Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178

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

Archive 1175

Archive 1176

Archive 1177

→

make a biography page live

good day, please i will like this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mustapha_Ado_Muhammad go live, it has been online before and its no longer visible. i appreciate if my request will be granted.. thanks Akanido213 (talk) 14:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Akanido213 There is now a draft article at Draft:Mustapha Ado Muhammad, created after the one you linked was deleted. The new draft contains no content beyond what has already been reviewed and declined as insufficient to show this person is notable in the way Wikipedia requires. You could try to expand the draft with new sources before re-submitting it. It is pointless to resubmit as it currently stands. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:25, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

hello Mike, what kind of new sources can i add to the article again so it can be approved?

i will really need help in getting this done.

thanks again Akanido213 (talk) 14:33, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Akanido213 Read Help:Your_first_article#Gathering references carefully for the guidance. To establish notability you need to find sources that are simultaneously all four of: reliable, independent (not based on press releases, or on statements by the subject or people associated with the subject) and published with substantial discussion of the subject. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

ok thanks , but please can you give me an example of such so i can get the required information.

thanks Akanido213 (talk) 14:46, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Akanido213, and welcome to the Teahouse if you look at any article listed at Wikipedia:Good articles/Social sciences and society you will find plenty of examples of good sources.

Please note that in Wikipedia there is no deadline. We are concerned with the quality of our articles, not with how quickly they are created. ColinFine (talk) 15:25, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

alright, thank you for the help, will go and check them out. Akanido213 (talk) 15:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Insert New Paragraph button: new in mobile view VE?

I swear this is not related to the new Vector skin (I've tried several skins), but this "Insert New Paragraph" button now appears between some, but ofc not all, paragraph breaks in the mobile view visual editor. I swear this wasn't there yesterday, and I didn't see anything in tech news. it is highly annoying for a thumb-smasher like me. Can this be turned off? Thanks, Teahouse! — LumonRedacts 03:35, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @LumonRedacts, welcome to the Teahouse. WP:VPT would be a good place to ask technical questions like this, in case one of the Teahouse techies doesn't wander by. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:50, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

John Cook Wilson entry

I am the author of this entry:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wilson/

Thus a recognized expert on Cook Wilson. The Wikipedia entry includes errors, an extremely poor choice of bibliography and consists of a set of randomly chosen remarks, that do not amount to a philosophically competent, serious, let alone complete, presentation of his work. I have begun revising it, including with lots of new material, to bring it up to the standards but someone simply undid all my work in the middle of the process. I was able to reintroduce the modifications I made so far, but please advise for the next step. As it stands one section, "Philosophy" and the bibliography will next revision and expansion. I fear that, again, vandalism will occur and that I am doing all of this for nothing because someone wishes the previous incompetent version to stand instead. MatMar555 (talk) 04:39, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

MatMar555, the place to ask about this is the article's talk page. I've already kicked off the discussion (which I don't intend to participate in, or even to monitor): see Talk:John Cook Wilson. Wait for the person who reverted to explain, and then reply to that explanation. Everything must be referenced: while waiting for the reply, you might add references to stretches that are currently unreferenced. -- Hoary (talk) 05:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for this advice (I am all new to this) and for putting my query at the right place. Needless to say, as opposed to the previous version, I have references. I am just going to figure how to put footnotes. :) MatMar555 (talk) 05:27, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

MatMar555, try Help:Referencing for beginners. It's extremely elementary (sorry if I seem to be insulting your intelligence by recommending it), but it has links to more helpful pages. And, whether or not you use the Cite templates, as you're likely to want to make repeated references to specific pages (or page spans) in certain printed works, you're likely to find Template:Rp useful. -- Hoary (talk) 05:40, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

For major article revisions, recommended to do a section at at time - referencing as you go - rather than all at once. That way, if an editor disagrees with some of your content changes, they will not revert everything, both valid and disputed. David notMD (talk) 06:07, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, I did not know editors are validating section by section. I note that referencing was to be done has you go along, I was expecting to do it at the end. MatMar555 (talk) 13:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I did as you recommended and fixed one section with footnoting, but you were busy messing with the entry at the same time, and as a result I lost what I did. I throw the towel. MatMar555 (talk) 16:56, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear Hoary, thank you for taking time to provide such kind advice. I am a beginner on Wiki, so no insult, on the contrary. MatMar555 (talk) 13:24, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

If ever you know how to do this, would you kindly get the entry back to what it was prior to my interventions, i.e., prior to January 21? Thank you again for your advice, help and, may I add now, respectful attitude. MatMar555 (talk) 16:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

John Cook Wilson is massively missing references. David notMD (talk) 06:11, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

MatMar555: before your edits, John Cook Wilson had four references (misleadingly titled "Notes"); after your edits it had only two. That will strike most editors as not being an improvement. Your problem is, your are rewriting the article backwards. Maproom (talk) 09:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I had not finished my edits, I had a break for diner with my family. The entry entry:

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wilson/

has no lack of them, I was about to move them in. I understand that I should have done this first. MatMar555 (talk) 13:21, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Finally, when I properly footnoted one section, the simultaneous pointless editorial interventions of someone else made me lose my work. So I throw the towel. You guys do not allow others to work at their own space and have no compunction whatsoever in intervening disrespectfully without waiting for the final result. I am Fellow of the Royal Society of Canada and I think the foremost specialist of John Cook Wilson and there you are, discouraged completely from helping Wikipedia. Well done! MatMar555 (talk) 16:44, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, pace* MatMar555 (talk) 16:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@MatMar555 When you stopped for a dinner break, you left the article in a state where it had unreferenced material. Yes, you intended for that to be a short time. But other editors have no way to know that you plan to come back and finish. Hence David notMD's excellent advice on using your sandbox, and working one section at a time. David10244 (talk) 11:09, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Look, when I came back to the entry, where all my work, after being suddenly and without explanation chucked away by InterestGather (who at least kindly apologized afterwards), and began work on referencing inline section by section, David notMD was busy as "expert on format" (his term) to tamper with not with the format but the content of the entry, introducing section, parsing the written bits and shuffling them about with the result that led me to lose my modifications. I am not interested in your explanations and self-justifications between yourselves to avoid blame, I would have simply appreciated excuses, which I am now sure will never be forthcoming. Since then, I have been threatened with a ban (see below) by another overeager "expert on format", Theroadislong (no excuses forthcoming for that one too), so I have done nothing else on the entry in fear of being banned. The net result is that this other "expert on format", who know absolutely nothing about the content, under the pretext that I do not understand collaboration, never suggested that I could resume work without fear, but instead proceeded to add himself some missing references, and make the resulting entry look ok to his eyes, as if if it is ok to this person who knows nothing it is ok. So, in the end "collaboration" here has meant "antagonizing the expert on topic and substituting oneself to finish the job according to one's own opinion of what is ok". All day yesterday I corresponded, and never had from both of these "experts on format" any inkling of the possibility that I could be kindly invited to resume my work on the entry, referencing it inline as I go about, with the promise of no interference until at least when I finished and no risk of being banned. So I am out of it, the result is disastrous and although some sentences are still recognizably mine, I disown them, and leave both of these "experts" to be proud of their great job. (that one has cognitive problems not to see the mediocrity in comparison with, say, the entry on a contemporary English philosopher such as Bertrand Russell amazes me; compare them yourselves.) I don't want to have anything further to do with this entry, I now know in my bones what everybody says about wiki being very territorial with agressive "experts" that act as lords over their turf. Please do not write to me anymore, I am not interested in attempts to justify this behaviour. Please, I really had enough. I need to go back to my life and my work. MatMar555 (talk) 11:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

By "All day yesterday I corresponded" I meant: here and on my talk page, where the conversation has sprawled. What a waste of time. MatMar555 (talk) 11:41, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, do note what is written immediately under this, to see that you intervention was irrelevant. MatMar555 (talk) 11:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

If you are planning to return to work on an article at a later time in the day, there are templates that you can use like {{in use}} to let other editors know you're not finished. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:49, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps if you could wait until I add them before erasing my modifications. If you care to look at https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/wilson/ you will see I could footnote every sentence in the entry. But, I confess to be new here and, not expecting this treatment, I foolishly thoguht I would add notes after the written text is completed. MatMar555 (talk) 15:02, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia has a steep learning curve. A suggestion: use your own Sandbox to perfect the formating of references before inserting those into the text. Others here at Teahouse can advise on the different methods of ref formating (my familiarity being limited to science journals). David notMD (talk) 15:09, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I just introduced the footnotes to the section "Personal Life", to begin with, but your continued simultaneous editorial interference as I am working on the entry meant that my modifications were not implemented and seem to have disappeared. I strongly resent this attitude, with no room for me to manoeuvre, so unless I hear otherwise soon, I'll stop my work and withdraw all modifications I made. I shall leave you to improve the entry on your own. MatMar555 (talk) 15:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't see the interference? The only content-related edits since yours, made by User:David notMD, were to remove the 'Cook' from 'Cook Wilson' per WP:SURNAME and to shuffle/retitle the section to conform with other Wikipedia articles.

Another recommendation: Don't mark your edits as 'minor' - especially those that introduce new content or other potentially controversial content, and use an edit summary. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

No, User:David notMD, made modifications of the layout (sections) as if it is his business to write the entry, those happening simultaneously to my fixing one of the sections as opposed to waiting to see the finish product, causing me to lose my work (and waste my time). So, please, do not tell me what happened. You only compound the problem. I am out of here, the entry was utter crap (even with many factual mistakes), it is now not even half-done towards a better state, I wish it could be reverted to its original mediocrity that seemed to have satisfied everyone but me. Yes, I now understand what "minor" means, but that it the least problem. If you wish to do something, don't pick on me further and try a revert the entry to what it was before I tried changing it yesterday (January 21), so that there is no trace of my own writing, including correcting falsehoods. Thank you. MatMar555 (talk) 16:54, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

i have added 5 more sources and copy edited for WP:MOS, your combative attitude will win you zero support here, it is a collaborative project. Theroadislong (talk) 16:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't care about winning any support, I now want simply to see all my modifications erased and the entry reverted to the state prior to them. I understand fully this is a collaborative effort, but it is not a collaborative effort when two persons not knowing the topic undermine my efforts, the first one by reverting all I did in one go without explanations and the second pretexting the half-way state resulting from this for interventions that ended up screwing my attempts a resuming my work. Please fell free to improve the entry and well done for you. I would not mind being barred from here if that meant not wasting anymore time replying to comments, my only wish is to have not trace left of my earlier, incomplete attempts at improving it. Please don't reply to this, we are wasting our time. MatMar555 (talk) 17:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Blanking content as you did here [1] is likely to lead to a block, please stop. Theroadislong (talk) 17:48, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@MatMar555 Listen. Being an "expert on a topic" means nothing here (Read WP:BACKWARD). If an editor is reverting your edits, try to communicate with them. Find middle ground. Also, don't "air quote" expert on format, like you're superior here. Believe it or not, they have years of experience and you don't. Also, read Wikipedia:Truth. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:51, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

"expert on a topic" is the expression used by one of the "experts", David notMD, not me. It is true that it means nothing here, the next guy will have another view. I would like to "find a middle ground" but the first thing that happened to me was that everything I did was chuck out without explanation. That person apologized, pointed tou to me that I needed referencing and someone else pointed out how to do inline referencing, so I began to do this. But then two further "editors" came barging in, messing with the entry under the pretext that it was not reference without leaving me time to do it and never since understanding that point, and even one of them threatening to ban. No middle ground possible here, as it was with the earlier two. Although I explained I am not going to take part of fixing this entry anymore, the agressive behaviour towards me continues just now because I was convinced this morning by Hoary perhaps to come back to the entry in the future. Rest assured, I will never. (And ask yourself if David notMD and Theroadislong went half way for starters, and then why they are allowed to behave like this with contributors, I guess that some are all powerful and can never be questioned here.) To me the entry is in a very bad shape, but if these editors seem capable of fill it in themselves given that there is no such thing as an "expert on a topic" therefore that they are experts too, and they do everything to discourage me from helping them with whatever knowledge I pretend, silly me, to have. Would you kindly not bother me now I'm out? Like the others, I am sure you have better use of your time than bothering someone who has withdrawn from "collaborating" under these circumstances. MatMar555 (talk) 17:23, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Article in need of updating

I work for Xperi and our article is in need of updating to accurately reflect the business today and the company's history. I submitted suggested changes to the talk page a few weeks ago with links to sources and a couple of editors made a few minor changes (corrected the company name and adjusted a few of the stats in the right-hand sidebar), but the page is still in need of additional updating.

I'm posting here in hopes that someone can review the other proposed edits and make them. Although the edits are factual, I didn't make them myself due to the conflict of interest policy. Millersamr (talk) 17:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Millersamr Welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for your transparency and for using the talk page. I fixed the {{request edit}} template you added to the page so it displays correctly and brings more attention to your request. GoingBatty (talk) 17:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

How do I make drop down boxes?

So, on my userpage I'm having a problem with headers and stuff, so I decided that a drop down box will fix it, but I don't know how to make a drop down box. Can anyone help me?-- Grapefanatic (talk) 17:20, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Grapefanatic see {{collapse top}} and {{collapse bottom}} for the closest we have. I believe a simple {{clear}} above the "Userboxes" heading should fix the display of said header as well, though the different sizes and floating behaviour of the userboxes might be harder to tame. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 19:18, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the invitation to Teahouse!

