks Customweb01 (talk) 08:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Customweb01 Draft:Bianca Dragusanu rejected on 18 August. Not in English and no references. David notMD (talk) 08:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

ALSO, 'your' text is a copy of the image description. David notMD (talk) 12:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Nation Creditworthiness?

what's the rationale to keeping GDP and other measurements as a sole indicator to identify creditworthiness for countries to avail external loan? is there any justice to applying this principle on least developed nations seeking funds because obviously their GDP's and other socio-economic indicators would be below global average? how do world banks or other foreign financiers fund them based on? Grotesquetruth (talk) 13:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Grotesquetruth, welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? If you just want general information about economic principles, a better place to ask would be one of the reference desks. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Add status item

Since people generally reply very slow on talk pages, I'm asking it here: would it make sense to add "rejected" to the list of possible statuses in Template:Infobox EU legislation? PhotographyEdits (talk) 09:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, PhotographyEdits. This is really a bit too obscure for the Teahouse, and it's hard to know which notable rejected legislation you might have in mind. But surely current/proposed/repealed refer to statuses of legislation that either are, once were, or might soon be actively operating. But if legislation is 'rejected', surely it's then just not valid legislation, and therefore is irrelevant and of little interest. I'd have thought it unnecessary. But this isn't a field I know much about.

I don't see you having actually asked the question at the Templates own talk page yet. That's always the first thing you should do. Then you can go to other places and flag up your post by including a link back to it. That way you keep all discussion in one place (and the most relevant place, too, I might add). One place you could then raise it and link to it would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject European Union. You could always check the View History tab of both the template and its talk page and look for any recently active editors and attempt to ping them, lest they're interested in commenting. Does that help? Nick Moyes (talk) 13:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes Yes, that helps, thanks! The article I had in mind was the Proposed directive on the patentability of computer-implemented inventions. PhotographyEdits (talk) 13:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@PhotographyEdits Ok, thanks, that helps to understand how you might use it. Is that a one-off, or a common thing, I wonder? I would certainly include a link in any discussion to an article where the template is used 'normally' and this one where it's use would be valid if only that status option were there. Sorry I can't offer much more than that. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes I decided to be WP:BOLD and add it myself :) There also seems to be the Draft Fifth Company Law Directive, but it's not very common to be both notable and rejected I guess. But since there are at least multiple, I would say having the attribute is worthwhile. Thanks for your comments anyway! PhotographyEdits (talk) 14:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Are these reliable sources?

Hello, I'm working on Draft:Mallu Traveler. Let me know Gulf Times, Indian Express, Manorama, The News Minutes, are these reliable sources? By the way, he is a YouTuber. Imperfect Boy (talk) 09:55, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Imperfect Boy and welcome to the Teahouse! indian express is generally reliable, although not much discussion has been present for the other three sites as far as I could find in the reliable sources noticeboard. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 10:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Imperfect Boy. Melecie referred to, but didn't direct you to, the Reliable sources noticeboard, which is the best place for such questions. Note that reliability is not always all or nothing: some sources are generally reliable and some are generally unreliable, but many are reliable for some kinds of information but not for other kinds, so it depends what you want to cite them for. ColinFine (talk) 14:38, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

page name change

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sam_Jones_Memorial_United_Methodist_Church Our church name changed in June. I am trying to get the name changed here. I don't have access to that edit, so I put in for a change 3 weeks ago and have not received a response. Nancy Jo Clark (talk) 12:41, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nancy Jo Clark: Hello Nancy Jo! First, you refer to it as "our church". Are you affiliated at all with the church (outside of you being a member of the church)? If so then you have a Conflict of Interest, and need to declare it on your userpage. Second, there is no deadline. I'm not seeing a move request on the article's talk page however I'm assuming you've made the request elsewhere. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 12:44, 17 August 2022 (UTC)R

It looks like Nancy Jo Clark tried to make a technical request here. That didn't work because it was entered inside hidden text, which isn't rendered on the page. It also wasn't super clear from that edit which article Nancy Jo Clark intended to be moved.

It doesn't seem super likely that after disaffiliating from the UMC, the common name is going to continue to be Sam Jones Memorial United Methodist Church, so a technical request would likely succeed – though I know little enough about this topic that I'm not going to boldly move it myself! If Nancy Jo Clark wants to try to request the move again at the page for making technical requests for page moves, being careful to follow the instructions given at the top of the page, I imagine it will likely be completed after the usual seven-day holding period. Caeciliusinhorto-public (talk) 13:21, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I'm am the Director of Communications here at Sam Jones Methodist Church (Formerly known as Sam Jones Memorial United Methodist Church). I am responsible for the "branding" of the church. We did disaffiliate from the UMC on June 4 and we are currently an independent church. We may join another denomination in one to two years, but the name should not change. I am sorry that I don't remember where I made the request. It's been several weeks and I keep getting lost in my efforts to edit the name. I will click on the link provided and see what I can get done. Thank you for your replies. Nancy Jo Clark (talk) 15:49, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Nancy Jo Clark: Alright well in that case please read WP:COI and also WP:PAID (Unless you are not paid). I would also recommend reading about what Wikipedia is not. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy time-saving note for others that this has been done. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:50, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, this seemed an unobjectionable move, so I went ahead and moved the page. Deor (talk) 15:43, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

"Check | url=value"

Hello Teahouse!

Apologies in advance for my newbie question, I'm attempting to cite the author page on a bookseller's website (Samtalent: Brutes) to add "writer" to the article: Bill Whitten, and keep getting a "Check | url=value" error. Should I change my formatting in the external links section? I'm currently using brackets around the url: [ http://example.com website: title]

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Whitten&action=edit&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Whitten&action=edit&section=4&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bill_Whitten&action=edit&section=5&editintro=Template:BLP_editintro

Thanks for your time!

- DN DemocratizeInfoNow23 (talk) 14:31, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@DemocratizeInfoNow23: Which citation template are you attempting to use? Typically URL parameters just take the bare/naked URL and surrounding it in straight brackets with custom display text would be expected to produce an error. Could you please clarify how you're doing it? Feel free to use < nowiki></ nowiki> tags (without the spaces) to put full markup of the citation/reference in so we can see what's going on. TheSandDoctor ^Talk 14:44, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I've fixed the faulty url in your top citation by simply removing the double curly brackets around that url within the reference template. As you've used it in the lead, it's generally not OK to include it in the External links section as well, so I have removed the second use of it. I didn't fully understand the website you linked to - doesn't look much like a bookseller to me. It may be that the citation is not needed in the lead (it certainly doesn't support him being a musician), and that you return it to the WP:EL section. If the bookseller isn't also the publisher, then it's probably not appropriate to include it there anyway. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:45, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for fixing the link, Nick Moyes. I appreciate it and I appreciate hearing that it's not sufficient, I'll find a better better one. I know he's been publishing prose for several years but is better known for his music career. I'll do some more research. DemocratizeInfoNow23 (talk) 18:13, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, DemocratizeInfoNow2, and welcome to the Teahouse. You're right that the way to write an external link is the URL in brackets, with (optionally) a space and then a title. But that is for a bare URL link: if you're using a citation template, then the 'url' parameter takes just the URL, not a title or brackets.

However, I am a little concerned at what you are trying to do. Frankly, the fact that he has a written a book that is available on a mate's website is not enough for Wikipedia to call him a "writer" (since anybody can do this). Unless you can find a reliable independent source that refers to him as a writer, I think that description should go. ColinFine (talk) 14:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you all for the quick replies! It's been a while since I've edited and I'm still learning, obviously. Good to hear that that link isn't sufficient to establish him as a writer. As far as I know he's published short stories for about a decade and I was citing his first book there. I'll do some more research, and find a better link. I'll use that independent source article as my guide. DemocratizeInfoNow23 (talk) 15:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Colin, yes, all of the replies I've gotten agree with you, I'll do more research and find a better representation of his writing career. DemocratizeInfoNow23 (talk) 18:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

IMDb Source

Hi! My draft (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Val_Galaktionov) got reviewed and was declined for a few reasons. The first reasons I will edit and correct, but I'm not quite understanding the other reason, which claimed that IMDb is considered an unreliable source. However, I saw other Wikipedia articles use IMDb as a source, such as (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Behzad_Abdi) and (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Benjamin_Britten). What should I do? Can I leave the IMDb source? If yes, will my draft be deleted? Jesusgreaterthanall (talk) 16:49, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello @Jesusgreaterthanall; welcome to the Teahouse. IMDB is not considered reliable by Wikipedia standards because virtually anyone can edit IMDB pages with minimal editorial oversight or fact-checking. Usually IMDB is appropriate for use only in the "External links" section of a given article. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 16:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, but then is it alright to leave the sentence mentioning IMDb without citing IMDb in the references? Jesusgreaterthanall (talk) 16:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Mmm, I would say no - not only is that still using IMDb as a source, which as has been said is discouraged, but it runs afoul of verifiability issues. Remember that citations are a crucial part of Wikipedia articles. ‍ ‍ Your Power 🐍 ‍ ‍ ^{💬 "What did I tell you?"}
_{📝 "Don't get complacent..."} 16:58, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I have removed the sentence from Behzad Abdi, thanks for the heads up. Theroadislong (talk) 17:03, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Got it! Thank you! Jesusgreaterthanall (talk) 18:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

New Contents Page

I have been trying to make a new contents page in my sandbox. I would like to left-justify the headings and their content so that it looks better. I've tried to do it myself, but I had no luck. I was wondering if you could what lines of code I need to add in order to accomplish this task or find someone that is good with graphic design to do it for me. Interstellarity (talk) 15:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Interstellarity: The template {{Intro to single}} defaults to center alignment. Add |align=left to change it to left alignment. RudolfRed (talk) 18:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks,  Done Interstellarity (talk) 19:00, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Notability criteria

Hello!

Currently i am working on a draft of Abbas Haider (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Abbas_Haider_(businessman)) the CEO of Aspetto, it was recently came into speedy deletion, after argumentative discussion i was able to save the page and now its move to draft space. As it was my first draft, i paid intense concentration on Wikipedia community guidelines, the page was backed up by major and neutral resources, Such as Wsj, Forbes, mary washington and others. I really want to know, is forbes 30 under 30 is a notable criteria for wikipedia? As i have seen page of Trishneet aroora, his page is all backed up with notability of forbes 30 under 30. Furthermore, his page was also came into speedy dleetion criteria, but he fought back to make it live. Please guide me!