Hi everybody, thank you for the warm welcome to the Teahouse. My name is June Komori and I am the co-founder for Bitcoin Wiki. It is a pleasure to be here. I do have a question though about a Wikipedia article that I was reading about called the Gülen movement. I am confused on why Gülen movement was renamed to the FETÖ "Fethullahist Terrorist Organisation" when they have not committed any acts of terrorism. How would one improve this article in situations like these? Komorijuno (talk) 10:03, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

As pointed out in the article, essentially only the government of Turkey labels them as terrorist. Questions like these are better discussed on the article's talk-page, though, as page watchers will see them. Lectonar (talk) 10:50, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Lectonar, it's a pleasure to meet you. I would like to thank you for responding to my question. Many people have opinions on different subjects, do we include personal opinions on Wikipedia articles if they're from the government? How do we identify between what is noteworthy vs which is not? Komorijuno (talk) 11:35, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

For example, I am labeled as an a member of the "Anonymous hacktivist group who is also apart of the FBI" by YourAnonWolf on Twitter. Do any of the labels or perceptions of me constitute the truth? They are merely false accusations made at me in attempts to gaining publicity. Komorijuno (talk) 11:49, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

(e/c) See Gülen_movement#Designation_as_a_terrorist_group. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:51, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi there Shantavira, how are you? I hope all is well. I am most concerned with the bombing of a public library. See Gülen_movement#bookstore was bombed in Şemdinli. I tried to read more about the library bombing from the original news source provided but the links does not work. See Şemdinli_incident_#Background. What do we do in this situation? Komorijuno (talk) 11:29, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

This might be of help then; although it's an essay, it is a good starting point as all relevant policies are linked from it. Lectonar (talk) 12:03, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Lectonar! I will bookmark and study the resource you have provided. Thanks for reaching out. Komorijuno (talk) 12:21, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

Anyone can edit Wikipedia, so you are welcome to be bold and change it yourself. That’s what makes Wikipedia great! Serratra (talk) 02:00, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Exactly, especially the articles similar to categories and redirects. That is the purpose of a Wiki, anyone can improve to the source of knowledge by making changes with sources cited. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 19:20, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Non-fiction excerpts from fiction

I'd like to cite non-fiction parts from The Mammoth Book of Roman Whodunnits and The Walled City by Ryan Graudin. Should I do this? GoutComplex (talk) 18:26, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, GoutComplex. I am sorry but works of fiction are not reliable sources for anything other than their plots. Trying to extract facts from historical fiction is original research, which is not permitted. Cullen328 (talk) 18:44, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I get it. But these books have a beginning and ending part that isn't fictional and has the author talking about history.

Are those sections not reliable? GoutComplex (talk) 19:09, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

[Edit Conflict] As you say, such anthologies (I have several from the extensive The Mammoth Book of . . . series from the Robinson imprint of Constable & Robinson, though not this one) usually contain non-fiction text by the editor, usually about the contributing authors and their stories but sometimes also about the eras and milieus in which the stories are set. The publishing house's own editors (some Mammoth volumes are retitled reprints originating from US publishers) should have checked this material, so I would tend to assume its reliability.

Similarly, authors of historical fiction often include forewords or afterwords describing exactly how they have stuck to and deviated from known history: this is at least better than nothing. Some historical fiction authors add bibliographical reference lists: where they do, it would be better to track down and consult the works listed. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.218.227.45 (talk) 19:21, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

YouTube links?

Hi, I just wanted to create a new page dedicated to a food delicacy that I am personally familiar with - (Siwawa). It is a very popular street food in Guizhou province. The issue is that with the one exception of CNN travel, I am having great difficulty in finding enough sources online that even talks about Siwawa let alone support all the information that I want to add in. CNN travel is also very stingy in giving enough info. And I am aware that you cannot add in unsourced statements. But is it okay if I add in a professional documentary style Taiwanese food channel that is only on YouTube, as my source? They have much of the info I need to back some information that I like to add in to my draft (which is limited currently). It is unfortunately the only source I can find, that shows some specific ingredients and mentions context like how sauces are used as both dippings and pour over toppings, etc. I can't find other sources that says the same and I also believe the food info in that specific YouTube link is accurate and of professional quality. I only intended to do something good and contribute (not here to promote commercial stuff or edit in bad faith) but no biggie if I can't use YouTube links but felt I should at least ask to be sure. (Because of the blacklist on YouTube links - I can't show the link but the YouTube video is titled (美食台 | 貴州的神奇娃娃，人人都想咬一口！)

Also Happy Lunar New Year everyone. :) SoyDream888 (talk) 06:40, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@SoyDream888: The answer is "it depends." If the YouTube video was not uploaded by the copyright holder, then don't link to it. If the uploader owns the copyright, then you can link to it, but what you say in the article would depend on whether the source would be considered reliable. If the video is expressing an opinion or point of view, then the article should attribute the claim, like "according to so-and-so on a YouTube food channel, this food is best prepared in a wok" or something similar. Otherwise if the source would be considered reliable, you can just state something in the article and cite the video. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:45, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, SoyDream888. Do not think of YouTube as a source. Think of it instead as a platform that hosts millions of videos, each one of which needs to have its reliability evaluated independently. A large majority of YouTube videos consist of self-published content and are worthless as references on Wikipedia. A small percentage are uploaded to the official YouTube channels of reliable media outlets, and are therefore acceptable. It is up to you to verify the reliability of any YouTube video that you propose to use. When in doubt, leave it out. Cullen328 (talk) 07:17, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

SoyDream888, youtube.com is not blacklisted. Youtu.be is blacklisted. The video you referred to is here. It appears to have been uploaded by its copyright holder, although I'd need to know more about Taiwanese food videos to be sure of this. (And I'm not qualified to comment on the [Wikipedia-defined] reliability of this video.) -- Hoary (talk) 09:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary @Cullen328 @Anachronist Thank you for the replies. :) That was extremely helpful. SoyDream888 (talk) 23:02, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey, @SoyDream888! That video looks very professional, it very much looks like a usable source to me, but what we're looking for is evidence of editorial oversight at this food channel, such as a masthead or similar. Is that something you'd know how to find? I have zero doubt the food itself is a notable subject. Valereee (talk) 18:51, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Valereee Thanks for approving the draft. I am not sure if this counts as evidence of editorial oversight. But I did some research and I found out that the food video short content company is owned by the Yit company or Yitiao TV (also on YouTube and its parent company). Apparently big on WeChat. Started by Xu Husheng who previously was the editor of The Bund magazine.[2] [3] So he has editorial experience for sure. Like most media, his company is for profit and funded by investors to sell stuff and views, but personally I don't really see how anyone would want to lie about food stuff. And when serious investors put in 500 million dollars into this company.[4] [5] I highly doubt they are amateurs with amateur mistakes. [6] Like what could motivate them to go all the way to Guizhou, communicate with a top Siwawa restraunt and take such professional videos of cooks frying the ingredients in the kitchen and yet not be able to know or report well on how an extremely simple recipe like Siwawa is made. I cannot comment on their other videos or their past. Their Siwawa video is actually the first time I seen their content and it wasn't made by amateurs. But if you think that my sources and info here in this reply, aren't enough proof of their editing expertise, then that's fine. I don't want to unilaterally add the source in just because I think its professional. But their "mother company" do frequently feature on Taiwanese version of Yahoo so it seems TW Yahoo trusts their reputation enough to permit them be on its platform.[7]SoyDream888 (talk) 21:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Moved discussion to article talk. Valereee (talk) 21:38, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Updates to law firm page

Hello, could a kindly editor please assist with two small updates to the Thompson Coburn LLP page? I added a discussion on the Talk page about Brief Updates to the info box. Many thanks! Spencecomms (talk) 21:47, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Done In future if you mark your request with the template {{edit request}}, on the article talk page, it will be put on a list and is more likely to get noticed. See WP:Edit request for more details. Theroadislong (talk) 22:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikilink use

Am I correct in thinking a wikilink should be created the first time the relevant word/phrase appears in an article (not including infoboxes) and not repeated later? In some articles the wikilinked word/phrase is in its second/later appearance, at other times two appearances are wikilinked. Mcljlm (talk) 00:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, @Mcljlm, welcome to the Teahouse. Your thought is right, for more information, please check on wikipedia:Overlinking Lemonaka (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mcljlm the relevant guidance is at MOS:LINK. The general gist is that yes, just link the first appearance and not others, with the exception of the infobox - but if the article is long, do consider that it may be more helpful for readers to have critical concepts wikilinked once per heading. This is especially helpful for mobile readers. -- asilvering (talk) 00:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

New Band

How many external resources does a new band need to get approved on Wikipedia? Westerner7 (talk) 00:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I added a header to separate this from the previous. I see the OP is blocked indef. David10244 (talk) 02:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Today’s featured picture January 22, 2033

When an artwork is shown anywhere writers and/or editors should provide its size. This is particularly true for today’s Chinese painting, which is enormously long. I bet that very few viewers of today’s article realized that the photo of the painting moves left and right so the the entire long picture could be seen. I discovered it by accident when I tapped the part showing so I could enlarge it and opened a very long, very narrow slit. I closed it and tried sliding it and it slid. It might be a good idea to say "slide the picture to see all of it" or something similar under the photo next time.

I’ve raised the size issue before, for the lost pendent of Queen Elizabeth I. That picture was described as actual size but that "actual size" was not provided. Wis2fan (talk) 04:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Wis2fan, I quote: "35.6 × 1152.8 cm". Whether you see a short stretch of the painting or a miniature version of the whole thing I think depends on which browser you're using. With the browser I happen to be using now, I see a miniature version of the whole thing. -- Hoary (talk) 05:10, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary: It would be cool, however, if that photo widget included a little bit of javascript to cause the image to pan slowly by itself. The javascript is simple, but run-of-the-mill administrators like me have no permission to modify templates with custom javascript. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I've made the suggestion at Template talk:POTD protected. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:01, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I’m using an iPad and the size doesn’t appear on my browser on the picture of the day post. I like your suggestion, Anachronist. That would be helpful.

A related problem is when the picture of the day is actually a video that shows or demonstrates something. In the picture of the day entry, the video NEVER works. The interested reader has to go to the original article to see what it actually the point of the POD placement.Wis2fan (talk) 04:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Questions

Play your questions in teahouse — KFC (🔔 • 📝) 08:00, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Navajcmer ("KFC"). Yes, people are welcome to ask questions about the use of Wikipedia here. Do you have such a question? -- Hoary (talk) 09:00, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

yes — KFC (🔔 • 📝) 17:12, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Navajcmer ("KFC") What might your question be? Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

new Questions say in the teahouse ok — KFC (🔔 • 📝) 07:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Experienced editor banned new user from editing page for reasonable edit

Hello all! I noticed that a more experienced editor banned a new user from editing a page after the new user made an edit that I believe was reasonable (or, at least, does not warrant a ban). I posted on the experienced editor's talk page to remind them of to not bite newcomers and asked them to post on the new editor's talk page instead of banning the new editor. I have to wait and see what happens, but I'm not sure what to do next if the experienced editor doesn't listen. Any advice? Thank you! Toomuchcuriosity (talk) 17:16, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Toomuchcuriosity, welcome to the Teahouse. RolandR is not an administrator and therefore cannot ban anyone from editing that article. Their edit summary refers to the fact that the article is under active arbitration remedies - only accounts which are logged-in, have 500 edits and an account age of 30 days are allowed to edit it. See the top of Talk:Bezalel Smotrich for further explanations. It's possible to lock an article so that accounts which don't meet the restrictions can't edit it, but in general Wikipedia's policy is not to do that unless there's a lot of disruption. A revert and a warning is pretty standard. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:27, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok, got it! Thanks for clarifying! I wasn't sure what that meant. In that case, that certainly seems reasonable. I appreciate your help! Toomuchcuriosity (talk) 17:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

In that case, I think RolandR was correct to restrict who can edit the article. However, I still think that the RolandR's reaction was a bit harsh and comes off as punitive for a reasonable edit since the page was only put under arbitration remedies following the user's edit.

Is the following a reasonable response on my part? I plan apologize to RolandR for my misunderstanding, but continue to note the no biting policy ask that RolandR at least include the user in discussions over this edit. Thank you so much for your help! Toomuchcuriosity (talk) 17:50, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Toomuchcuriosity, if I'm understanding the situation here correctly, the RolandR didn't restrict who can edit the article; they merely explained an existing restriction to an editor who was likely unaware of it. Cordless Larry (talk) 17:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh! Ok I understand now. Sorry for the misunderstanding, it can be hard to understand the context given small summary statements. Toomuchcuriosity (talk) 18:02, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I apologized to RolandR for my mistake. I really appreciate all of your help. I will continue to seek help from Teahouse moving forward since it is clear I was a bit too cavalier with my response. Toomuchcuriosity (talk) 18:14, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Toomuchcuriosity. Where things aren't clear from an edit summary, it's worth checking to see if the editor left a message on the talk page of the user concerned. RolandR's post here provides more explanation. Cordless Larry (talk) 19:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

I fully concur with the topic at hand. It is not a characteristic of a well-informed community to consistently subject new members to organized bullying on Wikipedia. The utilization of jargon that is not relevant to the novice is a common occurrence. While the Five Pillars of Wikipedia are considered fundamental to the Wikipedia project, some experts do not give due importance to these pillars and instead cite less relevant rules and complex systems to intimidate newcomers. This can be perceived as an organized effort. Novices can be described as individuals who may not be familiar with technical language and terminology but may possess a wealth of subject knowledge and expertise. They may also be individuals with limited editing experience In order to address this issue, I propose several suggestions.