Thanks

WforWriter (talk) 18:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Draft:Abbas Haider (businessman) Here is the draft link. WforWriter (talk) 18:27, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@WforWriter: You can include it, but since it is all related to his role at Aspetto, I'm not sure it pushes the notability needle. Personally, I look to see if someone is notable for more than just being the CEO of a single company, to meet our notability standards. If the company is huge and gets very much media coverage, along with coverage of the CEO, then that's different. What I see is a decent sized company that meets notability from the shown coverage, but not enough for Haider to have his own article. It's likely WP:TOOSOON. You might consider putting some of his info in a "Founder" section of the Aspetto article, until there's more coverage to do a standalone "fork" article just about him. TimTempleton ^{(talk) (cont)} 19:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Google vs Bing search

Hi, two of the entries I created don't appear in google search, but they appear in bing search, and I created them more than 100 days ago and they already been reviewed. I mean Hadar Gad and Noam Omer, How is that ? Tzahy (talk) 20:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Tzahy, and welcome to the Teahouse. Hadar Gad was makred as "reviewed" on 2 July. We have no control over what Google (or any other search engine) does thereafter. ColinFine (talk) 20:42, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks ColinFine, I thought that maybe there is a bug in the system that can be fixed ? I'm a technophobe and totally ingnorat in wiki code. I just proud of most of the articles what I edited or co-edited (apologize for my hubris) and wants people to know about them if they search. I created Noam Omer in 18 November 2021. Tzahy (talk) 20:51, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tzahy I don't know if this changed since you posted, but both appear to me when I google. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 21:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Gråbergs Gråa Sång, of course I checked just before I asked in the Teahouse (first time here), I wouldn't bother you for nothing, they doesn't appear in my google search, very strange. Tzahy (talk) 21:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tzahy: I get the WP article as the second result (after only the artist's own Web site) for Noam Omer, and the WP article as the fifth result for Hadar Gad. Deor (talk) 21:15, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Deor. Tzahy (talk) 21:19, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I found the problem and the solution: I'm from Israel and in my Google search definition the prefered language was Hebrew, once I changed it to English I see the entries, I wasn't aware of that; thanks to you all. Tzahy (talk) 21:26, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Tzahy. I have an editing suggestion for you. The lead section of Hadar Gad is way too short and the lead section of Noam Omer is way too long. The lead section should summarize the most important parts of the body of the article, but it should not include any information that is not covered in the body of the article. Please read WP:LEAD for more information. Cullen328 (talk) 21:57, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328, I will do that, I wrote myself a notice to read it, but I'm not sure if it will be done in the next two weeks. Tzahy (talk) 22:04, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Notability Concern

Is the MarTech (Marketing Technology) industry notable to write about? BroMonkey54 (talk) 20:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, BroMonkey54, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is the same as for any other subject: if (and only if) it meets the criteria in notability - which generally means that there are several reliably published and independent sources which discuss it in some depth. Are there any textbooks on it? If so, are they published by somebody who isn't involved in the industry? Alternatively, are there several academic papers on it (but they would need to be more than somebody writing up what they have done in the field)? ColinFine (talk) 20:47, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, BroMonkey54. I found a book called Technology and Innovation for Marketing, published by Taylor & Francis, which appears to be a reliable source. There are other similar books that show up in a Google Books search. Cullen328 (talk) 22:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

There is an existing article called Marketing automation. Cullen328 (talk) 22:43, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I feel I have addressed the issues regarding subjective matter on my piece on Iain Murray.

I feel I have addressed the issues regarding subjective matter on my piece on Iain Murray. How do I have it removed asap. I find it very hard to understand what to do to fix these issues quickly. Please advise. I am sure of the facts and will be happy to provide more if needs be but the process is quite mysterious. PLease assist FactEternal (talk) 12:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Iain Murray (sailor).

Don't worry about it being mysterious, FactEternal; Wikipedia seems that way to every editor when they first start – the learning curve is steep!

If you're truly sure that you've addressed the problem (I presume you've followed the link at the bottom of the template and read that Help page), you could click the "Edit" tab at the very top of the Article page and delete the second line of code that says "{{Peacock|date=August 2022}}", but as a new editor, you may not be sure and/or understandably not have the confidence to do that.

I suggest that we consult the editor who added the template, Tacyarg, and ask what they think. (My use of their username there was a "ping" which will notify them that they've been mentioned here: you (or I) could also have left a message on their Talk page.

If you're wondering how I knew who placed the template, I found the edit doing so listed in the article's View history tab.

Congratulations on having created a promising article: it's not easy! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.96 (talk) 15:35, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your supportive and encouraging reply. You are right. It is a steep learning curve. I am in a hurry to sort everything out accordingly. All suggestions and guidance hugely appreciated. FactEternal (talk) 13:43, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, FactEternal, and welcome to the teahouse. It would be helpful if you had told us which article you were referring to - I looked at all three articles about people call Iain Murray before I found that Iain Murray (sailor) has the tag you are referring to.

There is a link (Learn how and when to remove this template message)in the tag message - have you read that? ColinFine (talk) 15:33, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, FactEternal. It is not a "piece". It is an encyclopedia article that must be written from the Neutral point of view. Examples of non-neutral language include early domination and highly competitive and He continued to become known in the sailing community and uniquely and An onerous last-minute racing schedule imposed upon the syndicates. That is the type of language used by sports journalists not encylopedia writers. In addition, many of the references are non-functional and lack basic bibliographic information like the title of the article. Your first reference, for example, is worthless for verification. The reference provided for his participation in the 2020 Tokyo Olympics does not verify his participation. References with "author" as the title make no sense and mostly do not work. In conclusion, this article needs a lot of work before the tag can be removed. Cullen328 (talk) 16:02, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much for pointing out all my errors. They are hugely helpful, particularly as I need to make corrections as soon as humanly possible. Its requires quite a lot of discipline to write from a neutral point of view on this subject. Many thanks FactEternal (talk) 13:55, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

FactEternal, your repeated assertions of a "need to make corrections as soon as humanly possible" are worrying. Wikipedia is not news, Wikipedia has WP:No deadlines, and it is never to be used for promotion or for the benefit of the subject (that may be an outcome, but on the other hand it could turn out to be detrimental).

You have already denied any Conflict of interest on your Talk page, and by inference any onbligation to declare editing for payment, so why is there such urgency? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.96 (talk) 15:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

The article was created in 2008, so it is not yours. The references you added are all crap. The title is never "author." Most of those are to sailboat racing news feeds that currently make no mention of Iain. Cullen328 has gone to the trouble of tagging some of those as failing to verify the factual statement in the text, but there are many others. CHECK ALL REFERENCES. David notMD (talk) 18:25, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi there, sorry, I didn't get the ping, but happened to see this. Yes, this looks much better now, thanks for your work on it. It was phrases like "With a prolific career spanning all aspects of competitive yachting, he is most noted for his early domination and evolution of the 18ft skiff class ... excellence and innovation in yacht design ... highly competitive" that made me think it needed the Peacock tag. I'll take it off now. Tacyarg (talk) 23:17, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Having read the article through again - although I still think it's correct to remove the Peacock tag, I agree with others above that there are problems with the verifiability of the information. You have generally linked to the homepage of the publications rather than to individual articles, so the reader can't easily verify the information. And in some places it looks as if you have fallen into synthesising information in a way which does not reflect the sources but is a summary of several (eg "many classic motor boats" - you have sources about Murray designing specific boats but not one where an independent, reliable source has described him as designing many classic boats). Hope that is helpful. I'm also curious about the time pressure you mention. Tacyarg (talk) 23:36, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Gadget

Is there a gadget that can see the revisions and the creator of the article (aside from the history section)? SeanJ 2007 (talk) 12:20, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

For details like the creator, you can click on the page information link, which is located on the left-hand menu under tools. But I am not aware of any other gadget. Kpddg ^(talk) 12:46, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello SeanJ 2007, and welcome to the Teahouse. Further to Kpddg's suggestion, you should go to View History tab and use the Page Statistics link to an xtools link. Thus for Mont Blanc massif you'd only get just this with the Page Information link in the left-side Tools bar, but you'd get this much better report thith the Page Statistics link. It shows you the most active editors, how many each one made, plus a chronological breakdown of when edits were made and the changes in page views per year. In additoin the header of the report shows you when and who the first and latest edits were made by, the article's status, the total number of views over the last 60 days, plus the number of other articles that link to it. All in all, pretty useful. Was there anything missing from that that you wanted? Nick Moyes (talk) 13:01, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for sharing this; I had thought that xtools only had information about a user! Kpddg ^(talk) 13:18, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

SeanJ 2007, you might also find the mediawiki browser extension Who Wrote That useful. It adds a "who wrote that" item to the left menu on article pages. After you click it, you can select any text in the article to get a pop-up that tells you which editor added that text and when, while also highlighting all other text by that editor in the article. Schazjmd (talk) 14:44, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@SeanJ 2007: if you want the creator and creator revision there is a gadget that does that. Go to Preferences > Gadgets > Appearance and scroll down to the last entry, entitled 'XTools: dynamically show statistics about a page's history under the page heading' check it and Save. It also provides other stats; here's an example:

3,101 revisions since 2002-07-17 (+4 hours), 1,185 editors, 335 watchers, 40,875 pageviews (30 days), created by: ExampleUser (11,197) · See full page statistics

with pretty much everything linked. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 17:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Mathglot: Thank you. SeanJ 2007 (talk) 03:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Business on wiki

I have recently noticed that a car park business NCP have shot up on the google listings by in large for having a wiki page National Car Parks - Wikipedia, as a competitor a small business running for over 30 years when I set up a wiki page it is deleted as it is advertising a business. This seems unfair as NCP are gaining an advantage which I cannot compete with. How can they set up a page with the history of the business but we cannot? SAPEDI (talk) 16:10, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse SAPEDI NCP almost certainly didn't set up "a page" we call them articles not pages and they are usually created by people who have no connection with the topic, drawing on what reliable have reported. Wikipedia is not a place to promote your business. Please see WP:NCORP for the criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 16:25, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

The NCP 'article' is clearly promoting the business, anything with a weblink is a clear promotion of a page talking about services, current operations and locations. SAPEDI (talk) 16:32, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

If that is so then it will need tidying up, but the fact that other poor quality articles exist won't help you promote your business. Theroadislong (talk) 16:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I have removed much of the promotional content at National Car Parks please let us know if there is more. Theroadislong (talk) 16:43, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: Apologies for barging in, however taking a look at the article, the lead sounds very promotional. Mainly where it says "with over 150,000 spaces across more than 500 car parks in towns, cities, airports, London Underground and National Rail stations" which just sounds like something you'd hear in a commercial. I attempted to change it however I couldn't figure out how to make it not sound so promotional without just completely axing that part which would just leave the lead with "National Car Parks (NCP) is a private car park operator". ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:12, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

The " 150,000 spaces across more than 500 car parks" part isn't sourced anywhere so should probably be removed. Theroadislong (talk) 19:30, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: Alright. The only reason I"m keeping it is because it'll make the lead incredibly short. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, SAPEDI. National Car Parks has been on Wikipedia since 2006, so any recent changes in Google search results are for a different reason. The article was started by an editor who is still somewhat active and edits on a wide variety of topics, mostly related to New Zealand, Australia and the UK. This is clearly not an editor here just to promote your competitor. I am an administrator and so I could read your deleted article. The most important part of an acceptable Wikipedia article is the list of references to reliable, independent sources that devote significant coverage to the topic. The article needs to summarize those reliable sources. Your article was unreferenced though it had two external links masquerading as references. Unreferenced articles are never acceptable. The NCP article, on the other hand, has 18 references, many of them to high quality sources like BBC News, the Financial Times and the Manchester Evening News. That is the fundamental difference between the two articles. Cullen328 (talk) 01:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Also, adding an external link to the company website in the infobox of an article about a notable company is standard practice and not at all out of the ordinary. Cullen328 (talk) 04:19, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

help to edit article

I need help to edit the draft of Jason Innocent. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jason_Innocent

Thepublich (talk) 03:24, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Read the required criteria detailed at WP:ARTIST, find WP:Reliable sources that demonstrate how Innocent meets them, add summaries of those sources' contents to the article, and cite them. Unless you (or others) can do that, the draft will not be accepted as an article. This may be a case of WP:Too soon – maybe in five or ten years Innocent will have become better known and consequently have more reliable-source pieces written about him. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.209.121.96 (talk) 04:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I uploaded an article 1 year ago and have not heard anything

In June of 2021 I uploaded an article. I was told to wait 6 months for a response. It had been more than a year. How can I check on its progress? Thanks Senyi84 (talk) 22:21, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

This account has no edits anywhere aside from this edit. Also article are not uploaded, but what was the title of said "article"? PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:22, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Nevermind, it appears you uploaded a resume to commons. In any case it's not appropriate for Wikipedia or Commons. Please see WP:YFA and WP:42 PRAXIDICAE🌈 22:23, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I have seen many similar articles describing historically significant Martial Artists (see Li Ziming https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Li_Ziming). I think it is something readers would find intersting. Senyi84 (talk) 22:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@Senyi84: The article you mention has similar issues to your upload; I might have to nominate it for deletion. There certainly are notable martial artists, for example Ip Man. But not every martial artist qualifies for a Wikipedia article – even if they have achieved local fame. Read the links Praxidicae provided above for you, to get an idea. --LordPeterII (talk) 23:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Senyi84, uploading a PDF to Wikimedia Commons is completely the wrong way to begin writing an article. Commons is a separate project that hosts images and media files. Please read and study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 00:49, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I will review the article you mention. Senyi84 (talk) 01:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Both Li Ziming and Wang Qing Zhai are quite famous in China, for just their Martial Arts skills (as described in the articles). There are many people in the west who's teachers were trained by them. For those who study Martial Arts, it is often very important to understand the history of their art. Both Li Ziming and Wang Qing Zhai played important roles in the creation and promotion of their respective arts. Senyi84 (talk) 00:58, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Senyi84. Let me be frank. No experienced editor here on Wikipedia cares about what one new Wikipedia editor says is "quite famous" or "very important". We care only about what reliable, independent published sources say. So, back up everything you say by referring to what reliable sources say. That is the only way that you will convince anybody of anything here. Cullen328 (talk) 02:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I appreciate the need for objective evidence in these matters. I tried to provide references whenever I could.