Develop a more comprehensive understanding of legitimacy that takes into account a wider range of factors such as geographical location, cultural context, testimonials, lurking behavior, and external factors.
Focus on the specific challenges that newcomers face in the Wikipedia community and tailor strategies to address these challenges.
Encourage experienced community members to actively welcome and support newcomers by providing guidance and support, and helping newcomers to understand community norms and expectations. specially not by words but by deeds
Implement a system for reporting harassment and other negative behaviors to help create a safer and more inclusive environment for newcomers.
Regularly evaluate and monitor the effectiveness of these strategies to identify areas for improvement and to ensure that they are having the desired impact on community participation and acceptance of newcomers.

@Doug Weller ! I was able to comment here because you directed me.Thank you for that. If you would like to comment on this, I would be happy to know about it. Rs Ekanayake 03:39, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Per 1, I have no idea what you mean about legitimacy, lurking behaviour, testimonials, etc.

Per 2, we have places like this to help newcomers.

Per 3, we try but the number of newcomers is very large. I have no idea what you mean by deeds.

Per 4, we already have that at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents and Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard.

Per 5, see my comments on 3. I also don't know what metrics one would use. Doug Weller talk 08:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Gumball

I recently found a tweet saying that there was a seventh 7 of The Amazing World of Gumball, so why does it have a final episode date instead of a "present" there? I'm asking before I make this change. P.S. It's even in here. Sirhewlett (talk) 00:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I have changed my mind, I will use that source to put "present" there. Sirhewlett (talk) 00:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sirhewlett Welcome to the Teahouse. Your question is best addressed at the article's talk page. But if any seventh series has been produced, but not yet released or aired, then it seems clear the statements around the series finale are still relevant. That 7th series might never air - so I'd have thought it best to wait until it does. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:33, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I apologize. Just revert the "present" thing for me. Sirhewlett (talk) 00:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sirhewlett I changed the end date back to what it was. Also, we don't know who tweeted (I don't see a reference), plus, tweets can only be used in very limited circumstances. I left your other changes alone. David10244 (talk) 04:04, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Also please see WP:PRESENT. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Infobox for UK based "campaigning organisation" that's not nonprofit

I'm editing Big Brother Watch, which was described as a nonprofit but doesn't seem to be- There's no source which describes it as such, and it's a limited liability company(LTD) with two shareholders. It is a campaigning organisation, so it seems infobox_organisation is apropreate, but I'm not sure on the type. The examples are all nonprofit, government, or international- This is just a privatley run lobbying organisation. I moved to the company infobox, but I think organisation is more accurate, I just don't know the correct details. Adacable (talk) 13:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

ok "Advocacy group" seems to be correct. Adacable (talk) 14:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

I have given all citations available online.

Yet my submission has gotten declined. How must I improve, should I just make a simpler page with lesser details? am a beginner and I find it hard to decide what must stay on the page and what must be let go. I added everything I definitely know is right MadhwaItihasa (talk) 10:57, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@MadhwaItihasa: Welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you are referring to Draft:Panganama Timmanna Dasa. As DoubleGrazing wrote when they declined the draft, the problem is that most paragraphs do not contain a reference. While the draft has a number of references, they also need to be placed at the end of each part of text they verify so that readers can easily check the sources themselves. If you look at how other Wikipedia articles (like today's featured article Galton Bridge) are written, you will notice footnotes at the end of most statements. I suggest you edit your draft again by placing the footnotes (most of which are in the first paragraph) at the relevant places in the text (you can use a footnote multiple times, see Help:Footnotes for more details) and then resubmitting it for review using the button in the template. Regards So Why 11:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@MadhwaItihasa - see WP:Citing sources for a more thorough explanation of this casualdejekyll 14:23, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Stuck in mobile view

Hello,

I seem to be stuck in mobile view on my desktop. There is a lot of whitespace and it's difficult to navigate, looks like it does on my phone.

How do I switch out?

Thanks. 2600:100E:B014:8A53:D483:A0DB:600F:450C (talk) 15:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

If you really are in mobile view then click "Desktop" at the bottom of the page. The default desktop skin was changed recently so maybe you already are in desktop. You can only get the old desktop skin back if you have an account so your preference can be saved. See Wikipedia:Vector 2022#How to turn off the new skin. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! If the URL of the Wikipedia page you're visiting starts with "en.m.wikipedia.org", then you are on the mobile site. You can remove the ".m" to go to the regular version of the website, which has recently changed. See Wikipedia:Vector 2022 for information about the changes. GoingBatty (talk) 17:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Why

@Firefly115

I don't think that makes sense. Please explain. Goofyahadude1013p310 (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goofyahadude1013p310: I believe you meant to post this at Talk:Polybius (urban legend). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Altering images

There are a few cases I see of an image being arbitrarily changed, usually because "the previous one's quality was bad and not good" or "I think this one is funnier", my favorite example being the article on cursed images, though I might have to check if some pictures of food or game footage go through that.

Possible copyright issues aside, is there anything in favor of or against this? cogsan (talk) 18:03, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san Speaking very generally, altering images falls under, for example, WP:BOLD and MOS:IMAGES. Like anything else around here, altering images can be done in a WP:DISRUPTIVE manner. More specifically, IMO Cursed image is an odd article, I wonder if it would survive a deletion discussion. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:23, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Fair enough. Articles on memes like that are heavily subjective, so unless they weren't really related to the topic, not much could be considered "disruptive", but I can see that not being the case for replacing random pictures around the wiki with your brand's logo.

Really have to hope a theoretical deletion discussion on that article doesn't happen though, because it actually describes the meme for once, as opposed to just how the alt-right uses it.

Thanks. cogsan (talk) 18:34, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Help - Geraldine High School issues

Hi! i'm kind of new to this whole Wikipedia thing, and i'm trying to get a wiki page setup, but I've been reviewed, and I don't understand the requirements, even when I read the pages associated with them.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Geraldine_High_School - here's the link to the page and the issues. TemukaBag (talk) 21:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Your draft is just a blatant advertisement for the school. Wikipedia is NOT for merely providing information. A Wikipedia article about an organisation must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about them, showing how it meets Wikipedia's special definition of a notable organisation. Theroadislong (talk) 21:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

becoming an editor

I have started the course for becoming an editor and have edited 10 docs but can't find how to move on to the next stage, see going round in circles. Also I can't see how to do cut and paste when editing. Any help appreciated GCmatters (talk) 15:15, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @GCmatters and welcome to Teahouse. The first edit you did already made you an editor. You can navigate to articles of your choice and fix common errors in them or add more better content in them. If you are looking forward to creating new articles, please go through WP:YFA. Best, ─ The Aafī (talk) 15:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

thanks Teahouse, what about cutting and pasting ? GCmatters (talk) 15:35, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia, @GCmatters:! You are now an autoconfirmed user as your account is four days old and you have made ten edits. I'm unfamiliar with the Wikipedia Adventure, but it's not required to complete. Regarding your second question, to copy and paste when editing, just use Ctrl-C and Ctrl-V as you would anywhere else (or Cmd-C and Cmd-V if you are using a Mac). – dudhhr^talk _contribs (he/they) 15:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

thanks a bunch GCmatters (talk) 15:36, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome! :) – dudhhr^talk _contribs (he/they) 15:36, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@GCmatters: Cut, copy and paste are browser features, not Wikipedia features, so it depends on your browser or device. You can probably also mark text and right-click to select cut or copy, and later right-click a position and select paste. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:38, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

thanks, thats useful GCmatters (talk) 15:50, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Many editors cut/paste an article's section into their own Sandbox, fix it there (including creating properly formated references), and then paste into article. Cut/paste from one Wikipedia article into another is allowed as long as the Edit summary provides attribution. Do not cut/paste from copyright protected sources. David notMD (talk) 22:37, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Robert Tannahill

Robert Tannahill was born in 1774 but the Wikipedia article states "On leaving school at age 12, he was apprenticed to his father as a handloom weaver. It was during this time that he began to show an interest in poetry. With his apprenticeship completed, Tannahill left Paisley in late 1779 to work in Bolton, Lancashire."

The year that he left for Paisley seems to be a mistake since he left school at 12 - which would have been after 1779. I put question marks after 1779 to let readers know that it appeared to be a mistake. However, that was removed by one of your editors. But the editor never corrected the year that he left Paisley. 2603:9001:460D:227B:C3F2:A538:5797:94CB (talk) 16:32, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

"One of your editors"? You are an editor yourself, so I don't know who the "your" would be referring to.

Each article has a talk page, in this case Talk:Robert Tannahill. An article talk page is intended for discussions exactly like this. The Teahouse isn't the place to discuss content or behavior. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:44, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Note that Wikipedia editors are volunteers, and anyone can become one by creating an account. Esolo5002 (talk) 18:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Right idea, wrong place. Challenges to content are made at the Talk page of the article. Your edit was reverted not for being invalid, but for being in wrong place. David notMD (talk) 22:41, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

P!ATD Sources

Per the recent news, I visited the band's WP page and was surprised to see this section: Musical style and influences. I don't think I've ever seen so many cited sources in one section before. Are all these really necessary? or is this an example of WP:OVERKILL? Maineartists (talk) 22:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Maineartists. Yes, it certainly is overkill. It is rarely necessary to cite more than one source for a straightforward claim. ColinFine (talk) 23:07, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists - It looks ridiculous, yes. Might I suggest as a starting point to remove duplicate citations to sources that are already cited in the same section (ex. 2, 163)? casualdejekyll 23:09, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello all!

I'm an actor with several films on Amazon. I keep getting denied for a wikipedia page. I'm told it's because of resources so tonight I went and put in about 15 or so websites that mention my name from Google to foreign websites. I haven't gotten a lot of information about why I'm denied but I've been afforded blue check marks on many social media sites, it seems like Wikipedia would be easy to handle. I just wanted to control it before my name started to show up after recently selling in the UK and Ireland. Would anyone want to help me get it published? Madridbenjamin (talk) 01:10, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Madridbenjamin Welcome to the Teahouse! If you haven't already done so, please read WP:AUTO and WP:PSCOI, and declare your conflict of interest on your user page. The information at the top of Draft:Benjamin Madrid links to lots of Wikipedia's policies. In particular, and article has to show how the person meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". Looking at the IMDb page about you, it doesn't seem like you meet the criteria at WP:NACTOR, and the draft doesn't seem to have multiple independent sources that provide significant coverage of your work to meet WP:NBIO. It may be a case of WP:TOOSOON. Hope this helps! GoingBatty (talk) 03:15, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Madridbenjamin have you read Wikipedia:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing? Wikipedia is not a social media site, it is an encyclopedia with articles that can be edited by anyone. If there comes a time when a reliable source reports something about you that you don't like, it can be added to a future Wikipedia article and you won't be able to remove it. If you want to have control of what is published about yourself Wikipedia is not the place to ask for help getting an article, for that article won't belong to you, and you won't have control over it. You may also want to read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not. Best wishes to you. Karenthewriter (talk) 04:08, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Well in my business it's a good thing. If my agent wrote it they would also log in as Madrid or my name. While you say it isn't social media, I'm not sure how you understand how things spider across the internet. In my business I can't control MOST of what's put out about me. It's hard to control my privacy for sure and costs a lot to do so. Putting one thing out by myself is the least of what I could do. I know it can be changed but so does the general public. I would imagine that an incorrect wikipedia page full of errors is still better than no wikipedia page at all. I dont control anything that's out about me on the internet, not even my pictures on amazon or netflix. It's a very different beast than social media, but necessary if not for the content at all. Madridbenjamin (talk) 01:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for all your advice. I don’t meet the criteria of ‘actor’? I’ve done 500 pieces of work, and I could keep putting them in the resources but didn’t think I would need too. I’m known for selling the only film created in Indiana to Hollywood. There are businessmen in this town with wiki pages.