Part of the difficulty is that all of the corroborating documents are in Chinese. I did list as many as I could find. Senyi84 (talk) 04:47, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Senyi84, there is no requirement that sources be published in English. Sources in any language are fine, as long as they are published, reliable and independent. Cullen328 (talk) 04:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Help me to expand an article?

Hello, I'm working on Draft: Mallu Traveler. He is a YouTuber from Kerala, India. I've placed some sources there. Somebody please help me to expand the article? Thanks Imperfect Boy (talk) 05:40, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

To be honest, he isn't really that notable. There are many YouTubers that have over 1 million subscribers who don't have Wikipedia articles. I wouldn't bother, if I were you. Jenkowelten (talk) 07:53, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Is there a suggestion box?

I have 2 bot ideas. Where would I ask? Jenkowelten (talk) 07:48, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

For bots you need WP:BOTREQ. But read the Bot Policy first before asking. Also check the archive to make sure it's not a perennially rejected suggestion. - X201 (talk) 08:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Or instead of trawling through the archive, have a look at Wikipedia:Bot_policy#Restrictions_on_specific_tasks and Wikipedia:Bot requests/Frequently denied bots. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:22, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Not able to edit

Dear Team,

This is bring to your notice that myself was blocked from editing or create the history Dr Chef Sathishkumar (talk) 07:28, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You have not been blocked. Are you referring to Draft:Sathishkumar Gnanam being declined? - X201 (talk) 08:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You have not been blocked. HOWEVER, it appears that you have created two accounts, the above and User:Sathishkumar Gnanam, both in an attempt to create content about yourself. Immediately stop using one or the other of these accounts, as multiple accounts are referred to as WP:Sockpuppets, which will result in you being indefinitely blocked. Also see WP:AUTO for Wikipedia's advice to not attempt autobiography. David notMD (talk) 08:46, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

ALSO, creating more than one draft about yourself Draft:Chef Sathishkumar Gnanam and Draft:Sathishkumar Gnanam is wrong, as is repeatedly adding your name to List of Indian chefs when there is no article about you yet. David notMD (talk) 08:52, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

cake recipe

hello will you please be kind to help supply me with a delicious recipe for a vanilla cake recipe thank you -tim Tim W. Jacobson (talk) 23:22, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Ask at the Reference desks. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 23:23, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tim W. Jacobson Welcome to the Teahouse. Better still, why not just use a search engine and do your own research? I use that technique for a lot of my cooking, and would never consider asking Wikipedian's for a recipe. Good luck and good cooking! Nick Moyes (talk) 01:23, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tim W. Jacobson Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse! This is a place for new Wikipedia editors to ask questions about editing. Your question made me smile, but it does not fit here. I wish you good luck on your quest for a recipe, though!

Asparagusus (interaction) 13:34, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

I don't know, cake would go well with the tea around here! Polyamorph (talk) 16:14, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

@Tim W. Jacobson Wikipedia uses an encyclopaedic style and promotional language is not permitted, so we cannot recommend a 'delicious' recipe, unless the recipe has been described as 'delicious' by a reliable secondary sauce. We can only provide a neutral and well-balanced cake. In assessing the cake, our sauces must have depth, and be independent of the original recipe. In general, baking is discouraged as we're not allowed to synthesise our own cake. Also, when it comes to the consumption, you will probably find that Original Research is an attractive proposition, but it too, is not allowed in Wikipedia. We cannot have our cake and write about it. I would also recommend that you look for cake recipes elsewhere because our article Cake is written in American English, and is therefore eaten on the wrong side of the road. 149.155.219.44 (talk) 16:10, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the laugh @149.155.219.44! That's a really good one, I'm bookmarking that for future reference :D --LordPeterII (talk) 21:09, 17 August 2022 (UTC)

What a sweet post. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 04:28, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Yes, quite delicious. Lectonar (talk) 12:42, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

While that was hilarious to read, it requires some familiarity with Wikipedia to understand, but the Teahouse is the page for newbies. I am making it all small to give a visual indication that this should not be taken as a serious answer to the question asked. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:04, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Afd IP comments

Are comments from any IP accepted in Afd? PravinGanechari (talk) 10:58, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

PravinGanechari Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. As stated at WP:AFDFORMAT, "Unregistered or new users are welcome to contribute to the discussion, but their recommendations may be discounted if they seem to be made in bad faith (for example, if they misrepresent their reasons). Conversely, the opinions of logged in users whose accounts predate the article's AfD nomination may be given more weight when determining consensus." 331dot (talk) 12:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I think 331dot probably meant to ping PravinGanechari, not template him. I've done that countless times but usually notice the mistake before saving! Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Just missed putting the line in. It won't work now but it at least is fixed. Thanks. 331dot (talk) 12:11, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Government Bunkers

Where can I find a list of all offsite government fortified bunkers here in the United States Jmkirkman (talk) 06:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Jmkirkman, this page is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia, but you can try this link: Wikipedia:Reference desk. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 07:58, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Jmkirkman I don't think that there is a list on Wikipedia for that but the Category:Bunkers page may be of interest to you. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Ah, there's a Category:Nuclear bunkers in the United States. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:05, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

statistics

Does anyone knows about a research, poll or survey about the "average" wikipedian profile ? Tzahy (talk) 13:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

• Wikipedia:Systemic_bias#The_"average_Wikipedian" has plenty of links, one of them is to Wikipedia:User survey which lists some of those surveys. However, they were in 2005 or so, so they might be a bit outdated, though I expect the demographics have not changed much. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you very much Tigraan. Tzahy (talk) 13:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

My article declined

I have included important references in many languages ​​to my article. Why was it not accepted? I hope my edit will be accepted.

Best Editormena (talk) 10:32, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Editormena The short answer is that most if not all of your references are press releases by Nazlı Ekşi herself or her sponsors, presumably touting for business. Wikipedia articles must be based on what reliable secondary sources have said without being prompted or fed information. If you cannot find WP:INDEPENDENT sources showing her notability, then no article can be accepted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:00, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Mike, thank you so much for your return. I've unpublished a few references. The rest of the references all look like the content entered by the editor. Editormena (talk) 13:11, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Editormena Since I don't speak Turkish, I can't comment on all your sources but of the ones I can read, The Times of Israel and AZ Central's pieces are clearly based on interview, so not independent and just lazy journalism. The award by World Business magazine sounds impressive until you look at the cited webpage and find that they have no content at all about Ekşi beyond mentioning she won one of what seems to be a huge list of their annual "Awards". So not WP:SIGCOV and we are left wondering what criteria this magazine uses to select awardees. No doubt Ekşi is a surgeon doing their best but it is all too WP:RUNOFTHEMILL to warrant inclusion here. This seems to be your only contribution to Wikipedia so far, so I would encourage you to work on improving our myriad of other articles and forget about this draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:14, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry for the lengthy question.....

My name is Phil Lloyd. Username: HTW0822

I am looking for a site where my posts, and others’ on the same topic can be viewed publicly.

I/we are below a non-profit (just Sharing), and try to operate with no money and solicit Funding from Philanthropists or Crowdfunding.

I posted some on Fandom (WETBOP) a year or so ago, and recently on WT.social under the subwiki NSV.

I attempted to contact Mr. Jimmy Wales, but finding WTS once again, I thought this would work. But the issues there are two-fold.

#1) They, at this point do not offer sub wiki nesting like NSV.Energy.Anaerobic Digester.Electricity where members could create a new NSV, lets call it NSV.NoCO2Here where they could design their own New Sharing Village (using the common rules like Max. 1,000 people, 100ha’s in the Tropics and up to 200 ha’s in Temperate (snow) zones).

Then, decide what their NSV will contribute to Village-to-Village Sharing, like Biogas Digesters, Mens’ Shirts, Metal-works, and Toothpaste, for example.

And #2) they are in the process of preparing and releasing Version 2 of WTS, and not sure if my current method will work in that new release.

My question....finally....

Could I and other members write Here on Wikipedia on this Idea of Reducing CO2 emissions, stopping Homelessness, Poverty, Unemployment and so on....by simply shifting people to Sharing Villages – NSVs, where they contribute to building their own Homes, Grow and Raise their own Food on Local Farms using Forest Farming, etc.?

Please understand a 90-100% Sharing community has different motivation, different goals than a for profit one. We want only the Best, the Highest Quality, not the Least cost, not the least Labour for a product that has a built-in obsolescence. Labour is last on the last of criteria, after considering the amount of raw material used. A NSV builds products using worldwide standard components, so Repairing becomes easy. No Brands, just the Most Durable, Long Lasting, Best Quality, always.

Thanks in advance for any and all suggestions HTW0822 (talk) 04:28, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, HTW0822. It seems that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of the purpose of Wikipedia. This is an encylopedia that consists of neutrally written articles that summarize what independent reliable published sources say about various topics. It is not a place for various people to gather and discuss and debate ways to improve the world. That kind of discussion is strictly forbidden by policy, specifically Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. In particular, please read the section "Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion". The fact that your group is nonprofit is irrelevant. The policies in question apply equally to the smallest charities and the largest multinational corporations. Cullen328 (talk) 04:45, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

gotcha,

before departing though, perhaps starting at the VITAL Level 1, someone, anyone of the 76 million wiki authors must surely be concerned and find even the Vatican News is reporting on Fossil Fuel Use more than Doubling (110%) by 2030. Where are the "neutrally written articles that summarize what independent reliable published sources say about various topics" like Fossil Fuel emissions, and the likely-hood of our extinction unless we act quickly! Is this not a LEVEL 1 Priority? Guess not.... HTW0822 (talk) 04:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

HTW0822, Wikipedia has countless neutrally written encyclopedia articles about climate change, fossil fuels, renewable energy, endangered species, pollution, environmental action and so on. Wipedia editors can express their "concern" about these things off-Wikipedia and I certainly do. As I reveal on my userpage, I have been a member of the Sierra Club since 1976. But here on Wikipedia, building a neutrally written encyclopedia is always allowed. On the other hand, campaigning for anything except free knowledge is never allowed. The encyclopedia is our LEVEL 1 priority here. There are countless other websites with different priorities for you to choose among. Cullen328 (talk) 05:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@HTW0822: Welcome to the Teahouse. If you're looking for a space to collaborate using wiki software, you can go to MediaWiki and download the software (instructions located there) to use on a website you create. If you would like something more pre-designed, you could try out Miraheze. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

About copy-editing

Is there a way to request a copy-edit? Can you request a copy-edit of an article you've never edited? — VORTEX³⁴²⁷ (Talk!) 11:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Vortex3427 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for wanting to contribute. Most articles can be edited by any user, and you may edit any article in which you are interested in the topic or if you just noticed an error. If you see a change that should be made, you are welcome to make it yourself! If you don't yet feel comfortable doing so, that's fine too. You may use the article talk page associated with an article(for example, Talk:Joe Biden is the talk page for the Joe Biden article) to propose changes. To increase the chances they will be seen, you may make them as formal edit requests(click for instructions). Every article has a link to the talk page at the top(in desktop mode at least, it can be accessed in mobile too) 331dot (talk) 12:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You can add {{Copy edit}} at the top of the article if you think this is needed but you don't want to do it yourself (or have just done a bit). Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:13, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Vortex3427: Welcome to the Teahouse. As a coordinator for the Guild of Copy Editors, I can tell you that you can either use the {{copy edit}} template to put it in the backlog, or you can submit a request on the request page (please read the instructions carefully should you go this route). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:36, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

How to improve article to demonstrate significant coverage

I drafted a Wikipedia on the Zefania XML Bible markup language ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Zefania_XML ). There is already a German-language article on this topic ( https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zefania_XML ). My initial submission was rejected due to it not having "significant coverage." I've subsequently added further sources referring to it. While it may not be referenced extensively on Wikipedia, there are hundreds of Bible translations and several applications that are in or that use this format (most are not in English and are intended for a German-language audience and/or for underrepresented groups that have limited Bible resources in their languages), which is no longer publicly documented (the associated domains have expired and I had to use Archive.org and study XML examples to learn the knowledge presented in this article). This article will help preserve this information and serve as a resource to consult for those who wish to learn more about this format which is actively used to distribute Bible translations globally. What else can I do to improve this article (if anything)?