I’m happy if someone else does it but people don’t just show up on the resources I put up for nothing. Turn around and ask your Alexa ‘Who is Benjamin Madrid?’ - That global bit of info doesn’t get you on Wikipedia? Kinda weird. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madridb (talk • contribs) 04:50, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello from an Alexa-free zone, Madridbenjamin aka Madridb. There have been extraordinarily many actors. Most aren't notable according to Wikipedia's notability criteria. Perhaps here, in this thread, you could provide the links to the three best sources of information about you. These must be "reliable sources", and one requirement for this is that they must be independent of you: not by you, not by an agent working for you, not based on an interview with you. From the three, we'd be able to evaluate your [Wikipedia-defined] "notability". -- Hoary (talk) 05:48, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

I feel like you're bummed that I made my screen name 'Madridb'? It's obviously me, I wasn't trying to hide anything. I gave you tons of sources by outside websites that I simply googled. Nothing on the internet is that reliable as you know. All of the 10 or so websites I sent are independent of me. They use my face, they use my art and often steal it, but I dont have anything to do with any of them. Once a film gets sold I have little recourse over what happens to my image. I've even had a tough time putting my own image up places because people don't think it's me. Oddly, I wish my agent did this for me but agents aren't interested unless there's money directly involved. I think all of you editors can beat me up for text, code and whatever...but the truth is, I'm just a guy that sold some films for my job...which is notable in itself. No one in Indiana has ever sold a film to Hollywood, and I'm not rich, I just worked hard with a lot of people. I'm the face of the film, so if I don't hustle the crew won't get more work and notoriety. While it may seem like I'm putting my face up for fame...trust me, I never get recognized and I hope I dont. The people that worked on the film however get to keep working. Madridbenjamin (talk) 02:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Benjamin Madrid exists. All refs need to be embedded in the text. The software then puts a superscript number in the text and the ref shows uup under References. David notMD (talk) 06:02, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Madridbenjamin Wikipedia allows drafts to be created by their subjects, although for reasons already given you may not like how the article about you subsequently evolves. However, that said, it is vital that you conform to Wikipedia's policy on biographies of living people. That policy is there to ensure, among other things, that every fact stated in a biography is backed up by a reliable source that readers can use to verify it is an accurate representation of what the source says. This means the draft must use inline citations (see WP:ILC). It is unreasonable for you to expect volunteers here to fix the shortcomings of your draft. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:49, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Guys. I’m not expecting anyone to fix it. It has inline sources, notable according to all of your articles. I can already tell you this is more trouble then it’s worth. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madridb (talk • contribs) 16:23, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Madridb These are not inline sources, they are just a bunch of weblinks dumped at the end of the draft, with no attempt to specify which source is relevant to the various facts in the text. In addition, you have uploaded to Wikimedia Commons a photo of you but that is not your "own work", (i.e. taken by you as a selfie): it was taken by Lucas Saugen Photography, a commercial company. Commons will delete the photo unless you prove you are authorised to license it. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:00, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Correct. Saugen photography took the photos of my wedding and with permission sold them to TurboTax. Like son of citation for MLA and APA style I put the links in your ‘automatic’ citing link under cite and that’s how Wikipedia spit them out. So the wedding photos are my own work, bought and paid for by me. I may not understand how the coding of Wikipedia works but you do not understand the business of acting and modeling. I suppose that’s true for many people and why they say ‘it’s not notable’…forgetting that they don’t know ANYONE that’s successfully don the same. Saugen also took my first album cover photos from My first recording contract. Dr Demento Basement Tapes 11 also shows my pre show business (legal) name. A selfie portrait would have been taken by my arm. Those are clearly professional photos. If you walk into any big box store today you’ll also see my face on many many products. Ford Motor Company travels the world using my face for their new Fusion. It’s not a matter of ‘stuff’ or permission it’s a matter of wiki people understanding what’s legal, real and owned. I’m happy to give whatever they want as long as it doesn’t show personal info. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madridb (talk • contribs) 17:25, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

If you do own the copyright to the photo, you'll need to provide evidence of permission to Wikimedia Commons. See your user talk page over at Commons for instructions. It is, as you say, a matter of what is legal, and the admins over at Commons will delete the photo if there is no evidence that the upload is in fact legal. As for "I put the links in your ‘automatic’ citing link under cite and that’s how Wikipedia spit them out", you misunderstand what you'd need to do – the citation marker has to be placed after the sentence or paragraph it supports, not in the "References" section. Take another look at the information linked by Michael D Turnbull above. --bonadea contributions talk 17:58, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

@Madridb: You need to put each of those citation templates at the end of the article behind a sentence that is supported by that citation.

Also, we are strict about copyright. The fact that you possess a photograph doesn't mean you own the copyright. The fact that you bought a photograph doesn't mean you own the copyright. If you paid a photographer, then you would need a written agreement stating that the photograph is a work for hire, and you would need to provide a copy of that agreement to the Wikimedia Foundation.

Nobody said writing a Wikipedia article is easy. In fact, it is the most difficult task in existence on Wikipedia, and even more difficult if you have a conflict of interest, as you do.

One more thing, and this is really important. Please look at the short essay Wikipedia:Golden rule to understand what we require of the sources you cite. Can you tell us which three sources you cite meet all three criteria described in that essay? ~Anachronist (talk) 01:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh absolutely. None of the articles I published were written by me, from the Indianapolis Star to IMDB to Indican Pictures to Trinity Creative....none of those were written by me but rather about me. All of the arabic sites you see quoted were not written by me, in fact I didn't write anything for any of the articles sited. This gets very confusing I'm sure to you guys that I do happen to be a film maker and writer, but articles about my writing are not my words. I hope that makes sense and yes I followed every Goldenrule you quoted. Madridbenjamin (talk) 17:08, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Madridb If the photographer sold the copyrights to TurboTax, then TurboTax owns the copyrights, not you, and unfortunately you can't relicense the images "for anyone to reuse, even for a commercial purpose". TurboTax might not like for you to (attempt to) relicense them in that way. David10244 (talk) 11:01, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

David10244 - incorrect. They sold one photo and that’s not the phot used. The caption says ‘on the set of turbo tax’. The photo was not sold, if you Google ‘tips for newly married couples’ you’ll see the actual photo. Companies buy one picture often not an entire set. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Madridb (talk • contribs) 12:26, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Madridb I think you misunderstand what is being told to you. If Lucas Saugen photography took the picture, it's their picture, and they have full rights. They then sold the picture to TurboTax, correct? They own the photo's rights. Google search results do not have anything to do with this. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:59, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Once you pay for your photographs to be taken, you also buy the copyright. What's odd about my situation is that my photos were also worth something in the public sector. I bought the photos, and then gave permission for them to be sold at will by the distributor. This may seem odd to you guys but it's common in my business. If I did work for Google for instance or Ford Motor Company, I wouldn't own the rights to the work even if my face was on them. However, in this case the pictures worked in reverse. I payed for someone to take my wedding photos who happened to be a professional photographer for not only wedding work, but also a commercial photographer. We were friends from a past business deal which is very common. The photo you are seeing on Wikipedia was not sold to Turbo Tax, are you understand this? One photo from the pile of photos was sold to Turbo Tax, but that isn't being used here. It's moot. The photo you are seeing was bought and paid for as a service by me to own and distribute as I see fit. Madridbenjamin (talk) 17:05, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

The statement Once you pay for your photographs to be taken, you also buy the copyright. is not always true. It can be true depending upon what agreement has been made with the person taking the photo, but it's not always the case. Anyway, if that's what happened in your situation, all you need to do is email your c:COM:CONSENT to Wikimedia VRT. A VRT member will review the email you send and either verify the license or email you back if they need more information. Regardless, Commons and Wikipedia are separate projects with their own repsective policies and guidelines. While Wikipedia articles often use files uploaded to Commons, any questions related to the licensing of such files need to be resolved over at Commons. So, if you have questions about this kind of thing, you can ask them at c:Commons:Village pump/Copyright. Now, if you don't want to go through the VRT process, there's a possibility that the file will end up deleted because Commons tends to err on the side of caution and delete files when there are concerns about their licensing.

Whether a Wikipedia article can be created about you is something for discussion here on Wikipedia. That, however, will depend upon whether you're considered to meet Wikipedia notability guidelines like WP:GNG, WP:BIO or WP:NACTOR, and this doesn't depend at all on whether there are any images in your draft. You can continue work on the draft while it's waiting to be reviewed to make it more clear how you meet one of the above guidelines, but generally it's not really a good idea to submit the same draft over and over again. If you would like some Wikipedia users experienced with creating and editing articles about actors, you can probably find some at Wikipedia:WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers. Perhaps one of that WikiProject's members can provide you with some more specific suggestions on how to improve the draft. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

How do I get my Wikipedia back to English language

Help. I clicked on something, and now all my menus are in a different language than English. I don't know what to click on to get them back to English menu and contents.

My pages are displaying in English. And my URL is standard English, like this link I'm on now: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Teahouse

But I'm at a loss how to get it back to English language in the menus etc. N2e (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@N2e: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. Click on the

icon near the top of a page, then click on the

in the lower-right corner of the menu that opens up. It should pull up Language settings for you at "Display Settings". See if that's set to English, and if not, click on it. That should change the menu language back to English. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:11, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, Tenryuu 🐲. That was a great help! Followed your advice and all the menus are back to English. Yay! — N2e (talk) 03:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

help with authority control, please?

Hello,

I tried to add the VIAF and GND id for a recently created person,

Arnold Baumgarten

but there is a message saying the authority control is erroneous.

How to fix this please?

https://d-nb.info/gnd/127406719

http://viaf.org/viaf/118200321

Thank you Eli185 (talk) 05:17, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Eli185 - Welcome to the Teahouse! The Wikidata item associated with the Arnold Baumgarten article had an incorrect GND value. I deleted it and readded the number you provided, which did the trick. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 07:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Eli185 (talk) 05:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

You missed the first digit off the number - no problem, all sorted now! — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 08:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Eli185 (talk) 05:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Link A Sanbox Article and give citation

Hello Team,

I am currently building a page for an Indian Freedom Fighter and a Parliamentarian who was a public figure and made significant contribution to Indian History. I find his mentions on the Wikipedia pages, but his wiki page is not existing. I am working with his next generation to build this Wiki page and link it to the existing pages wherever his name is mentioned.

Could you please help me how to do it?

Should i wait for my article to be reviewed and then add the citations?

TIA

Prashanthi Kolluru. Kolluru81 (talk) 07:41, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Kolluru81, are you saying that you're working with a descendant or heir of this person? -- Hoary (talk) 08:16, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Do not submit for review until you have all the citation included and properly formatted. David notMD (talk) 08:27, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Kolluru81, you should start by assembling the sources you plan to use. If these include several reliable independent sources with extensive discussion of him, you should go ahead and write a draft, basing it on the sources and citing them as you go. If you submit an article for review without using any sources, it will certainly be declined. And you should answer Hoary's question above. Maproom (talk) 08:29, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

For the curious, the draft is at User:Kolluru81/sandbox. A Wikipedia article cannot be used as a reference. I see you have included a photo identified as being taken in 1951 as your "own work" For Wikipedia, use of that term means that you are indicating that you took this photo yourself. David notMD (talk) 08:35, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank You for reviewing. Can i change the identification? It was published in a Newspaper of 1950s. Can i edit it to the newspaper name? Kolluru81 (talk) 08:45, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

I wish the term "own work" instead said "I took the picture". David10244 (talk) 08:48, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank You @Maproom. Noted. Will take care. I appreciate your inputs. Kolluru81 (talk) 08:46, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes @Hoary i am working with his descendants to put it up on the Wikipedia. They have shared the sources, which i am uploading on Wikimedia as well. Kindly let me know if i am in the right direction. Kolluru81 (talk) 08:43, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

If this image and the other one from the Provisional Parliament Meeting that you placed in Commons were in a newspaper, then my understanding is that either the newspaper or the photographer hold copyright. David notMD (talk) 08:51, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @David notMD, I really appreciate your inputs. I am trying to change the copy rights for this image, but i am unable to. Could you please help? 2406:B400:D1:B442:74D4:F1C3:4F92:4B94 (talk) 13:05, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 And if the newspaper or photographer holds the copyright, you can't upload it here and release it for public and commercial use. Copyright is complex. David10244 (talk) 13:41, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

A copy of this photograph is in a library where the event took place. How can i attribute this? Could you please advise. Kolluru81 (talk) 13:07, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 That is not related to the copyright status of the picture. It's not my area of expertise though. This should help: Images (click here). Good luck. David10244 (talk) 08:41, 20 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 Also, the sources of information for an article (the references) need to have been published (click here). David10244 (talk) 13:44, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually we are talking about a Public Figure of 1950s who has contributed significantly towards the drafting of the Indian Constitution. Could you please help me on the published sources. I have tried everything from my side and also from the family side, looks like some records were not archived in digital space, but are in the Indian Parliament's website. Kolluru81 (talk) 13:10, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 Sources (used as references) do not need to be online. You need to cite when and where the source was published, though. (And family records, even if they were scanned or digitized, are not usable as sources.) I know there are a lot of scattered questions and answers here; I hope this is helping. David10244 (talk) 08:53, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244 This is really helping. Thank You. But i am unable to delete the image registered in Wikimedia commons. How can we go about it? please advise. Kolluru81 (talk) 10:15, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 When I see an image at Commons, there's a link labeled "Nominate for deletion". I don't remember if that appears right away, or if I need to click the "more info" button first. David10244 (talk) 05:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244 looks like the image has been deleted by Wikimedia team. Thank You for checking in. I wasn't able to delete it and by mistake had mentioned as my own work. Kolluru81 (talk) 07:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 You might want to read WP:COI if you are working with his descendants, as well as make the mandatory paid editing disclosure Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 15:54, 18 January 2023 (UTC)

@Club On a Sub 20 Thank you for sharing this. I am not getting paid for this article, as i am helping a family whose grandfather made a significant contribution Indian Freedom Struggle. He has been lost in the history as he was a selfless man who was focussed on building a country than his persona :-) Kolluru81 (talk) 13:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:PAID applies if paid, WP:COI if just helping. Do not add any more newspaper photos to Commons, and delete the one from the draft. David notMD (talk) 13:20, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Thank You So Much. Will edit the copy. Thank You! Kolluru81 (talk) 14:16, 19 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 In case you haven't seen this link yet, please read WP:YFA. David10244 (talk) 08:55, 21 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @David10244

I completed the article and submitted it for review. But unfortunately was rejected. The reason mentioned was "unreliable sources". But all my sources are publicly Published in the Govt of India official Parliament website. May be i am missing something. Could you please check and advise?

TIA. Kolluru81 (talk) 14:50, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 Your draft was not "rejected" (that's a bit of Wikipedia jargon that means the reviewer thought that no article would ever be OK and you should give up trying). Instead, it was "declined", which means that the article hasn't met our standards yet but could do so after more work. Your task is to show that Reddy meets the notability requirements of WP:NPOLITICIAN, which as far as I can tell he will do because he was an MP in India's national parliament in the 1950s and you need to supply reliable sources (which don't need to be online but must have been published). Here your draft is problematic. The weblinks you have supplied don't work for me and I can't tell which website they are supposed to go to because you have used links that start http://10.246.16.187:80/handle or similar: I can't tell what these domains are. If they are the government of India website they should start https://www.india.gov.in/ so like this one which works for me. Your sources need to back up the details of Reddy's life, not just state what Bills he debated in parliament. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:54, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Michael D. Turnbull. I really appreciate your detailed insights. How would i use the sources that are not online. I have few images, that i was able to find in a library. How do i use them. When i try to insert a citation, it gives me less options.

Kindly advise. Kolluru81 (talk) 06:02, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kolluru81 Full details at WP:CITE. Basically we use templates such as {{cite book}}, {{Cite news}} and {{cite web}} depending on what the source was. For your politician, I'd expect many of the sources to be vintage Indian newspapers or maybe books. The use of sources you have found in a library is fine, the material does not have to be online and nor does it have to be in English (although if there are multi-language sources, we obviously prefer to use the English one). Take a look at Mahatma Ghandi, to see what a really good biography looks like. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull i have edited the sources now, with the details of Volumes and Journal details. Kolluru81 (talk) 11:31, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Help on references

Sir/Madam

Ref no. 4 in Vikraman Radhakrishnan has no info of content it is cited and it is operated by a opposition political party[8]. Ref 5 is a religion website (https://sanatanprabhat.org/english/).

I deleted them with my reason. My edits are undid and no reason given to me.

I know Wikipedia for 5 months only. I said my reason in talk page. I do not understand what to talk in talk page and who I should talk any more.

Kindly help me Sir/madam. 106.205.72.176 (talk) 06:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Anonymous user, you've been asked on that talk page to be patient; you may have to be patient a little longer. Tips, however: (i) Sources that say unfavorable things about people aren't necessarily libelous or undesirable. However, if a cited source is libelous, or is close to libelous, or if there's clearly a bias in an article, then bring up the matter on WP:BLPN. (ii) Don't complain about (or describe, or praise) references by number, because numbers may change. It's better to describe the link, and to add that it's currently number such-and-such. (iii) If you'd like more people to evaluate the sources of which you disapprove, then if the article is about Indian matters, write on WT:WikiProject India. Avoid starting a discussion there: instead, simply invite people to the talk page of the article. And keep your description in your invitation very succinct and neutral (not "Somebody keeps adding junk sources" or similar; instead, "There's a disagreement over the suitability of sources" or similar). Good luck! -- Hoary (talk) 06:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Sir/Madam,

It is only about references. currently Ref no.4 [9] does not have connection to the info in the page. Why is it in there? 106.205.72.176 (talk) 07:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't know why it's there, and I'm not going to speculate. If it has no connection then it should probably go. You might write on the article's talk page that you propose to remove it after 48 hours unless its connection has been re-created or you've otherwise been persuaded that it's worthwhile. (Don't say "the day after tomorrow" or similar, because of course different editors have different days and nights.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC) If it has no connection then it should probably go. You might reasonably wonder "Why only 'probably'?" Because it's possible that it did reference some material that was thereafter clumsily and wrongly removed. In order to check, one should go through the article history. -- Hoary (talk) 08:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Review of my Draft

Can you please review my draft and give some insights on how to improve the article that i'm writing so that it becomes submitted.

Draft:ITech Store Kailashpoudel2057 (talk) 08:55, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Your draft lacks any independent secondary sources, we have zero interest in what their own website says. Theroadislong (talk) 09:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I will research for external sources, rather then using their internal sources. Kailashpoudel2057 (talk) 09:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

There is nothing Wikipedia-article-worthy about this computer sales and repair store. This draft has no potential to be accepted. David notMD (talk) 11:07, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kailashpoudel2057 You created another section below with the same question and I others have given essentially the same answer. You are paid to promote this store: the rest of us here are unpaid volunteers and we have little time to assist your efforts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Help in My First WikiPedia Article

Please check Draft:ITech_Store and give me some feedbacks on where i can improve myself. Kailashpoudel2057 (talk) 10:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Kailashpoudel2057 Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I am afraid that I must tell you that you seem to have a fundamental misunderstanding as to what Wikipedia is for. It is not a place for businesses to tell the world about themselves and what they do, and where existence warrants inclusion. This is an encyclopedia with criteria for inclusion, called notability, such as the definition of a notable company. Any article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets that notability definition. Please read Your First Article.

You do have on your user page "I work for ITech Store", but please read about paid editing and conflict of interest. 331dot (talk) 10:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kailashpoudel2057 You have re-submitted a draft that was declined after adding just one extra citation, to a website that simply lists the store among many others. There are thousands of stores in the world selling IT equipment and billions of people. Wikipedia has to restrict what it covers if it is not to be overwhelmed by trivia. By long agreement, this is done by insisting that what is included here is notable. An article about your store is very unlikely to reach the threshold for inclusion and I would advise you to give up trying. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Editing an article on mobile phone

Hello, I ve made a contribution for an international handball coach page. In the infobox and under the heading managed teams I added the managed teams list chronologically, adding as well the flag of each country he worked in. I checked the mobile view from my computer and every thing was fine. So I sent the link to my own messenger, and as well to my own gmail to open it, and check the layout on my mobile. And there I had a surprise: When I open the link from messenger the infobox is perfect and the flags are well aligned. When I opened the link from my gmail, and when I made a research about the coach on google browser, the flags in the infobox under the teams managed are not well aligned. Please check it by your own to understand better. The page link: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paulo_Pereira_(handballer) Thank you for your support Sahrayo (talk) 02:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sahrayo The article Paulo Pereira (handballer) looks fine on my PC's Edge browser but it does have an unusually wide infobox because of the way you've added all the flags. The new Vector 2022 skin is probably not helping the situation either. I suggest you remove the flags and make the article look more like the one for Carlos Resende, another handball coach. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Mittens (chess engine)...again

Hello. I promise this is the last time I'll be asking this, I just thought as I had asked here before that it would be a good idea to ask again.

Following on from my last time asking, the engine has been subject to significant coverage in international newspapers, including WSJ, the Times, the Independent and others. I think it passes WP:GNG now, but want a last check. Thanks, Schminnte (talk • contribs) 21:33, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Schminnte Welcome to the Teahouse! Add {{AfC submission}} to the top of your draft, and a reviewer will determine whether it passes WP:GNG. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:14, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Should I use AfC? I try to move pages into mainspace myself to avoid increasing the backlog as I'm not a complete beginner. Schminnte (talk • contribs) 22:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Schminnte AfC process is not necessary. If you think it's ready for mainspace, be bold and move it! Harobouri • 🎢 • 🏗️ (he/him) 22:47, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Schminnte You've got solid coverage in several reliable newspapers, so I'm sure WP:GNG is met. The overall tone seems OK (I'm not a new article reviewer) and if you move it into mainspace it will still be reviewed by the new pages patrol, so I support the idea of being bold.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Joe Pappio (Professional athlete)

Hello,

I am his grandson.I have edited his page as well as added pictures. No one else has any business revising my edits. Now I'm blocked from editing his page. Please advise if there is someone more qualified to update his page and I won't bother it anymore Joepoe1961 (talk) 09:48, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Joepoe1961 Hello and welcome. Almost any editor may edit almost any article. You are not blocked, but you should avoid directly editing the article- instead, you should use the article talk page(Talk:Joe Pappio) to make an edit request(click for instructions). 331dot (talk) 10:00, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Joepoe1961 The article is lacking sources. The only one currently is a .pdf which mentions Pappio in two general listings, which is certainly not significant coverage. As his grandson, don't you know of any further reliably published sources, for example from contemporary newspapers? If so, we would welcome you pointing these out on the Talk Page of the article. The only reason we don't like relatives placing material directly into the article is because you have a conflict of interest that means you might not write as neutrally about Pappio as our policy requires. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Citation information below:

https://ualr.edu/sequoyah/thisday/hominy-indians-triumph-new-york-giants/#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20article%2C%20on,there%20to%20witness%20the%20action. This event is also family history for me.

Joepoe1961 (talk) 12:13, 25 January 2023 (UTC) Joe Poe Jr

Joepoe1961, please sign your comments. (You do this by hitting "~" four times in a row.) The only mention in that link of your grandfather is a single sentence quoted from a newspaper, viz: Nix, Pappio, Geo, and John Levi played a bang up game for the Indians while Ben Hobsome, Comstock, and Miller shone with equal brilliance for the Giants. This is not "significant coverage". -- Hoary (talk) 11:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Joepoe1961 I am a member of the WP:The Wikipedia library and accessed newspaperarchive.com via that. I readily found a citation in the Cincinnati Commercial Tribune Newspaper Archives for October 7, 1928 Page 9, which actually is significant coverage for Pappio and includes a photo of him. You can access the website at this URL and do further research (you don't qualify for the Wikipedia library as you haven't contributed here enough). Don't place anything you find in the archives at the Teahouse, use Talk:Joe Pappio. Note also that the link to rutgers.edu in the article has rotted and you'll need to look for it in the Wayback machine. Good luck. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleting redirect

I am now in the midst of a debate that has been going on for days about deleting an unnecessary redirect. I simply ask to delete it in order to create it from scratch. It shouldn't cause all this unnecessary headache at all. The reviewers refuse to delete it on the grounds that I have to create a draft. God... Does this make sense?? In other words, they want to be sure that the redirect will not remain a red link, and they prefer it to remain as it is, in order to verify that there is a ready draft. What step do you suggest? Sakiv (talk) 18:19, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Sakiv, next step is write the draft and then either submit to WP:AfC or move the draft to mainspace. WP:RM can help with the technical parts if you have a draft that is ready for Mainspace and do not want to submit to AfC. There is no reason to delete the redirect in anticipation of an article as several editors have explained in edit summaries. Slywriter (talk) 18:26, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

In which policy it is written that the redirect stays forever unless there is a draft? You are not familiar with the matter. The same method was used to create articles after I requested their deletion. The creator of these redirect is still doing this to create similar problems in the future.--Sakiv (talk) 18:30, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Sakiv. It is not a matter of written policy as much as simple logic and best practices. Redirects are for the benefit of readers looking for information. The redirect should be deleted when an acceptable article is ready to replace it. Cullen328 (talk) 18:37, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 and Sakiv: Is it actually necessary to delete this redirect? It is possible to turn the redirect into an article by editing the page instead of deleting it. Jarble (talk) 19:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sakiv: We generally only delete redirects if there is an existing saved page which needs to be moved there. Otherwise the redirect can just be turned into an article as Jarble said. See Help:Redirect#Creating and editing redirects. You will not be registered as the page creator but does that matter? PrimeHunter (talk) 20:36, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jarble Suppose someone edits the page to change it from a redirect into an article, but the page is not great--no references, etc. What happens then? Does someone who is patrolling page changes then need to revert it back to a redirect? David10244 (talk) 02:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244: He won't even answer our questions and resumed his odd creation of redirects after a short break. This behaviour is unaccaptable. Sakiv (talk) 21:12, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sakiv Yes, if I am reading this right, he is oddly fixated on having the redirect removed before his draft is accepted to replace it. There is no reason for that. David10244 (talk) 13:08, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Professional athlete

I represent a professional athlete who would be deserving of a wikipedia page but is not listed. Just his father comes up who was also a pro athlete. Can I speak to someone to request this inclusion? Haroldk12 (talk) 21:35, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Haroldk12:

Assuming you are being paid by the athlete, you will need to disclose your conflict of interest.
If there are no reliable sources that talk about your client, AND WP:NATHLETE is not met, then there is no article to be made. Wikipedia is built on in depth, independent, reliable, secondary sources. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:57, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Haroldk12. You might also find it instructive to read an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Haroldk12 Hello, welcome to the teahouse. For creating an article, you need to provide Reliable sources to prove it has enough Notability. If you are paid by someone, please disclose your Conflict of interests. Happy editing. Lemonaka (talk) 00:53, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks much. This is just a professional baseball player who we know. Where do I supply the links of articles about him for a page to get approved and developed? Haroldk12 (talk) 18:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Haroldk12 Wikipedia is run by volunteers. You can post your best three reliable, in depth, independent, published sources here and ask for an opinion on whether the athlete is notable as Wikipedia defines it. It will be up to you to actually write a draft article, which will then be reviewed and maybe turned into a permanent article. Please click and read your first article.

It is possible that by posting some sources here, you will interest someone to write a draft. But this is unlikely, so you may have to do the work yourself.

Also, please do not use any outside services that claim to write Wikipedia articles for money. Some of these outfits are scams, and some of them will take your money and then write a draft that eventually gets deleted for not meeting the standards described in the links that various editors have given here (the words in color). Hope this helps. David10244 (talk) 13:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

How do I get another user to stop restoring their unsourced content and teach them about BURDEN?