QoheletIO (talk) 15:37, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

• @QoheletIO: Have you clicked the link behind "significant coverage"? It would have told you that what matters is if there are reliable, independent sources that describe the subject at length. The fact that there are hundreds of Bible translations [using it] does not matter one bit, and Wikipedia does not care that this article will help preserve this information and serve as a resource to consult - use another site for that. Conversely, the fact that said sources are hard-to-find / defunct, or not in English, is not a problem. (Plenty of good sources are print-only, for instance.)

I have not checked your sources carefully, but I am not optimistic those will suffice. Please note that documentation produced by the developers of the language would fail the "independent" prong of the test for sources that support notability.

If you cannot find sources that demonstrate significant coverage, please read Wikipedia:No amount of editing can overcome a lack of notability (the title of the page gives away the main message). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 15:56, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, QoheletiO, and welcome to the teahouse. While it sounds as if your purpose is very worthwhile, unfortunately, help preserve this information and serve as a resource to consult for those who wish to learn more about is not part of the purposes of Wikipedia. If it hasn't already been written about in realiabnle independent sources, then Wikipedia will not cover it. ColinFine (talk) 16:05, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, everyone! This was helpful. I've made significant edits to the article to demonstrate significant coverage within the applicable domains and to even incorporate some criticism of the format by a notable individual within the field. I appreciate your assistance. ~ QoheletIO (talk) 18:00, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@QoheletIO: Please note that when it comes to notability, we are after quality, not quantity. Your draft now contains more than 20 references. I suggest that you leave a post on the talk page of the article that gives the three best sources of the bunch - that way a reviewer does not have to crawl through all of them, because otherwise it might take quite a long time to get a review. See WP:THREE for more information.

You should still take care to cite a source for every statement of fact in the body of the article, so it is appropriate to keep references that are below notability-grade for that purpose. However, such references still need to be reliable for the assertion they are supporting. For instance, you cite one this webpage for the assertion that Songbeamer supports Zefania, but Zefania is not mentioned at all at this page, so that fails our core policy that readers should be able to verify the articles from the references only. If the assertion that Songbeamer support Zefania is instead in the documentation / user manual of Songbeamer, you should cite that instead (it’s OK if it is not online). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 08:47, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Tigraan, I appreciate your feedback. Despite there being numerous articles on Wikipedia for related projects (including those that support this format), it seems the bar is much higher to document the format itself. I've decided not to pursue the matter further related to Wikipedia as I've invested too much time as it is. I've instead just created a GitHub repo documenting the information (and also created a backup of some of the corpora) and will just do that instead: https://github.com/biblenerd/Zefania-XML-Preservation . Thank you for your assistance, though! I tried but it seems perhaps Wikipedia is not the best place for documenting formats used in the global Bible translation community. 2601:248:C100:54D:4959:BAF2:81B7:DC1 (talk) 14:50, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Not sure what I am doing wrong and how to get this entry correctly written...

I am looking for a bit of help getting unstuck with the creation of my first page/entry: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Paywith.glass

I really do not know how to get this one right/compliant with the requirements. I was told by Liance that it is not notable and others here in the Teahouse have said that it is not clear what the entry is about - app, software, service etc...

I have edited it to give more clarity around the subject matter and more historical data on the timeline using publicly available references.

Now I am told by Pythoncoder that it sounds like an advertisement... there is clearly a fine balance I am completely missing.

If either of you is available to give a bit more guidance on this, I really would appreciate it. Otherwise, could someone here please help.

-Hatter Hatter.glass (talk) 12:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi there. The issues raised by both reviewers appear correct to me. This article is beyond a fine balance - it is filled with promotional buzzwords and is not written from a neutral point of view. The reviewers have left notes with the relevant guidelines and these are linked in blue. You have correctly disclosed a conflict of interest for the article subject, and thanks for the transparency. However this conflict is likely clouding your judgement in being able to write neutrally, which is why conflict of interest editing is discouraged. Can I please ask why you signed from two accounts? Are you using two accounts? Thanks MaxnaCarta (talk) 12:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi User:MaxnaCarta my apologies about the signature. No, not using two accounts, I may have incorrectly signed (really not a wikipedia protocol/syntax expert here).

Ok, are you able to help elaborate on the issues raised?

For example, you state that the article is filled with promotional buzzwords, could you give more clarity on this. I am not sure if you refer to things such as blockchain or CBDC, distributed cloud etc because we have no other way of describing such things since we literally are exactly these. Blockchain, AI and distributed cloud as the foundation tech for a CBDC infrastructure solution... it really is literally that.

Also, as far as notability, I don't know how to provide the information in the correct way without it sounding like an ad since we are again, quite literally the technology being used to power the first retail CBDC pilot in a G7 per the press articles that cover this.

I really do need your help on this, I am not sure how to do it the right way :) Hatter.glass (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

There's no point working on the language of a draft if the subject doesn't qualify. Back in February you were told/asked "None of the cited sources appear to demonstrate significant, independent coverage of the subject. Please select the [three] best sources which demonstrate notability." Given that the name "Paywith.glass" doesn't appear within the title of any of the references, I suspect that this comment/request is just as valid now as it was then. And therefore, please -- right here, in this "teahouse" thread -- specify which three sources best demonstrate notability. Of course they must be reliable sources, and in order to be reliable they must be entirely independent of the subject. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I agree with Hoary on this. In my own opinion also, this article does not look appropriate for Wikipedia. I would not approve it if I had reviewed it for the same reasons as others. It looks like you have received sufficient feedback on the matter also. MaxnaCarta (talk) 12:40, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Our issue here is that we are infrastructure powering pilots. We are clearly mentioned in the articles but the headlines will not be about us, they are about the use of our technology.

Additionally, the sources are all independent, for example, we do not write, nor do we have any control over what is written by Ledger Insights but we are clearly mentioned in the article as the founding entity behind the subject of the article, therefore without us there would not be this initiative or article to talk about it.

Another example is Coindesk who are notoriously difficult to get a mention from unless you are shaking the industry and yet, this is covered here. Hatter.glass (talk) 12:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:TNT is required, ridiculous promotional marketing includes "paywith.glass is modern intelligent financial transaction infrastructure" "creates an Intelligent Digital Currency/Electronic Payment Payments (iDC/EP) Infrastructure solution " "Stellar's own mission statement aligned with the duo's own vision for a payments solution" "Today's financial services infrastructure[27] must integrate low-cost, instant global settlement, solutions to serve the Unbanked, support for e-commerce" etc. etc. etc. Theroadislong (talk) 12:47, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

hi User:Theroadislong, I can remove the information about Stellar's mission statement which was added to give context as to the origin of the project. It was in no way intended as marketing, we were just showing what inspired this in the first place.

As for the "Today's financial services infrastructure must integrate low-cost, instant global settlement, solutions to serve the Unbanked, support for e-commerce", I have quite literally cited the source, this is not my opinion nor a promotion.

There are papers that have come to this conclusion from multiple independent sources which I wanted to use to show that the criteria for infrastructure today is very different from the criteria in the 1970s when the last major financial services infrastructure was built. If you could you guide me on how this should be written instead, I would be very grateful.

Finally, "paywith.glass is modern intelligent financial transaction infrastructure" "creates an Intelligent Digital Currency/Electronic Payment Payments (iDC/EP) Infrastructure solution " is not marketing.

The subject matter is a type of DC/EP (this is just literally what it is, like the Titanic was a ship, the Tesla Roadster is a car) but its specific subcategory is iDC/EP which means that is has an AI element to it and is not a passive solution. Like the difference between a watch and a smartwatch. Again not marketing, it's the terminology for this type of infrastructure. In comparison, China's Digital Yuan, runs on DC/EP, which means that it is in the subcategory that is passive... ie: no AI.

Could you point out any other areas that don't read well and provide guidance on how to rewrite them as necessary? Hatter.glass (talk) 12:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You may not have any "control" over what Ledger Insights publish, but the only mention of paywith.glass in that article is introducing a quote from the CEO of paywith.glass. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 12:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Also see WP:SOLUTIONS. Theroadislong (talk) 13:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

User:ColinFine May I ask then what the suggested action here should be? paywith.glass is currently being integrated into the global financial system across multiple countries to power their domestic and cross border payments rails.

The UK pilot is the first one to be announced and in each market it will be announced as a pilot with whatever the local name is but in the industry it is know that it is powered by paywith.glass.

Direct statements to the public about it will be much like speaking of Arm holdings which makes the technology behind the Samsung and Qualcomm chips which power everyone's smartphones but Arm holdings only appears in most news articles in relation to financial performance, mergers or acquisitions.

How can paywith.glass have a wikipedia entry despite being layer 0/layer 1 of next gen financial services, if there would not likely be any paywith.glass titled articles published for years to come? Hatter.glass (talk) 13:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

If the necessary sources aren't available, then Wikipedia will not have an article. MrOllie (talk) 13:09, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Could you explain to me then how Space Hero has a page?

All of the sources are paid sources as is the practice of PR in Hollywood. Hatter.glass (talk) 13:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

If you want to see why space hero has an article please read my contribution to the deletion discussion that was held. There was significant external coverage in New York Times, among other sources. Granted, one source I found and cited was indeed a press release. Even so, that tv show meets notability standards. Your company/article does not. Sorry. There is no point endlessly asking different editors how to improve it when a clear, specific goalpost has been provided to you in order to demonstrate a meeting of notability. MaxnaCarta (talk) 13:35, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok, I have two last questions:

1. Does the Digital FMI Consortium which is mentioned in these three sources qualify? I ask since this will help me to better understand what is looked for.

https://www.eweekuk.com/cryptocurrency/digital-fmi-consortium-powers-up-for-crypto-and-cbdc-crusade/

https://www.finextra.com/newsarticle/40822/tech-industry-consortium-to-run-cbdc-pilot-with-sterling-stablecoin/crypto

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/digital-fmi-consortium-set-to-explore-new-era-for-money-1031689290

2. It was already stated here that Coindesk does not qualify as a reliable source (I was surprised by that) but may I also ask if FintechTimes or The Banker do?

https://thefintechtimes.com/cross-industry-consortium-explores-future-digital-financial-market-infrastructure/

https://www.thebanker.com/Editor-s-Blog/UK-private-sector-consortium-enters-the-CBDC-game Hatter.glass (talk) 13:57, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Hatter.glass: I have to be blunt here. You need first and foremost to find sources to prove notability (in Wikipedia’s meaning of the term). Drop everything related to cleaning up the article, now - first, you find sources that satisfy WP:GNG, then only if they exist / are sufficient you write the article. Otherwise, it’s just a loss of your time. Very few persons, companies, concepts etc. meet that barrier - it does not mean those persons, companies, concepts are bad or useless or anything, it just means they should not have a Wikipedia page. That other pages exist despite insufficient sourcing is not a valid argument (maybe those pages ought to be deleted).