Hello.

I am at my wits end with a seasoned user who has been here for more than 10 years, A E Francis, on the article Thomistic sacramental theology.

The user insists on adding back unsourced (violating WP:BURDEN) and essay-like (WP:NOESSAY) content, including their own signature inside the body of the article. Whenever this unsourced content is removed, they edit-war every 2 to three months and call this removal vandalism (e.g. [10]). Talk page discussions (and that is when the user even accepts to communicate, which is rare), an admin warning, and two warnings of mine have proven to be fruitless. The user seems to want to WP:OWN the content they have added.

So, what am I doing wrong? How am I to explain the user they are in the wrong here? Veverve (talk) 15:33, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

What you're both doing wrong is edit-warring. Rather than block you both, I have protected the article until the content dispute is resolved. ~Anachronist (talk) 16:46, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist: until the content dispute is resolved: this is why I post here! It simply cannot be resolved currently. So, do you have any advice? Veverve (talk) 16:51, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Veverve: If this is persistent behaviour but doesn't cross WP:3RR, you're best served taking it to dispute resolution. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Veverve: Also, if this is a dispute between only two editors, then Wikipedia:Third opinion might be a useful way to get a tie-breaking view. If there is a serious behavioral problem involved, then go to the WP:CESSPOOL and report it there. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:05, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Veverve However, an editor putting their signature inside an article is absolutely wrong. David10244 (talk) 13:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Help with publishing my artist

Courtesy link: Draft:Harry Yummy

Can someone please help me publish my up coming artist. Marfoy (talk) 20:10, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Marfoy: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. Your draft is missing references, which are vital to each and every article on this encyclopedia. You will probably want to read Wikipedia:Reliable sources and Easy referencing for beginners —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:19, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

How do I edit and add the references? Marfoy (talk) 20:24, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

See the links I provided above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Do you publish artist here? And if you do how much you charge. Marfoy (talk) 20:42, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

There is no charge. Follow the guidance at WP:YFA. Remember this is an encyclopedia and not a venue for promotion. RudolfRed (talk) 21:05, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Marfoy Hi there! Creating a new article is one of the hardest things to do on Wikipedia, especially if you do not have a lot of experience editing existing Wikipedia articles. To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, and be prepared for a process that may include waiting for review, rejections, and rewrites, before an article is created. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:06, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Marfoy "Up coming" and new artists usually don't have reliable, in-depth, independent, published coverage about them yet. Wikipedia takes note of people and things after they have become notable, not before. David10244 (talk) 13:45, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not to author or co-author.— Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 22:48, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

If you cannot find references about her, this can never become an article. Looks like WP:TOOSOON. David notMD (talk) 03:58, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

unable to edit

I want to communicate that in the article on the Cleveland jewish Community, the list of noteworthy individuals shoud include Leslie Foldy, physicist and co-author fo the Foldy–Wouthuysen transformation Leeascherman (talk) 03:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean History of the Jews in Greater Cleveland? Leslie Lawrance Foldy is an existing article, but nothing there mentions being Jewish. David notMD (talk) 04:10, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I can't see anything in any English language sources supporting it either. Maybe something in Czech or Hungarian under " László Földi"? User:Leeascherman do you have any sources for this? JeffUK 14:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Citation not formatting

The following:
"url=https://digitalcollections.lib.umanitoba.ca/islandora/search/%28"foley"%29?type=edismax&hidden_filter%5B0%5D=ancestors_ms%3A%28"uofm%3A1243378"%29&f%5B0%5D =mods_originInfo_dateIssued_dt%3A%5B1908-05-04T00%3A00%3A00Z%20TO%201908-05-05T00%3A00%3A00Z%5D"
is not properly formatting as shown below. How do I fix it? ^[1]

^ "foley"%29?type=edismax&hidden_filter%5B0%5D=ancestors_ms%3A%28"uofm%3A1243378"%29&f%5B0%5D=mods_originInfo_dateIssued_dt%3A%5B1908-05-04T00%3A00%3A00Z%20TO%201908-05-05T00%3A00%3A00Z%5D "Winnipeg Tribune". lib.umanitoba.ca. 4 May 1908. p. 2.

DMBanks1 (talk) 02:37, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I added a line break to the url. David10244 (talk) 13:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

DMBanks1, change each of the four offending instances of " to %22, and you get this.^[1] (I do wonder about the life-expectancy of the link, however.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:13, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

^ "Winnipeg Tribune". lib.umanitoba.ca. 4 May 1908. p. 2.

DMBanks1, for an explanation, and for what to do about other troublesome characters, see Help:URL. -- Hoary (talk) 04:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks. DMBanks1 (talk) 15:02, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Why did Wikipedia had a very few redesigns?

After looking at Vector 2022 respectively on this site, I began to notice something. Only Wikipedia had websites redesigned in 2003, 2005, 2011, and recently, 2022. Unfortunately, this site hasn't been redesigned very often and frequently, I was expecting this site to be renovated at a constant pace, but it didn't. There are very few website redesigns in Wikipedia, although there are minor updates that added some of these features. So, try to give me a reason why this site layout hasn't been majorly changed very often and instead seldom, and try to give me an example of how this site could be updated to the latest. I really wanted to know how. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 21:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. Most of the people who hang out on this Teahouse are editors, and have little or not involvement with the software or user interface. WP:VPT is probably a better place to ask this. ColinFine (talk) 21:57, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@204.129.232.191 - I reckon the reason is just because it's really hard to redesign Wikipedia in a way that makes people happy. Vector 2022 is probably the most controversial redesign yet, but Vector 2010 was very controversial in its time. Heck, Timeless was basically canned due to the problem of being unable to make everyone happy. (Honestly, I prefer Timeless to Vector 2022... so if they ever remove Vector 2010, which they probably won't, that's what you'll likely find me using.) casualdejekyll 22:55, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Casualdejekyll @ColinFine But, could you please go deep further on Vector 2022 and why did Wikipedia had website layout changed in 2003, 2005, and 2011? I saw this timeline in this page on Wikimedia Foundation that explains the history of that. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 16:28, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

IP editor, this is not something hosts at the Teahouse are likely to know. It would be better to direct your question to WP:VPT as suggested above. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@204.129.232.191 - Pre-2003 Wikipedia looked like this, which is undoubtedbly why a redesign was neccesary. I think you can see why that isn't considered user friendly by any modern standard.

The switch from Monobook (2004) to Vector (2010) was motivated by the same reasons that people want to replace Vector with Timeless (2015-2018) and later Vector 2022 - usability. Vector was primarily the product of the Wikipedia Usability Initiative (2009-2011). I'm using too many years, probably. casualdejekyll 18:01, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Commercial websites that are trying to sell you products and services frequently redesign their sites in order to keep up with trends and fashion in design, and to keep their sites "fresh" and "relevant", in order to help attract new customers. Wikipedia doesn't need to do any of that - it exists to present (mostly) textual information to people who want to read it (and, to a lesser extent, edit it). Therefore the only real drivers to change the way the site is presented are improvements in accessibility (including, e.g., navigation, presentation of information for visually impaired users, etc.) and to accommodate the different types of devices used to access Wikipedia (computer monitors, then smartphones, then tablets, etc.) In other words, we don't change the site just because we can, we change it when there are tangible benefits to end users in the changes made. Bastun^{Ėġáḍβáś₮ŭŃ!} 14:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, alright then, I need to understand that. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 16:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

How to restore Wikipedia's old design

For the interested, it says you can do it without registering. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:04, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that, Gråbergs Gråa Sång! I've downloaded the Firefox fix and it seems to be working. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.212.208.82 (talk) 13:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Great! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Is this proper usage of WP:ICW

In Godless (novel) I have entirely removed a section due to plagiaristic content (further explanation in the article's talk page). I was wondering if this is proper implementation of WP:ICW, as I generally am not one to edit boldly and feel a bit less comfortable with such things as a newcomer. Xxthedeathlordxx (talk) 20:01, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

If, as you say on the talk page, that the summary section was copied from another place, then yes, removing it is not only allowed, but mandated. --Jayron 32 20:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Where for duplicate ?

Hi, I would like to know where should i go to discuss about a duplicate ? Gavecuriut (talk) 19:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Gavecuriut: Sorry, I'd like to help, but I need more information. A duplicate what exactly? Can you give us some more details so we can answer your question, or direct you to the correct location? --Jayron 32 19:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

A duplicate about family biography between Baba Ali Chaouch and Ali Khodja, same history, same sources at different periodsVeronne, La; De, Chantal (1980). "Abdeijalil Temimi. Le Beylik de Constantine et Hādj Ahmed Bey (1830- 1837). Tunis, 1978. In-8°, 300 pages, 24 planches hors texte. (Publications de la Revue d'histoire maghrébine, 1.)". Bibliothèque de l'École des chartes. 138 (1): 131–132.,Allioui, Youcef (2006). Les Archs, tribus berbères de Kabylie: histoire, résistance, culture et démocratie (in French). L'Harmattan. ISBN 978-2-296-01363-6. The first source doesn't mention both and the second one, i just ordered it because we can't fully access it (points out kabyle tribes). Therefore i would like to know where we can talk about duplicate? Gavecuriut (talk) 21:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Gavecuriut You raise an interesting issue but one that will only be of interest to a few editors. I suggest you use the Talk Page of one of the articles for the discussion but place a link to it on the other's Talk Page as well. You might try to alert some members of WP:WikiProject Algeria but as that Project is not very active a better way forward might be to {{ping}} a few of the editors who have been active on either article to your new comments. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Koopa Troopa

I am planning to document all the different variations of the Koopa Troopa, from the Mario franchise of Nintendo. First of all, is this notable enough to become a new article? Also, do I need the consent of Nintendo? Anonymous Elementary Schooler (talk) 02:41, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

i just wanna submit how do i do this Anonymous Elementary Schooler (talk) 03:05, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

You don't need permission from Nintendo to write about their characters. There is already an article for Koopa Troopa, and there's a list of Mario characters that lists all of the important ones. If you notice anything missing, you can add it as long as you use reliable sources to confirm what you're adding. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

i beileve you need to state what source you used and u will be good to go i am not sure though i am new to wiki Despacito305276 (talk) 21:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback on whether my edit was correct

Hello, is my edit correct? I have been removing these same information. [11] [12] [13]

Because I agree with this editor. [14]

That such information is of (undue weight and recentism). As I feel it's disportionate to make an entire chapter pointing out that this particular company is refusing to end business in Russia. I mean I am aware that many Russian businesses are being Sanctioned. However I am also aware many western and Asian companies are continuing to do business with Russia. I don't know the exact number but it's safe to say that the vast majority of western companies are continuing to do business with Russia. And I quote in my source - (Majority of Western companies doing business as usual in Russia, study finds -Only about 8 percent of EU firms have divested from Russia, with the majority of Western firms still active in the country being German). https://www.politico.eu/article/majority-of-western-companies-continue-business-in-russia-study-finds/ So when the vast majority of the world is doing business with Russia. I think it's extremely unfair and of undue weight for an editor to go single out certain companies and criticise them for continuing to do business with Russia. When such a thing is actually very very common among the majority of western companies in the world. It is not extraordinary or unusual. So I removed them on the basis of : (undue weight and recentism).

Am I wrong? I am asking you as you are all more experienced, to tell me if this is actually was the right thing to do? I don't think it was wrong but will revert if you all think I am wrong to to remove on grounds of (undue weight and recentism) Truth721 (talk) 15:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

This gets fairly subjective. Personally, I agree with your edits and I think criticism sections should be avoided whenever possible, though I could also see a case for at least mentioning it in the article. With that said, you might want to read the Wikipedia policy about edit warring, as it's usually not considered good form to revert several times in a row, even if you're right. If a user continues to add content that you feel is undue, you can leave a post on the talk page (which I see you did), and if a compromise or solution is not found, then you can make a post on the neutral point of view noticeboard to ask for further input. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 16:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien thanks for your feedback and advice. I actually heard something about a village pump and assume that it means pleading your case and then getting approval from an unbiased panel or community to approve of your edit and rule it or against it. The issue is that I know such a topic is going to attract editors who are politically motivated to add that in. And I don't think good faith reasoning is going to work with them and I don't want to waste my time toedit war either. And why I mentioned it here possibly hoping for a shortcut to that village pump. Though I assume the neutral point of view noticeboard is that village pump that I keep hearing about. Thanks for the advice and I will be sure to take it. Truth721 (talk) 20:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Checkuser note: Truth721 has been blocked for socking.-- Ponyo^{bons mots} 21:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Finding Enough Credible Sources for Approval

Courtesy link: Draft:Ish Entertainment

Hi! I'm creating a page for a film and TV production company that has produced a lot of content as commissions for networks. Because of this, their programming is often labeled "HBO Original," "Hulu Original," etc. Whenever there's buzz about their shows, it's typically the network listed in the article, not the production company. The company is credible though - it's won an Emmy and been nominated for many more. My issue is the citations that I have don't seem to be enough for my article to be approved. Wondering if there's a way to solve this issue so that the article can be approved, or if I'm just SOL until I can find more citations?

Thank you! Oslofirstave (talk) 21:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Oslofirstave Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to solve this issue is to have appropriate sources that offer significant coverage of the company. There is a difference between the company being nominated for an Emmy and the work of the company being nominated(like a documentary film). It's possible that the work of the company could merit articles while the company itself does not. If there is not sufficient sources about the company itself, it wouldn't merit an article. That can't be fixed by editing. 331dot (talk) 21:50, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Totally understand, thank you! Oslofirstave (talk) 22:24, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Having Trouble Confirming a Birthday

Hi everyone. I recently created a Wikipedia account in order to edit an error that I noticed on the article for the artist Mónica Mayer. It lists her birthday in the main text of the article, but in the side panel with basic information only has the year that she was born. I was going to fix this, and just out of curiosity, I checked the source that was cited with providing her birthday. The English page linked to the Spanish version of the article, which cites a source that claims to have her birthday. However, I could not find it anywhere on the article linked. I also did a brief google search for her birthday, and every source I could find other than the Wikipedia page only listed the year, not the date. How should I proceed? Is it best to just remove the date and keep the year, or should I keep looking, or perhaps reach out to Mayer herself for clarification? Any help is appreciated. Fleegus (talk) 19:14, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Fleegus Welcome to the Teahouse! If there is no reliable published source for her date of birth, then please remove it. Any information in a Wikipedia article must be verifiable, not based on what the subject of the article says verbally. If you have any relationship with Mayer that could be construed as a conflict of interest, then I suggest using the article's talk page to make your request, with the {{request edit}} template to gain the attention of other editors. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:30, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello Fleegus Welcome to the Teahouse and Welcome to Wikipedia! I'm so glad you started an account to fix a problem; most of us got started at Wikipedia similarly, and some of us have been a very long time after starting out. I hope you stick around! Regarding your question, if reliable sources don't have the exact date, you should remove it from the Wikipedia article unless and until the date is reliably sourced, we shouldn't include it. While this is true for all information at Wikipedia, it is especially important to hold to those standards for articles about living people. If you've got reliable sourcing for the year, but not the date itself, remove the date and leave the year with its source. That would be expected practice. Does that answer your question? --Jayron 32 19:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jayron, thank you so much for your advice! I'll make the changes that you suggested. And, just a personal thing - I wanted to thank you and everyone else who replied for being so kind. I am definitely a beginner to editing articles, and I really appreciate you all for being understanding, especially since it can sometimes feel like every online community loves gatekeeping these days. Have a good one! Fleegus (talk) 22:46, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

And per WP:BLPPRIVACY the exact date should not be include unless it has been "widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public". Meters (talk) 19:52, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Pending review vs creating an article directly

I just submitted my first article for review, and I realized after that I could have just published the article myself since I am an autoconfirmed user. What would happen if I were to publish it now? Would it be taken down since it is still under review or would it cancel the review since it is no longer a draft? Or is it just a bad idea entirely to move it myself since this is my first article? Any advice would be appreciated. Ptarmica (talk) 20:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Going through the AfC process can be considered lower risk than creating an article in mainspace, the reason being that the latter are seived via New Pages Patrol (WP:NPP), seen as having less patience than Reviewers. (Yes, I meant "seived.") David notMD (talk) 21:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

That is good to know. I will just let it go through AfC in that case. Thank you! Ptarmica (talk) 21:20, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Happy to accept, just need to wait for the redirect to be deleted, I've tagged it. Theroadislong (talk) 21:25, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! I am very excited to hear that. Ptarmica (talk) 21:42, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Not "sieved"? I thought it was related to "sieve". David10244 (talk) 13:12, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Oy. Yes, "sieved". I typed "seived" into Google to check definition and missed that it had first corrected spelling to "sieved." David notMD (talk) 15:54, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Just ask Aritosthenes how it's spelled... David10244 (talk) 05:14, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Navajcmer

There is no revision with ID pls edit me — Navajcmer (🔔 • 📝) 01:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

If you rephrase this request/question more intelligibly, somebody here might be able to help. (Punctuation may aid intelligibility.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:27, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

op blocked for not here. lettherebedarklight 晚安 06:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

How to close a RFD discussion

I nominated two redirects for deletion but later changed my mind and I want to withdraw these nominations. IntegerSequences (talk | contribs) 04:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

You can strike out you nomination statement, and add a small note about the withdrawal. Carpimaps (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@IntegerSequences Carpimaps (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. IntegerSequences (talk | contribs) 06:45, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

The article Laura Bergt links to Google Drive in the references

The article Laura Bergt links to Google Drive in the references, I'm not sure there's a policy against it but it definitely seems a bit off... I'm not clicking on those references. Is there a policy against this? Isn't that also a copyright violation? Therapyisgood (talk) 23:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)
Hello, Therapyisgood, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's certainly not usual to link to a google drive (It would have been helpful if you had indicated which reference: the one I've found is Blewitt in Anchorage Times). When I try to follow the link it tells me I need to request access - this is not the same as being behind a paywall. Without seeing it, we can't tell, but I agree that it is likely to be an unauthorised upload, and hence a copyright violation.

I would recommend removing the links that are to such places (a citation does not require a URL unless the source is only available on the web, and not necessarily even then). It would be worth searching for the source online, eg through WP:The Wikipedia Library, and substituting it if it is found, but otherwise just leave the URL parameter empty. ColinFine (talk) 23:57, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Therapyisgood. I'm just going to add to what ColinFine posted above by saying that leaving the |url= parameter empty for a citation formatted using the {{cite web}} template (as well as some others) will cause an error. So, if you're going to start removing urls from citations, you probably should make sure you're not creating some extra cleanup work for others by doing so. It might be a good idea to discuss your concerns at Talk:Laura Berg to see if others can help resolve the issue. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

So well my page was Declined.

Courtesy link: Draft:Utekontakten Bergen

So Idk why any ideas how You can see why it was Declined? The Norwegian Empire (talk) 22:23, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@The Norwegian Empire: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. This is the English Wikipedia, and articles here are written in English. You may be looking for the Norwegian Wikipedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The post on your talk page User_talk:The_Norwegian_Empire explains the reason it was declined. JeffUK 22:26, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Also note that the article does not appear to be written in an encyclopedic tone, it reads a lot more like a promotional piece than an encylopedia article (see Wikipedia:Writing_better_articles#Tone). JeffUK 22:32, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, The Norwegian Empire. All encyclopedia articles on the English language Wikipedia need to be written in the English language, so that is reason enough to decline your Norwegian language draft. But drafts can be translated. I do not read more than a few words of Norwegian. but I used translation software to take a closer look, and your draft appears to be a promotional brochure instead of an actual neutrally written encyclopedia article. So, your draft has (at least) two major problems, and maybe more. Cullen328 (talk) 07:36, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

The Norwegian-language Wikipedia are here and here. Maproom (talk) 08:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Film categories: (Soccer)

I wish all the film categories had the word (soccer) beside association football. 86.133.195.90 (talk) 20:53, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

sorry, i don't understand your question. could you give an example? lettherebedarklight 晚安 06:03, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia doesn't grant individual wishes. If you have a reasoned proposal, then argue your case on the relevant talk page and see if you can reach consensus with other editors. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:25, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Google searches putting the little wikipedia thing on the right of the search

What is it called when google searches (cache?) the little snippet of a wiki article on the right hand side or a search results? And when did they start doing that? Or all search engines really? — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 05:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Moops The little box is called (by Google) a knowledge panel, powered by the Google Knowledge Graph. According to our article it was rolled out in May 2012. Shells-shells (talk) 05:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I just went to the link you shared. That is really cool. I would have never found that on my own, 'Google Knowledge Graph', neat. TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 05:59, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Moops: Note that the only part Google took from Wikipedia is usually a text paragraph which ends with a link on "Wikipedia". We get many complaints about errors in other parts and made {{HD/GKG}} to respond. PrimeHunter (talk) 06:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I am not familiar with HD/GDK. Tell me more. This is all very interesting to me. :) TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 06:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Moops: {{HD/GKG}} (Help desk/Google Knowledge Graph) is one of the stock answers at {{HD}}. It was made for Wikipedia:Help desk in 2013 but can also be used elsewhere. A typical complaint says we show the wrong person on an article, usually without saying they saw the image at Google and not Wikipedia. That's why is says "Are you by any chance referring to ...". The article often has never had any image. I give the reply after Googling the name to see what Google shows. Ukexpat made the template but it was based on my help desk posts. It's substituted so it doesn't show on WhatLinksHere. This search finds 99 help desk archives. I thought it would be more by now. Here are 26 Teahouse archives. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:11, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

That is some nice Wikipedia history right there! TY — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 07:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Moops, there is an amusing but very informative essay called Wikipedia:Don't build the Frankenstein. Such errors can be made by human editors or by sophisticated computer algorithms or chat bots. Cullen328 (talk) 07:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I enjoy amusing but very informative essays. TY! I will give it a read. :) — Moops ^⋠T⋡ 07:22, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Moops: {{HD/GKG}} was created at Wikipedia:Help desk/Archives/2013 May 6#Wrong photograph. The typical complaint said "the photograph that appears on the page is NOT ME" about a page with no image. Other search engines copied Google's "infobox" idea (right down to the confusing Wikipedia link with no mention of other sources) so we also made {{HD/YKG}} and {{HD/Bing}} in 2015 but Google is more popular. Long ago we got similar complaints about automatically generated Facebook community pages with links to Wikipedia. {{HD/facebook}} was created in 2011, the oldest of the lot. A typical complaint was that some Facebook algorithm had given a wrong geographical location. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:32, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Access to an ACM Article

I need to see a paper: Movie script markup language by Dieter van Rijsselbergen et. al. To add references and new info to an article. The full paper is here: https://dl.acm.org/doi/10.1145/1600193.1600231 Usually I can find a PDF somewhere but no luck on this one and alas I no longer am an ACM member. I recall there was a resource editors could use but it's been a while and I don't remember where it is (or I may be remembering wrong). Any suggestions would be appreciated. MadScientistX11 (talk) 14:38, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MadScientist. Have a look at WP:RX. It may be that you can get it youself via WP:The Wikipedia Library (I've never used this, so I don't know its scope). ColinFine (talk) 14:51, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@ColinFine, Eureka! That is the link I needed. Thanks. I'll make sure to bookmark it for future reference. MadScientistX11 (talk) 15:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Advice for running an edit drive

I'm currently brainstorming an edit drive that aims to make WP:Vital articles more reliable, i.e. removing depreciated sources, adding reliable sources, make sure the text really said what the source has said, etc. I want to make that edit drive both as a place where newcomers can hone their skills while having fun doing so. I know that this question probably doesn't totally belongs to the Teahouse, but I really want to know experienced and new editors' thought alike about this idea. CactiStaccingCrane 15:43, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

If you haven't found it already, this looks like a great place to start Running Editathons and other Editing Events - Programs & Events Dashboard (outreachdashboard.wmflabs.org) JeffUK 16:01, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't plan to run an offline editathon, but this is a very good read nonetheless. The drive will probably last about a few months, and would work on each section within the WP:Vital article list one by one (People, History, Arts, etc.), focusing on just getting most of the information cited (80%) with no bad sources left. Once a section is completed, the drive would move on to the next section, while a small group of experienced editors will spot-check about 2-5 sources in every article and use script such as WP:CITEWATCH to find unreliable sources. Ultimately, the drive aims to make a meaningful impact to improving Vital articles and prove to the newcomers that Wikipedia is still capable of doing exciting things. My biggest concern here based on my past experience with the WP:30 kB drive is that interest seems to be unsustainable as the drive really struggled during the last two weeks. CactiStaccingCrane 16:19, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I found an account which may be doing edits on behalf of a website, but I am not sure how to deal with it

Account: Gekiclaws

May be editing on behalf of: Chess.com

Proof for my claim: https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxZc5-Nm9cU5VGzx7TsLG05w3bW0rVv_EK (post by Chess.com claiming that "they" fixed Daniel Rensch's Wikipedia ~~page~~ article)

Article diff: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Daniel_Rensch&diff=prev&oldid=1135345321&diffmode=source

However, this account has only done one edit that is relevant to chess, so I don't know how to handle this. Can someone help me out here? Tube·of·Light 14:29, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tube of Light I see the diff you mentioned was reverted 20 minutes later. GoingBatty (talk) 14:38, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, but since they only did one edit on behalf of chess.com, should the user be warned for unpaid editing or not, @GoingBatty? Tube·of·Light 06:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tube of Light:, per WP:OUTING, Posting another editor's personal information is harassment, unless that person has voluntarily posted their own information, or links to such information, on Wikipedia. Personal information includes (...) home or workplace address, job title and work organisation (...) (emphasis in the original). Please don’t do that again. Off-wiki evidence can be used for high-level cases by emailing it to admins etc., but don’t post it publicly.