Notice it’s also a loss of our time. By my count, you have received tailored advice from almost ten different contributors (between the draft comments, your talk page and this thread). I think new paid editors should receive as much help as non-paid editors (even though some people think they should not be helped at all). However, you have had much more help than the average new editor, and I do not see a commensurate improvement in Wikipedia ability.

Onto the sources you provided:

1. Coindesk might be notoriously difficult to get a mention from, but it’s still considered not a good source for notability on Wikipedia. (It might well be that Coindesk is the best of the "crypto" specialized press; but "best of a bad bunch" does not mean "good".)
2. that other source you provided might superficially resemble what we are looking for, but an experienced reviewer can see multiple red flags. The article has no byline, which is generally a sign of poor editorial control/practices. The content smells of a single-interview article (that is, the journalist interviewed a spokesperson/CEO and basically wrote what they said without making any attempt at further investigation), which makes it not independent. (Yes, single-interview articles are more than 90% of journalism by volume today, but it is still useless for Wikipedia purposes.)

So, again, if you don’t find much better sources, you would do well to just stop editing the article here and now. No need to ask people to explicitly point out parts of the articles that need rewriting, even if they help you, it’s pointless if the article ends up deleted anyway. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I am just repeating this here in the event that you do not receive a notification for the above, I do not want to spam anyone just for the record.

1. Does the Digital FMI Consortium which is mentioned in these three sources qualify? I ask since this will help me to better understand what is looked for.

https://www.eweekuk.com/cryptocurrency/digital-fmi-consortium-powers-up-for-crypto-and-cbdc-crusade/

https://www.finextra.com/newsarticle/40822/tech-industry-consortium-to-run-cbdc-pilot-with-sterling-stablecoin/crypto

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/digital-fmi-consortium-set-to-explore-new-era-for-money-1031689290

2. It was already stated here that Coindesk does not qualify as a reliable source (I was surprised by that) but may I also ask if FintechTimes or The Banker do?

https://thefintechtimes.com/cross-industry-consortium-explores-future-digital-financial-market-infrastructure/

https://www.thebanker.com/Editor-s-Blog/UK-private-sector-consortium-enters-the-CBDC-game

Hatter.glass (talk) 14:24, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You just cited a source that has "PRESS RELEASE PR Newswire" as the byline. Given that, I am not inclined to help you much further, so this will be my last post on the subject.

You have been asked to provide the "three best sources", but nobody has given you a link to WP:THREE yet. Go read that. It’s really short. In particular, notice that part: Be honest with yourself about how good [the sources] are.. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 15:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Does it "qualify" for what? You use the word "mention", and that is crucial. What you need is several sources each one of which satisfies all three of the following criteria:

1. It is a reliable source (i.e. it has a reputation for editorial control and fact-checking. You can ask about particular publications at the WP:RSN.
2. If is wholly independent of the subject - not written, published, or commissioned by the subject, not based on a press release, not quoting anybody closely associated with the subject

You might like to ask the guys at WP:WikiProject Cryptocurrency for help. ColinFine (talk) 15:05, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

References

Hello!

I know this isn't a question. But i just wanted to say hi and engage with the community i suppose. Kasper252 (talk) 04:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

hello ! Vincent-vst (talk) 07:18, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, Kasper252, how are you? Nice to find you here! Are you thinking about editing an article here? What are your interests? Mathglot (talk) 07:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Kasper252 Welcome back. You appear to have been very constructively productive since becoming active again. David notMD (talk) 08:32, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi! Thanks David. I was a bit of a vandal back in the day. But I have reformed! I've made a few articles, helped some orphaned ones, and do wikignome work. Its really awesome being able to help out.

And Vincent! Ive edited quite a few so far and I'm loving it. I have ADHD so pretty much going to one thing to another. But my special interests are Three Kingdoms Period China, Coldwar, and Visual Arts. (Also i suck at Source editting) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kasper252 (talk • contribs) 16:52, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Citation for an old novel?

How can I make citation for an old paperback novel that I'm referencing? Do I have to? 2001:1970:4F63:A900:0:0:0:7942 (talk) 18:01, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You can use the "Insert a template" button (it looks like a small puzzle piece on top of your text box). Once you open that you can search for the Cite Book template which will let you insert all relevant information about the source. Hope this helps. ― TUNA × 18:15, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks so much! 2001:1970:4F63:A900:0:0:0:7942 (talk) 18:48, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

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

The place of birth for Bridget Rice (nee Henaghan) is incorrectly stated as Co Monaghan on her wiki page. She was born to Walter Henaghan and Bridget McGreal in Louisburgh, Co Mayo - the same place as her brother Fr Johnny Henaghan - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Heneghan.BuffyO'B (talk) 18:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, BuffyO'B. Do you have a reliable source that verifies her place of birth? Cullen328 (talk) 18:53, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi, we have met before in connection with Major Myles Moylan's place of birth (Tuam, Co Galway). This time I am working on Fr Johnny Henaghan, Columban Father and Malate Martyr. He was posthumously awarded the Medal of Freedom in 1948 by the US President. His sister Bridget Rice TD accepted it on his behalf - I have the photo. She, like him was born in Louisburgh, Co Mayo. Her Mam ran the local Post Office there - Bridget's Wiki page mentions that she was a postmistress. This link should direct you to her birth record - https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/birth_returns/births_1885/02644/1974953.pdf. Her marriage cert https://civilrecords.irishgenealogy.ie/churchrecords/images/marriage_returns/marriages_1914/09865/5583126.pdf

∼∼∼∼ BuffyO'B (talk) 20:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

can you edit in different languages

im new to wiki so i want to help a friend know how to edit but in french . please answer my question. Forever1kpopok (talk) 19:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Forever1kpopok: Hello Forever and welcome to the Teahouse! If your friend wants to edit Wikipedia in French, then they will want to go to the French language Wikipedia, located at fr.wikipedia.org ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:15, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Case law of the boards of appeal - template for 2022

I find no template for the 2022 edition of the case law book of the boards of appeal. More specifically, the link

• Legal Research Service for the Boards of Appeal, European Patent Office, Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO (10th edition, July 2022), ii.e.4 : "Correction of errors in the description, claims and drawings - Rule 139 EPC"

fails and an error message comes up. Apparently, there is no template for 2022. By contrast, the link

• Legal Research Service for the Boards of Appeal, European Patent Office, Case Law of the Boards of Appeal of the EPO (9th edition, July 2019), ii.e.4 : "Correction of errors in the description, claims and drawings - Rule 139 EPC"

works all right. Can someone produce a template for the 2022 edition of the case law book, please? Dzmanto (talk) 20:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

O'Hare International Airport sourcing problem

Hello. Go to O'Hare International Airport page. Go to Reference #5, it is not going to the skyvector document at all, have done a number of airports using this source. I typed in the URL properly. Thank you for your time.Theairportman33531 (talk) 20:50, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I have removed the reference, it was not needed. Theroadislong (talk) 21:11, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Theairportman33531. Your addition missed the last hyphen in https://skyvector.com/airport/ORD/Chicago-O-Hare-International-Airport. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:16, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I want someone to submit for me

I tried submitting but couldn't figure out how to declare Conflict of Interest and it just says to "avoid writing submissions about yourself or family, friends" so I want someone to submit for me. I have all of my newspaper and magazine articles saved on my desktop but cannot submit about myself, does anyone do this please? 24.71.114.218 (talk) 14:26, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Kathy Hubble - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:46, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Presumably this is about Draft:Kathy Hubble?

You, or anybody, could submit the draft for review; but it would be a waste of everybody's time to do so at present, because there is not a single reference in it. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

I think you're asking if somebody could write an encyclopaedia article about you. It is possible that somebody could. But we are all volunteers here, who spend our time as we choose, so if you want that to happen, you need to persuade somebody that it is worth spending their time on this, i.e. that their work will not be wasted; and the first step in doing that is to assemble the necessary sources to demonstrate that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability. If you cannot do that, then no article about you will be accepted, whoever writes it.

Note that if we do at some point have an article about you, it will not belong to you, it will not be controlled by you, almost anybody in the world will be able to edit it except you (you will be able to suggest Edit requests), and it should be based almost entirely on what people unconnected with you have published about you, not on what you or your associates say or want to say. In short, it will not be in any way for your benefit, except incidentally. ColinFine (talk) 14:47, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

I've added a bunch of newspaper clippings to Draft talk:Kathy Hubble for anyone to use to improve the draft. (I'm not that familiar with sports notability but Hubble does appear to be a notable athlete.) Schazjmd (talk) 15:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You actually have two drafts: Draft:Kathy Hubble and Draft:Kathy Hubble (2). As explained, you are allowed to attempt to create a draft about yourself (although advised not to). If you wish to persist, work on only the latter, which has references. David notMD (talk) 22:08, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

how to fix speedy deletion log on my article

I have created a article and it was deleted for speedy deletion log i have fixed the issue but again it was deleted. This is very disappointing to me. please help

to solve my problem Ehtisham raziq (talk) 15:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Ehtisham raziq Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. You edited your user page, which is not article space, but a place to tell about yourself as a Wikipedia editor only. Wikipedia more generally is not a place for people to tell the world about themselves. Please read the autobiography policy. 331dot (talk) 15:19, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Ehtisham raziq, I see no evidence that you are a Notable person as defined by Wikipedia. You tried to use other Wikipedia articles as references, which is not permitted. Please read WP:CIRCULAR. You tried to use Facebook as a reference. Facebook is not a reliable source because people tell lies there and spread falsehoods routinely. Please read about what Reliable sources actually are. Cullen328 (talk) 15:44, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Indefinitely blocked on 19 August. David notMD (talk) 22:11, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Article Declined

I wrote a very beautiful article about a very famous YouTube Leart.. but the article got declined As2302575 (talk) 17:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@As2302575: Hello As and welcome to the Teahouse! Unfortunately your draft is currently nominated for speedy deletion under the criteria G11, which means that the article's purpose is to promote/publicise the person, which is not allowed on Wikipedia. Also, it does not fit Wikipedia's Biography of Living persons guidelines which state what is required for articles like yours. Having a Youtube channel does not automatically make a person eligible for an article. Even if said person has millions of subscribers, if that's all they're notable for then they won't get an article. Also, attempting to redirect the article to an external website (such as their youtube channel) doesn't work and is completely inappropriate to do. Please, read Wikipedia's BLP guidelines (linked earlier in this reply), as well as wikipedia's notability criteria. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 19:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, As2303575, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid that is very often the experience of people who join Wikipedia and immediately plunge into the very difficult task of trying to create an article without spending any time learning what Wikipedia is or how it works.

In particular, editors who do that nearly always have come here for the specific purpose of telling the world about their subject: in other words, promoting them, which is not permitted anywhere on Wikipedia.

Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 19:05, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Another indefinitely blocked on 19 August. David notMD (talk) 22:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Categories (again)

I don't always understand the right way to handle categories, so I'm asking this here instead of making changes to articles. (Sorry about the unlinked category names here - they disappear if I put them in braces). I'm looking at Nancy Reagan and see that it's in the category American film actresses. There's also a category called "Nancy Reagan", and some similar actress categories are sub-cats of American film actresses. Should the Nancy Reagan cat just be a sub-cat of American film actresses also? If we took this too far logically, her category would be a sub-cat of all the categories listed in her article, so I can see that this might lead to craziness. Also, looking at Ronald Reagan, the 20th-century presidents of the United States cat could be a sub-cat of 20th-century American politicians. - Special-T (talk) 21:48, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Special-T, and welcome to the Teahouse. See WP:Categorization#Category tree organization for a discussion of diffusing and non-diffusing categories. In answer to your first point: if you start the link with a colon, it will produce a normal Wikilink rather than the special treatment of putting the page in the category. So [[:Category:American film actresses]] displays as Category:American film actresses. ColinFine (talk) 22:28, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Special-T: Place a colon in front to link a category without placing the page in the category. [[:Category:American film actresses]] produces Category:American film actresses. The articles in Category:Nancy Reagan have low relevance to her actress work and she didn't get a category because she was an actress so it doesn't belong in Category:American film actresses. See Wikipedia:Categorization#Eponymous categories. All categories should have at least one parent category but it's already in better fits like Category:First Ladies of the United States. Category:20th-century presidents of the United States is already a subcategory of Category:20th-century American politicians. Ronald Reagan is in both because it is a non-diffusing subcategory. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, both. Think I'll just leave categories alone for now! - Special-T (talk) 23:30, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Citation

Can someone help me how to cite the correct source which is accepted on Wikipedia, please. Marvel 19 (talk) 02:37, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Diana fireboy DML

hi @Marvel 19 and welcome to the teahouse! you can read Reliable sources to see what makes a source acceptable for use in Wikipedia, and Perennial sources to see the most common sources and whether they're reliable or not.

for your article, it seems that Versace has left a note stating that there isn't enough significant coverage of the song, which means that you don't have enough sources that focus on "Diana" instead of its album Playboy. what you can do instead is either make a draft for Draft:Playboy (album) that discusses the album as a whole (although you'll still need sources with significant coverage of the album, it's probably easier to get sources for a whole album than sources for a specific song). alternatively, if you feel like the song "Diana" is more popular than the album it's in, you could instead find more sources on Diana and continue your draft on the song. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:49, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

ohhhh. thank you soo much. i have now understood what it means. oky then i will work on the album draft. Marvel 19 (talk) 02:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Dishonest Removal of Content

On Sanna Marin page, the Controversy section that I added on August 18, 2002 has been removed dishonestly. Restore the content. I am increasingly observing it on Wikipedia that rogue users dishonestly remove content that is critical or negative for people or organizations. Wikipedia must ensure the neutrality of the platform and it should not allow certain dishonest elements to misuse it for their personal gains. Rrthakur22 (talk) 05:11, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Rrthakur22. Please be aware that Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons is a very important policy that must be followed. Thinly sourced unsubstantiated allegations of wrongdoing do not belong in Wikipedia biographies. When your content like this is challenged, you are obligated to build consensus among the editors interested in the topic in order to include it. Here is a quote from the policy: Biographies of living persons ("BLPs") must be written conservatively and with regard for the subject's privacy. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a tabloid: it is not Wikipedia's job to be sensationalist, or to be the primary vehicle for the spread of titillating claims about people's lives; the possibility of harm to living subjects must always be considered when exercising editorial judgment. Cullen328 (talk) 05:22, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. The source was BBC in which the concerned person was quoted. And now there are multiple reliable media sources which have carried the same information. I think Wikipedia must not block or sensor content simply because it is related to a controversy about a living person. The Wikipedia users and other stakeholders must know the truth. If required, Wikipedia must change its content aggregation policies. Investigate the above case objectively. Rrthakur22 (talk) 05:29, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

To: @Cullen328 Please see my response given above. Thanks. Rrthakur22 (talk) 05:33, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Rrthakur22, Wikipedia is not a content aggregator. It is a neutrally written encyclopedia. This is gossip and it simply is not allowed in this encyclopedia. Do not add any similar content to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Cullen328 (talk) 05:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

to add on to the above, we do not censor controversies when they're relevant, however we only include ones that are important in objectively discussing the subject. gossip such as this, even when they end up getting noticed by other politicians and mainstream media, are a dime a dozen and usually end up getting forgotten a few whiles later. here's a question: if a reader is reading her article maybe 50 years later, would that (possibly short-lived) gossip be vital into understanding who she is? 💜  melecie  talk - 05:50, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

To: @Melecie But we must not ignore such widely covered incidents which can later become major events in history so that the readers could know the sequence of development in a systematic way on a single source: Wikipedia. I am not interested in this particular case. You can remove the information that I added. But I still think Wikipedia must evolve. Rrthakur22 (talk) 05:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22 This goes into WP:CRYSTALBALL. Is there any major fallout from this? At the moment, I don't see that written. Until then, it is just smoke and mirrors here. – robertsky (talk) 08:27, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

To: @Cullen328 I am not satisfied with your response and intimidating warning. Please let me know where else I can raise this issue which is related to Wikipedia's credibility. Rrthakur22 (talk) 05:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Rrthakur22, you do not need to be satisfied with my response but you must comply with the WP:BLP policy. I have been trying to explain the policy politely. Please read Dispute resolution for your various options if you truly believe that I am misinterpreting policy. Cullen328 (talk) 06:01, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

UPDATE: Rrthakur22 and Cullen328 The content in question (her attending a party) is now referenced content in the Personal life section rather than as a Controversy section. Personally, I would delete all mention regardless of refs. This is different from the government Brits partying controversy, which took place during a COVID lockdown. David notMD (talk) 09:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Okay @David notMD @Cullen328 As @David notMD perhaps knows it from a recent case, the critical information related to Aam Aadmi Party is being repeatedly removed. Today I experienced it again. The "Allegations and Investigations" section that I added on Manish Sisodia who belongs to Aam Aadmi Party is being removed by perhaps the PR team of Aam Aadmi Party. I want to retain this information and informed the users on their Talk page. This is very important information that Wikipedia readers must know. Please help me resolve such repeated issues as I believe Wikipedia is full of such PR users who block important information that is critical to their clients / associates. Rrthakur22 (talk) 11:38, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Rrthakur22 This is a new topic which would have been better served by starting a new question. User:Aditi Gyanesh deleted your referenced content and you restored. Gyanesh had previously removed referenced negative content about Sisodia, which was restored by an editor, and warned on Talk page. You added a warning to Gyanesh's Talk page. Also summarizing the conflict on the article's Talk page would be a good idea. Let us hope that Gyanesh does not repeat the revert. If so, you can warn about edit warring. David notMD (talk) 12:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @David notMD Since this issue is again related to the topic "Dishonest Removal of Content" I had put it on this page. But in future as you have suggested I will create a new page. I am trying to highlight a dangerous trend on Wikipedia that people with hidden identities are tampering with or deleting the truthful information dishonestly. In all probability, these people belong to or hired by these organizations who want to misuse Wikipedia to promote their interests. How do we stop it? Rrthakur22 (talk) 12:36, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22: The general problem that people try to alter Wikipedia content for their selfish PR purposes is not exactly new. There has been some well-documented cases (here’s one recent example from fr-wp). It might be the first time you encounter that, but it certainly won’t be the last if you stay around.

The specific problem that a given editor might be trying to alter a given page for nefarious motives might deserve investigation, for instance at the conflict of interest noticeboard, but make sure to come with solid evidence.

Please also moderate your language, even if it is hard to think the edits could be in good faith. Saying that "in all probability, someone who disagrees with me must be a paid goon" (which is essentially what you wrote) violates the guideline about not casting aspersions. Saying that a removal of content is dishonest (which implies a deliberate choice to harm the encyclopedia rather than just someone being wrong) is not a great idea either; it might technically not be a breach of policy but it certainly will not help you to talk peacefully with the other editor. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 13:41, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks @Tigraan for your advice. I will be careful in future. To: @David notMD I have put the WP:PAID and WO:COI message in the Edit summary of Manish Sisodia page on which I have just added more information. Thanks. 122.162.147.131 (talk) 13:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Sorry @David notMD and @Tigraan Since I had not logged in, my IP was published. Now I have logged in. Rrthakur22 (talk) 13:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

No problem Rrthakur22, such accidents happen. It’s perfectly fine (as long as you don’t try to pretend you are two different persons between the IP and your account).

If you want the IP removed from this page for privacy reasons, contact the oversight team (via Special:EmailUser/Oversight). If you don’t care, you don’t need to do anything. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 14:37, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh and FYI see the next part of this saga, continued in a new thread below. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 05:16, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Publication of an autobiography

Hi guys! just wondering in regards to this autobiography Draft:Sadiq Daniel does it look good? and in regards to it getting published by probably someone more experienced? Also having a slight problem with the picture maybe the page needs to be formatted into an athlete page?

thank you anyone who can help! Baselinekickzz (talk) 03:11, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

COI has also been triggered on the article..

Happy editing! Baselinekickzz (talk) 03:24, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Have a look at WP:AUTO to see why we discourage autobiographies, Baselinekickzz. What you have written seems focused on promoting your business interests. It also lacks citations of what Wikipedia calls reliable sources. As far as another Wikipedia editor writing your bio for you, don't hold your breath, as there is no shortage of notable businesses to write about. Wikipedia has its own definition of notable, meaning a subject has been written about in depth in published, reliable sources which have no connection to the subject. For starters, you may want to study this page on writing a Wikipedia article.--Quisqualis (talk) 03:36, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Your User name is the same as your business. This is not allowed. David notMD (talk) 03:52, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello Baselinekickzz. It may be helpful to read An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. If an article about you is published in Wikipedia it won't belong to you, and other editors will be free to add to it. There may be a time when something is published about yourself that you'd rather not have others read, but as long as the topic is covered by a reliable source it can be added to your Wikipedia article. Best wishes on all Wikipedia projects. Karenthewriter (talk) 06:05, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

How long do I have to wait for my drafts to be accepted?

I wrote some drafts and immediately they refused it, I added the references, which was what they asked to do, but I never got any answers ANGELA BIDOIA (talk) 23:41, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Drafts are not reviewed in any particular order. The reviewers are volunteers and review what they choose. There is a large backlog, so it may sometimes take up to four months. Just be patient and continue working to improve the draft while you wait for review. RudolfRed (talk) 00:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You have created five drafts, three of which have been Declined once and one Declined twice. As noted above, there is a backlog of drafts. Yours will be reviewed in time. Often weeks, but can be reviewed sooner or later than that. David notMD (talk) 03:07, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

ANGELA BIDOIA UPDATE: All of your drafts have been declined at least once. I strongly recommend that you limit future work to first getting one draft approved rather than wasting reviewers' time on several drafts when you have not yet demonstrated competence. David notMD (talk) 08:11, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@ANGELA BIDOIA Your drafts say "...was named, possibly in honor of"; "The Turkish historian Necdet Sakaoglu calls her Hyuma, but notes that she could have been named Hyumashah"; "it is more likely that he died before 1586"; "However, it is also said that Sardar Farhad Pasha was the son-in-law of Safiye Sultan and married her daughter, so there is a great possibility that he was Humashahd"; "If Mahfiruz Sultan would have been alive at the time of her son's accession to the throne, it is assumed that she was the one who gave Meleksima to Osman as a concubine". And that's just from two drafts.

That is a lot of unknowns for an encyclopedia to handle. 71.228.112.175 (talk) 07:24, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Template removal

Hi ! Do you know how to remove the templates that says "This article contains promotional content" or that kind of thing pls ? Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Craffael.09 (talk • contribs) 08:37, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, Craffael09, and welcome to the Teahouse. The tag has a link in it that says (Learn how and when to remove this template message) Have you read it?

If you are talking about Alpha Sigma Rho, evaluative claims such as first Asian-interest sorority established in the state of Georgia are not acceptable anywhere in a Wikipedia article unless they are directly sourced to a wholly independent reliable source. And random bolded text immediately makes the text read as an advert, as well as being forbidden by the manual of style.

Remember that Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. ColinFine (talk) 08:59, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Box of Frogs problem

I just made an edit to the Box of Frogs article, and I'm having a problem with formatting. In the Albums section, for the second album Strange Land, I added "Cassette version bonus tracks" and listed two new songs after the numbered tracks, before the bullet point. On the edit page, it looks correct (I couldn't use hashtags to number 11. and 12. because the added text reset the counter to 1.), but in the article itself it comes out all wrong: There are inappropriate spaces before and after the new numbered songs, the songs appear to be boxed, and they are in a different type face. Can someone help? Pete Best Beatles (talk) 20:54, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi Pete Best Beatles. I fixed it in [16] with the method at Help:List#Specifying a starting value. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:10, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks, that's way beyond my ken. There's still one little problem there: since the songwriter info. is not available for the bonus tracks, there's nothing between the song name and the singer's name. They look jammed together, so I tried to add a space, and the space is there on the edit page, but it doesn't take when I enter the edit. -- ```` Pete Best Beatles (talk) 22:11, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pete Best Beatles: Consecutive spaces render as one space in HTML. The second space is still there in the HTML of the saved page but it makes no difference. See {{spaces}} for a method to make more spacing. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:21, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks. I decided to solve the problem a different way, but I'll make a note of that for possible use at a later. -- Pete Best Beatles (talk) 09:09, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Tables

Hi! I was wondering how to insert tables when editing. Im planning on adding information to an article about a game listing its soundtrack Getting Freaky on a Friday Night, yeah. (talk) 08:56, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

There are many ways. See Help:Table. If you're using the source editor, you'll probably need to learn the table syntax, but if you want to avoid that, you can also do it via the visual editor. small jars tc 09:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

hi @Getting Freaky on a Friday Night, yeah. and welcome to the teahouse! I'm assuming you're planning to write the soundtrack section for Friday Night Funkin'? you could take a look at the table in Undertale Soundtrack for an example, or Katawa Shoujo#Soundtrack when dealing with soundtracks featuring multiple artists. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 09:34, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you, @SmallJarsWithGreenLabels and @Melecie, and no the soundtrack is for a different game. the game has 2 different soundtracks due to an in game feature. Getting Freaky on a Friday Night, yeah. (talk) 09:46, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Would anyone like to professionally create an article for the Kingdom of Heaven?

Hi. I would like to ask anyone at the Teahouse if they would like to create a professional page on Wikipedia that includes the facts, the details, the historical information, and the verifiable proof thats undeniable, that also includes subheadings, images, dates, and photos, and website link refernces for The Kingdom of Heaven on Earth including: helping the world to be informed about the house so that they may all come to know, and learn, to assist the LORD and his anointed Son and Bride, to make this professional page able to be searched on Wikipedia with its own page to add to Wikipedias content and help Wikipedia build a historical Encyclopedia to the truth of The Kingdom of Heaven. Please reply if you are interested in helping us to the Glory of God!

We also do not mind offering you creit for this assistance. Thank you Kindly. Beautiful The Kingdom of Heaven (talk) 17:23, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

No, this is an encyclopedia, not a repository for fiction. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:25, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Beautiful The Kingdom of Heaven, welcome to the Teahouse. The purpose of Wikipedia is to summarize what reliable, independent, secondary sources have published about notable topics. Based on what you've tried to contribute so far, it does not appear that your mission is in line with Wikipedia's mission. Also, be aware that there are many dishonest people who offer to write Wikipedia articles in exchange for money, with the end result of your money disappearing and no article appearing - or appearing and being quickly deleted.

You will need to explain your relationship, if any, to user:TheKingdomofHeavenonEarth. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:32, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Now Firstly, could you let me know , Where is Wikipedia based in what nation and under what law?

and then ill answer youre question. Do you understand I have rights under the Consitution of the United States of America to the freedom of speech , the freedom to exercise these rights, and the freedom information, as to which this information is historical. The son of man is historical information in which you cannnot dispute under any article. You allowed the kingdom of heaven articles on other articles without any problems. What kind of encyclopedia is Wikipedia building when it refuses to let me under my amnedment rights under the consitution to speak freely? And can you please offer a link as to Wikipedias mission statement. you sir, have imposed or seemingly impose rudely, your opinions not based off of any history onto me, And by what authority or right do you have to ask personal information about my poersonal life? you have overstepped the bounds of my freedom, my rights, and violation should be onto your sight, i take it you hold youre own beliefs, and i do not ask your business. you called this "fiction" that is youre personal opinion infriging my rights as to which I broke no rule of law. And ahow come there are all these articles on what you call "fiction", even though our article has nothing to do with fiction but non fiction. By what authority do you think you have to impede, impose, invade, intrude, interrogate, like an inquisition to my personal life and relationships. Be advised you broke my amendment rights as to which I will fully use by my God given rights under the constitution to enforce by law any violation of my freedom, liberty, and rights under the constitution of the heavenly government which has full jurisdiction over the earth and every nation within it which falls in the territory of the heavens within the Kingdom of Heaven of the creator! You better believe it! becuase its not fiction and were not here to play games with those who are enemies against and who also commit treason against us. Beautiful The Kingdom of Heaven (talk) 17:55, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Your website and made up "kingdom" that you posted on your other account are not notable, and no there won't be an article. PRAXIDICAE🌈 17:56, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Please see WP:NOLEGALTHREATS. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:59, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

He's going to complain to sky daddy. We're all doomed. PRAXIDICAE🌈 18:02, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Now blocked. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 19:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

We have an article Kingdom of heaven (Gospel of Matthew), which does what an encyclopaedia article should do, and summarises what reliable sources say about the subject. But please see WP:NOT#Wikipedia is not a soapbox or means of promotion ColinFine (talk) 17:39, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

OK, a few declarations here

• I am a believing, church-going Catholic (can't quite bring myself to say "good" Catholic), so of course, I believe in God, and in Heaven and Hell. Nevertheless
• The original poster clearly has some issues and problems with perspective, but beyond wasting a bit of time for a few people, he's quite harmless (and now blocked, anyway). That said,
• @User:Praxidicae, your attitude and comments are unnecessary and uncalled for, and quite frankly label you as rather like the Original Poster. You don't believe in God; that's your own choice/problem. But it's totally irrelevant to the question of whether any article is appropriate to Wikipedia or not. Uporządnicki (talk) 21:14, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

The OP is a blocked editor who is trying to spam his wannabe cult. I don't think someone who threatens editors with eternal damnation and "reporting to authorities" is high on the list of people that we need to pacify. But do go on. My belief or non-belief has nothing to do with anything. Unless, of course you think that this Kingdom of God on Earth, which is what they were trying to spam is anything but fiction. It literally features marvel superheroes. PRAXIDICAE🌈 21:16, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Frankly, the fact he invoked freedom of speech strikes me as incredibly suspect. If your most compelling argument in favour of your faith is that it is literally not illegal to express, that should be a massive red flag to any potential proselytes that something is wrong. That isn't an argument of spirituality in the slightest. —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 21:51, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

If THOC isn't a sendup of Western religion-cum-hucksterism, I'll eat my keyboard.--Quisqualis (talk) 04:44, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I learned some new words today... PRAXIDICAE🌈 10:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Having read all this, now my brain hurts. The most useful part was the mention that Beautiful is now indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 22:17, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Reliable source misunderstanding

An editor I have been at cross purposes with, just removed material from Capital punishment for homosexuality because the source supporting it was unreliable. Its citation was from Reuters. In restoring, I linked to RS noticeboard, but the restoration has been reverted with ES in reply: [17] "[Reuters] bad source parroting from other articles and reuter did a poll discussed in another discussion that had poor sampling" Similar edits at LGBT rights in Sudan, too.

In both cases, the removal of Reuters cites has justified returning outdated and inaccurate information. Because we have disagreed a lot, the editor will not take my word for it. Two great, experienced, non-involved editors, Mathglot and Firefangledfeathers have earlier tried to restore peace by getting us to concentrate on content, but I have little hope that the editor would respond to any explanation from me. Can anyone gently suggest to the editor, they have misread the WP discussion: It's not about Reuter, but uses a Reuter Foundation report cite to talk about a wholly different source organisation as potentially unreliable?

This is not really the place, I know. I can't go to any noticeboard, I just can't. Any help appreciated. AukusRuckus (talk) 10:40, 18 August 2022 (UTC) Updated. AukusRuckus (talk) 11:53, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @AukusRuckus, welcome to the Teahouse. This is, indeed, really not the place; it's a board for newcomers to ask questions about editing Wikipedia, not a content/policy discussion or behavior correction forum. I assume you've read the dispute resolution page. If a noticeboard is your only option left, then that's where you should go. 97.126.103.107 (talk) 12:33, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Ok thanks, I'll just leave it with the overturned, pre-2020 law in, then.

It's not really a content or conduct dispute, per se; more a misunderstanding. In reading the Wikipedia discussion of reliable sources the editor has, I think, looked at a citation for a "bad source" as the bad source itself. I just thought it'd be a quick short circuit to give them a heads-up in an acceptable way (to them). I am too wary to try again with the editor, and too timid to appear at a noticeboard.

Someone else may correct it in time; many regular editors and readers would understand that Reuters is unlikely to be considered an unreliable source. And I guess a few days or weeks saying Sudan still has capital punishment when Reuters said in 2020 it doesn't, won't matter in the scheme of things. (Although, these topic pages are not as well-trafficked as I thought they'd be). Thanks for your reply, and sorry to trouble you. AukusRuckus (talk) 12:48, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Oh, and yes, I did wonder if I could still be considered "new", but I sure do still feel new! If it was unacceptable to ask here, I'm sorry, but I see sometimes people are just given a little pointer or two, here, and I thought, "I can ask": Seems an unscary place! Cheers. AukusRuckus (talk) 12:54, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@AukusRuckus, we do try to keep this an "unscary" place, and we try our best to give pointers to folks who come and ask questions (which is why I linked to the DR page) - but taking requests to go off and give pointers to other folks who haven't come and asked anything is a bit outside scope. I don't think anyone here wants to become the Teahouse Police Force. Sometimes you'll run into editors who apparently can't be reasoned with; that's just the nature of the project, and you have to decide for yourself how far you're willing to push things before you just let it go. You're not the only one who'd rather drop an issue than venture into noticeboard land. 199.208.172.35 (a.k.a. 97.126.103.107) (talk) 14:09, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

No, I quite understand. That's fair. I didn't want a police force, though. More a casual "Oh. I see where you may be a mixed up." "Reuters? Unreliable you say? Hmm, that's surprising ..."

It was more along the lines of alerting any interested parties to a rather large and easily-resolved inaccuracy, one that I do not feel up to tackling, newly introduced by a mildly-confused editor. An editor who may well be amenable to taking a second look at the WP:RS noticeboard, if asked by someone other than me. A little orientation guide to understanding a WP discussion was what I hoped for, not for anyone to step into a dispute. It is what I would do myself, if they did not think I was horrible. I suppose I was asking for a sub!

I am going to try a very gentle query one more time, and leave it there. Thanks for your replies. (Not sure if you're one or two users) AukusRuckus (talk) 14:39, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Just one user under many different numbers, @AukusRuckus. This sounds like a situation you could try resolving with WP:3O (assuming you've already attempted a discussion on one or more of the talk pages). It's quicker and more informal than other methods, and it's sort of what you were hoping for in terms of calling in a sub. It's possible the sub may not end up agreeing with you, but at least they'll be an experienced editor who can give an opinion based on policies and guidelines. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 14:59, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

I thought you were one and the same. Thank you, they're very good ideas, but I'm not sure even the relatively low-key 3O is the right venue to get someone to take another look at their misreading of WP:RS Noticeboard.

I appreciate you bearing with my massive externalised thought process, though. Maybe I'll come back to it another day, or someone else may have edited it by then. Cheers, AukusRuckus (talk) 15:14, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

@AukusRuckus We certainly don't limit ourselves to only answering question from "newcomers", though that does tend to be our main focus. Anyone can ask an editing-related question here at any time, and I have done so myself when stuck at times. And you are always welcome to do that, too. It's more that your question is a bit off-topic, as the IP suggested.

Sometimes (assuming you don't want to go down WP:THIRD or WP:DRN routes) it can be best to leave things to cool down, and maybe even wait for other evidence to emerge. One saying that I use at home a lot is "you didn't hear me thinking". I've not checked, but it helps to ensure the logic of any argument you want to make is laid out clearly for all to see, rather than making assumptions that someone else understands something. Taking it step by step, you might be able to win your argument. I assume that in all other respects, the other person is behaving acceptably? It's certainly worth trying to keep out of WP:ANI unless you feel strongly about an issue of behaviour. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:34, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks Nick, I think I'm wasting so many good people's time way more than I meant to. It was only a mistake on the other editor's part. We're not in a dispute, although we've been in plenty before.

I am not going to do more. Someone will pick it up at some stage. Because the editor now believes the WP:RS noticeboard has decided Reuters is a " bad source" and has removed article material accordingly, I thought it an easy, low-labour, fix for someone to say to said editor "Are you sure that's what it says?", before they start removing dozens, or hundreds, of claims sourced to Reuters. I know they will not take a gentle hint from me.

Your observation about "thinking" at someone is spot-on. Great saying, I think I'll pinch it! It raised a smile for me, both in amusement and recognition.

In this case, the only argument that really needs to be made is whether WP:RS Noticeboard has actually declared Reuters a bad source or not. An easily-established point, but not one that can be demonstrated by me to that editor, in any way. Hence, my hope that someone not anathema to the editor could point out what the the noticeboard actually says re Reuters. There is nothing else at issue. Confused editor believes Reuters-sourced material is deprecated, those with a little more savvy in navigating the RS noticeboard know what the RSN actually says: "a generally reliable source".

It would make me laugh, if I were crying less! Thanks for listening, and for the saying I am stealing for use at my house. You always give such nice responses. Cheers, AukusRuckus (talk) 15:08, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

AukusRuckus, please be aware that the Thomson Reuters Foundation is a charitable organization that is different from the commercial Reuters news agency. Material published by the foundation should be attributed to the foundation, not to the news agency. Cullen328 (talk) 17:41, 18 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for pointing that out, @Cullen328; that is a nuance I had not noticed. Just for future reference, would that suggest a different, or perhaps "yet to be decided", view for TRFN's reliability as compared to Reuters, the agency itself?

I noted that in several syndicated appearances of the news item cited and removed from DP in Homosexuality article, for example in the SMH, [18] the article credit says merely "Reuters". The Independent's article is under their own reporter's byline and says "Additional reporting by Thomson Reuters Foundation".

I realise you're not the RS noticeboard, but I'd be interested in your thoughts. WP's Thomson Reuters Foundation News article notes number of journalists employed and some awards. OTH, their service is free (which may or may not be an indicator). A quick search of the noticeboard turns up nothing specific for TRFN or its previous name, AlertNet. Of course, I can open a discussion at the noticeboard, if it comes up in a specific instance at some stage, but just curious. Cheers, AukusRuckus (talk) 08:40, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

P.S. Just in case I have misconstrued the purpose of your post, Cullen, for clarity, it was not me who added the disputed source. In July 2020, another editor moved Sudan from the capital punishment listing to "historical" section, adding the source then. Best, AukusRuckus (talk) 09:04, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

AukusRuckus, I see no reason to doubt the reliability of Thomson Reuters Foundation News, and I believe that it can be presumed reliable in most cases, unless evidence to the contrary is presented. It is just that it should be attributed properly, since it is not Reuters. Cullen328 (talk) 15:06, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much, @Cullen328. It may not make the difference, but I really appreciate your note (to the other user). Thanks for taking the time to do that; it was the sort of thing I was hoping for, if only so I know in my own mind, I'm not insane!

And thanks for filling me in about the TRFN as opposed to Reuters: I'm very glad to know it. Best wishes, AukusRuckus (talk) 14:07, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Closure request - Conchita Wurst and others

I made a closure request 3 weeks ago for a move of the Conchita Wurst article, discussion on which ended over week ago with a clear consensus (in my opinion). I can see that there are lots of other requests which are even older, some a lot older. They just seem to fall of the end rather than actually be closed. I think I'll have a go at closing some although I haven't tried that before. Is there another way of requesting a closure on the one I initiated myself (i.e. Conchita Wurst)? All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 07:13, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Emmentalist: no, there is no other place to request a closure. lettherebedarklight, 晚安, おやすみなさい, ping me when replying 12:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

It is unlikely to be acted on until the 30 days elapse. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Slywriter (talk • contribs) 14:15, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Could someone have a look at United_States_Junior_Chamber#Controversies

This section is sourced to a book, but obviously it's hard for anyone to assess that the book is accurate and a reliable source. Currently it's making extremely drastic allegations that I'd like to see supported by multiple good sources, given their nature. 79.64.7.76 (talk) 14:08, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I've removed the recently-added section and left an explanation on the article's talk page. Schazjmd (talk) 15:29, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Suspect Editors

To: Wikipedia editors and supervisors. @Venkat TL is repeatedly removing truthful information from reliable sources from the pages of Aam Aadmi Party and its members such as Manish Sisodia under one pretext or another. There are a couple of other editors who are sympathetic to these pages and indulging in objectionable behaviour of content removal particularly from these pages. I have added messages on Talk pages, etc. but they ignore my messages. I urge Wikipedia to investigate this issue thoroughly and block these users permanently if they are exploiting Wikipedia to surreptitiously promote the interests of a few persons or organizations. Also, please restore the content that I added on these pages. Copy: @David notMD @Tigraan Rrthakur22 (talk) 04:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Who wants to drag this guy to WP:AE for enforcement of WP:ARBIPA sanctions? —Jéské Couriano v^_^v ^{a little blue Bori} 04:59, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22: Welcome back to the Teahouse. By the sounds of it, you are looking for WP:ANI. However, you may find that what is called a WP:BOOMERANG occurs, due to your violating WP:BLP repeatedly. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 05:01, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I am not adding information about some ordinary individuals. They are politicians who are using huge public money to get negative media information about them blocked and pay for massive advertisements to falsely project their performance as politicians. Their decisions impact a large population of vulnerable people. Therefore, the public must know everything about them if it is being frequently published by the reputed media outlets. Without adding any comment from my side, I am simply citing those media sources to inform the public about these politicians. Please restore the content that I added and do not remove the content arbitrarily. Thanks. Rrthakur22 (talk) 05:39, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Rrthakur22: I have no idea whether your beliefs about these other editors are accurate or not. But please note that RIGHTINGGREATWRONGS is no part of the purpose of Wikipedia. ColinFine (talk) 08:48, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine @Jéské Couriano @Mako001 This user, giving me sock vibes, is only interested in adding negative information about politicians on the basis of news reporting of ongoing investigation, violating WP:SUSPECT and WP:CRIME. His inappropriate edits were removed/copy edited by others and he has now resorted to calling everyone COI. Not sure how to respond to this kind of behavior. Perhaps the admins should take a look. Venkat TL (talk) 09:13, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

"Perhaps the admins should take a look" is useless. If you want some admins to "take a look", raise a properly supported issue at WP:ANI. ColinFine (talk) 09:26, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@ColinFine ok. Admin @Cullen328 has posted on his talk. Venkat TL (talk) 16:03, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@Rrthakur22: WP:BLP applies to politicians as well. Mako001 (C)  (T)  🇺🇦 09:50, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Line-spacing in <blockquote>

Very sorry to be troubling busy editors: I've been improving the old Hudibras article. I'm new to article-sized Wikipedia writing, but have had great and very valued help from editors. One of you recommended (a few weeks ago) that I use <blockquote><poem> ... </poem></blockquote> for indented quotations. I've done that, to good effect — many thanks. But this seems to bring with it an odd change to the spacing beween lines, which is obviously ridiculously excessive. What code can I add to reduce the leading? Many thanks for any help! GoldenDorset GoldenDorset (talk) 09:24, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, GoldenDorset. The spaces are there in the code. If you don't want the lines displayed double spaced, don't put blank lines between them. ColinFine (talk) 09:30, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

 Note: wrapped the tag in header around <nowiki> 💜  melecie  talk - 09:36, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

I am *so apologetic* — I don't know how I could have failed to observe that. I don't know how the double-spacing appeared (I never use it myself) but it was clearly there, and I *ought* to have seen it myself. Deepest apologies for troubling you, and deepest thanks for your good humour in correcting me! GoldenDorset (talk) 16:22, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Help moving a page

Hi. I need help moving The Forever Story (album) to The Forever Story. Only an administator can do that, apparently. The name "The Forever Story" is unambiguous. Castlepalace 19:53, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hi @Castlepalace, and welcome to Wikipedia! I’ve gone ahead and completed that move for you. Cheers! 🐶 EpicPupper ^{(he/him | talk)} 19:59, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you so much! Cheers! Castlepalace 20:01, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Could someone check over this sourcing for me?

I was taking a look at Lipstick effect, and the following paragraph was inserted some time in 2012:

"In a 2012 study by four university researchers, the effect was attributed to evolutionary psychology: "This effect is driven by women's desire to attract mates with resources and depends on the perceived mate attraction function served by these products. In addition to showing how and why economic recessions influence women's desire for beauty products, this research provides novel insights into women's mating psychology, consumer behavior, and the relationship between the two. [...] Although the lipstick effect has garnered some anecdotal lore, the present research suggests that women's spending on beauty products may be the third indicator of economic recessions—an indicator that may be rooted in our ancestral psychology."<ref>See Hill, S. E., Rodeheffer, C. D., Griskevicius, V., Durante, K., & White, A. E. (2012, May 28). "Boosting Beauty in an Economic Decline: Mating, Spending, and the Lipstick Effect". ''Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,'' available at http://personal.tcu.edu/sehill/LipstickEffectMS20March2012.pdf</ref>"

Though I'm not too well-versed on psychology papers and journals, I have to admit it kinda sounds like pseudoscience a little. The journal, Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, doesn't come up in Beall's list but did seemingly come to blows for some nonsense in 2011, 2012? I'd appreciate someone having a look in. Thanks!--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 15:20, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

You could bring this to FTN. The nuances in evaluating journals closely is a difficult endeavor for the average, non-academic editor. Pyrrho the Skipper (talk) 17:42, 19 August 2022 (UTC)

@Pyrrho the Skipper: Thank you! I'd forgotten FTN existed; I'll post this there.--Ineffablebookkeeper (talk) ({{ping}} me!) 21:00, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Andrew Tate page

How about removing it? Thanks 131.191.80.78 (talk) 17:24, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor. I am not a fan of kickboxing or of Andrew Tate, but we are not going to remove an article about a two time world champion. Cullen328 (talk) 17:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. Our criteria for accepting an article is whether the subject meets our criteria for notability, not how virtuous or objectionable the subject is. ColinFine (talk) 21:21, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Suggesting pages for creation

Hello I follow a lot of public figures in the entertainment industry and community. What is the likeliness of having pages created from suggestions of others as I don’t see several already made? S3lftaughtob (talk) 14:27, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

@S3lftaughtob: Welcome to the Teahouse. The answer to your question is extremely unlikely. Subjects must be notable as Wikipedia defines it, and they should satisfy the criteria for celebrity notability guidelines. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Thank you for this information. I believe a few do fall under all of the criteria. This is a great experience! S3lftaughtob (talk) 20:12, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

WP:YFA explains how to create a draft and submit it for review. I see that you have already used your Sandbox to that effect (allowed) and had the draft Declined. Among other problems, IMDb is not considered a reliable source reference because anyone can edit it. Find better refs before trying again. David notMD (talk) 21:42, 20 August 2022 (UTC)