In addition, it is not clear to me whether someone at chess.com actually made the edit, or whether they just used a preview to make a humorous screenshot and then Gekiclaws actually made it for fun after seeing the post. It would have been best to politely ask Gekiclaws on their talk page (with vague phrasing such as "are you employed by the subject of any of the articles you edited?") before rushing to judgement. Finally, as vandalism go, that’s rather mild, so I don’t think a harsh warning is needed either. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 09:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, shoot, sorry about that, @Tigraan. And about the possibility of the user editing after the post by chess.com, yeah, I hadn't considered that. Tube·of·Light 14:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Once you’ve seen enough randallism, the idea comes to mind easier. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 17:21, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Remove annoying parts

When I try to edit a semi-protected page it keeps saying note: this page is ...if you need help getting started with editing... and it is annoying, how to remove this? Jishiboka1 (talk) 09:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Jishiboka1. Which page are you referring to? Sometimes a page has been protected and restrictions are placed upon who can edit it. Pages can only be protected by an administrator and there's almost always a very good reason for doing so. If you can provide the name of the page, someone can probably better answer your question. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:47, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

No i have autoconfirmed rights, and editing a page that is semi protected there is this red note, i can edit but it is annoying, i've seen it enough that i now know. Jishiboka1 (talk) 11:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jishiboka1: You can add this to your CSS:

#semiprotectedpagewarning {display: none;}

Most interface elements can be hidden similarly. The HTML at the note says id="semiprotectedpagewarning". Your browser probably has a view source or inspect option to see it. If it had said class="semiprotectedpagewarning" or included more classes with class="... semiprotectedpagewarning ..." then the code would be .semiprotectedpagewarning {display: none;}. If there is no suitable id or class then it's difficult to hide something. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:07, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Jishiboka1. Would you be kind enough to link to the page you were having problems with, please? We can probably help you better if we can check it. It's probable that the article was one of the tiny proportion which have needed to be given 'Extended protection', requiring editors to have made more than 500 edits (see WP:ECPGUIDE).

I see you've only made 413 so far. So you would need to make an WP:EDITREQUEST on the talk page at this point in time, I'm afraid. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Hi. They are able to edit that page. I think it maybe a default edit notice for all semi protected pages, or a custom one for the particular page. —usernamekiran (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Login issues

I asked the below question on my talk page:

Please help me with...

Hello. I apparently no longer have a username, although I do have a username. This is my page. My name is in red now elsewhere and Wikipedia says I do not exist. I do exist. I'm right here. I am also unable to login, although I appear to be logged in. Crikey.

I'm not a major editor, and there is a lot about Wikipedia which I do not understand. That's why I don't attempt things I don't know about. But I do provide useful work, correcting articles, providing sources and adding hotlinks. I also correct grammar. I am unaware of doing anything wrong that would cause my name to be deactivated.

This is what I see now:

The page "MGHuc" does not exist. You can create a draft and submit it for review, or you may create the page "MGHuc" directly, but consider checking the search results below to see whether the topic is already covered.

User:MGHuc/sandbox This is the user sandbox of MGHuc. A user sandbox is a subpage of the user's user page. It serves as a testing spot and page development space for the... 55 bytes (1 word) - 09:01, 3 January 2020 User:Sam Engleang -´mkenHcg;ykluyxøHmk [TukeRbIeBlRblg ebImin[RKUxøHBitCaBi)akehIy ¬nageqøIyRBmTaMghuc R)ak;mkCamYy¦. dMbUg´bdiesFnignagEtnagenAEtbgçMehIyKMramfaebITuk´Camitþ... 14 KB (1,515 words) - 06:59, 6 December 2008 MGHuc (talk) 04:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC) MGHuc (talk) 04:38, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I received an unsatisfactory answer and replied:

I have never had this issue before where I was unable to login. I just attempted to login like I always do so any edits I make could be tracked back to me should there be any issues with the work I did. I hold myself accountable.

I have no recollection of what the "User:Sam Engleang page" is or any memory of it whatsoever.

I was not logged in when I "made this entry", unless when logging in, Wikipedia, for the first time ever, tells you that you don't exist. I didn't suddenly become an idiot and forget how to login or become confused by the process.

Thank you for taking the time to address my concerns. However, I found your answer to be unhelpful and condescending in more than one area. Perhaps we can get someone in here who will be more helpful to someone who believes in Wikipedia and who is only trying to help contribute to the cause.

Thanks for your effort.

MGHuc

After posting my reply I realized that my initial question was no longer open for replies so I assume the person who did reply will not see my follow-up. I was unable to delete my comment and just start anew here.

I know little about the processes around here but I stick to what I do know and I'm just trying to help out.

Thanks,

MGHuc MGHuc (talk) 22:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi User:MGHuc! You do have a user and a username, what you don't have is a user page, you can create one by clicking 'Create' on this page: User:MGHuc . you can learn more about user pages here: Wikipedia:User_pages, note that you do not need a user page at all, it's entirely optional and you are very welcome to continue editing without creating one. JeffUK 22:34, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@MGHuc: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. It seems you're confused about the existence of a user page (which not every user has). Your name is in red because a user page was never created for it (and by no means is it mandatory to make one). You are currently logged in and you definitely posted this question from your account. If you want your name in blue, just click on it and type something into the page that opens up and click Publish page. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 22:35, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I got the gist of this from the other user that replied, but what I don't understand is why I was apparently unable to login and was told that my username did not exist. I want to stress, I have never had that issue before. With the recent changes to Wikipedia's format I wondered if there was some bugging going on.

But thanks to you and to JeffUK. I edited my question in here and said that after clearing my history the matter seems to have been resolved. Thanks so much. MGHuc (talk) 22:43, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I got the gist of this from the other user that replied, but what I don't understand is why I was apparently unable to login and was told that my username did not exist. I want to stress, I have never had that issue before. With the recent changes to Wikipedia's format I wondered if there was some bugging going on.

But thanks to you and to Tenryuu. I edited my question in here and said that after clearing my history the matter seems to have been resolved. Thanks so much. MGHuc (talk) 22:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@MGHuc Login user-names are case sensitive, so it is possible that you tried to log in with MGHUC or Mghuc or some other incorrect combination, which wouldn't have worked. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

My username and password autofills. But again, thanks. MGHuc (talk) 22:51, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MGHuc. Your username and account have existed for almost five years. Your userpage does not exist because you have never tried to create it. Your account has never been blocked and is in good standing. So, it is difficult to figure out what your actual problem is. Cullen328 (talk) 06:10, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't know what the problem was, but there was a problem that happened for the first ever. The problem has now been rectified, probably because I cleared my history, something I should have thought of much sooner. Thanks for your help. MGHuc (talk) 19:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Userpages

How do i make a really ^Snazzy Userpage. I see all these editors with dope userpages with userboxes and descriptions. How do I make something like that ThePowerWizard (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @ThePowerWizard. I usually direct folks with this question to the User page design center. It's inactive, but still full of ideas. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Userboxes has instructions and a link to a gallery of existing Userboxes. David notMD (talk) 19:53, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Homepage tab

Hello, how do I deactivate the "Hompage" tab? The one that displays "Hello, ‪Jerium‬!". Must be a recent thing because I don't remember having that around last year, thanks Jerium (talk) 19:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jerium: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. You can disable it by unchecking Preferences → User profile → Newcomer editor features →

Display newcomer homepage. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:56, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Tenryuu Thank you, was getting annoyed by that tab. Jerium (talk) 20:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure where to take this

but I just undid an edit by 167.98.2.34 and looking at their edit history i believe that they should be blocked. Check it out. Carptrash (talk) 21:31, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Administrator_intervention_against_vandalism would be the right place, that page also gives some guidance on the procedure (that the user should be warned, etc.) I note from that user's talk page that they have had two warnings recently and not edited since. If the warnings have the desired effect there's no need to block them. (Wikipedia:Sanctions_against_editors_should_not_be_punitive) JeffUK 21:39, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Carptrash (talk) 18:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

The edit which you reverted was a correct edit, as you would see from the wikilink which the IP had added. I have reverted your change. David Biddulph (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay, but the reference should go where the edit is made not a wikilink away. Carptrash (talk) 18:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

As I mentioned in reply to your edit on the article talk page, the entire Claires Court School Boat Club#Honours section is unsourced, so you could remove the whole section if you wished. It is, however, not unusual for even featured articles to include embedded lists where the individual list entries are not sourced in the list but presumably are in the linked articles. - David Biddulph (talk) 18:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I had (have) no desire to revert whole sections or even just one item. I was following a vandal and when they did an unsourced edit I removed it. Carptrash (talk) 20:08, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey, new user here

New user here. This whole space is a lot to take in, I would appreciate some help ThePowerWizard (talk) 18:04, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@ThePowerWizard: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. If you're referring to the white spaces to the sides of the article, you can get rid of those by either clicking on the

in the lower-right corner of the window, or by going into your preferences and uncheck Preferences → Appearance → Skin preferences →

Enable limited width mode.

If this is a more general question about Wikipedia as a whole, I suggest checking out the tutorial. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi, ThePowerWizard, and welcome to the Teahouse! Is there anything specific you'd like help with? Perfect4th (talk) 18:13, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Your draft Draft:Irrational Time Signatures declined once and likely to be declined again for A) lack of reliable source references; and B) topic may be sufficiently covered at Time signature. If you decide to give up on your draft, at the top, inside double curly brackets {{ }}, put Db-author. An Administrator will see this and delete the draft. David notMD (talk) 19:48, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

I declined it again because the topic is already covered in greater depth at Time signature#Irrational meters. ~Anachronist (talk) 20:26, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

How do you make a Wikiproject?

I am a co-founder of the American Isopod and Myriapod group. We would love to create a project here on Wikipedia for our members; however, I could not find straightforward instructions on how to do so. Nathan Jones Blastcat-iNat (talk) 22:39, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Blastcat-iNat, welcome to the Teahouse. Have you read the instructions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Guide#Creating a WikiProject? I'm afraid your proposed scope is a little too narrow, and you may be better off simply joining a larger WikiProject in the general subject area - perhaps creating a taskforce within it - but the instructions are there if you want to forge ahead. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 22:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the quick response I agree that a taskforce would be best, thank you! Nathan Jones Blastcat-iNat (talk) 23:00, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Question about reference

Hi! I have a question. Can we use a wikialpha, wikitia, and other wiki platforms as reference? Thank you. Bmjc98 (talk) 23:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Bmjc98 and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is no. See Wikipedia:Reliable sources, particularly Wikipedia:Reliable sources#User-generated content. StarryGrandma (talk) 23:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

That's what I thought so. Thank you for responding. Bmjc98 (talk) 23:55, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Extended protection

Why are some articles (such as Donald Trump) extended protected? Mast303 (talk) 01:54, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mast303: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. Usually when an article is given protection it is because it is subject to edit warring, which causes it to be incredibly unstable to a casual reader. You can find out the reason by clicking on "Page information" in the sidebar, navigating down to §Page protection, then clicking "View the protection log for this page". —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 01:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Mast303: Articles that are extended-protected prevent IP editors and accounts with less than 30 days tenure and 500 edits (30/500 protection). This is usually in response to edit warring, vandalism, disruptive editing etc, from IP editors and new users sometimes even auto-confirmed accounts. These pages are prone to attract attention because of the subject of the article, so in instances where disruption is high, administrators opt for extended confirmed protection instead of semi-protection in instances of editing disputes. For more information read Wikipedia's Protection policy. -- StarryNightSky11 ☎ 02:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

For Donald Trump specifically, this request at Wikipedia:Requests for page protection is when the extended-confirmed requirement was initiated. DecafPotato (talk) 02:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I want to know about Barry Diller's acquisition of Universal Television

Hi, I'm clarifying that Barry Diller bought Universal Television on October 20, 1997 according to news articles and reports, I attempted to edit it and it was reverted back. 2603:6010:3A00:5F1F:948C:F5EB:F094:43B7 (talk) 23:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! It would have been nice for Materialscientist to provide an explanation in their edit summary to explain why they reverted your edit to the Universal Television article. My guess is that they reverted the edit because the Los Angeles Times reference doesn't seem to specify the sale date was October 20, and you did not provide a new published reliable source for the specific date. GoingBatty (talk) 03:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Not a Sockpuppet!

I was wrongly banned for being a sockpuppet of another account and can no longer log in to my own account. I submitted a ticket well over a month ago and have not heard back. Is there a way I could get an update, such as opening another ticket or directly contacting a steward? 108.3.175.41 (talk) 04:53, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP 108.3.175.4. There are several administrators who also answer questions at the Teahouse and perhaps one of them will pipe in and post something about this. Generally, accounts blocked as sockpuppets are, for the most, indefinitely blocked and not eligiblke for unblocking as explained in WP:SOCKBLOCK. The primary account (i.e. the sock master) accused of sock puppetry may be unblocked in cases where administrators feel that the block has served its purpose, but one thing that you should understand is that even posting above like you did here at the Teahouse using a different account (even an IP account) can be seen as a form of block evasion and only further complicates things. The best advice that I can give you is to log in to your blocked account and then post an unblock request on that account's user talk page. You're going to need to convince an administrator that you not only understand the reasons why you've been blocked but also are unlikely to repeat the same behavior. Sometimes as a way of verifying this, you may be given a chance at the standard offer in which you agree to make no edits of any type to Wikipedia for a certain period of time in addition to some other conditions deemed fit by administrators. There's no guaratees your request will be granted, but it's where you're going to need to start. Now, if for some reason your user talk page access has been taken away, you shouldn't use another account to make sure a request. Instead, you should follow the guidance given in WP:UTRS and request an unblock that way. If you really feel this is a case of mistaken identity, then you can say as much in your unblock request. You should, however, be advised that there is a technical way of assessing whether different accounts being used in violation of WP:SOCK are connected. If your account has been blocked based on such evidence, it's going to be hard to get administrators to believe a mistake has been made and the wrong account ended up getting blocked. Finally, instead of posting any more on Wikipedia using IP or newly created accounts (even if it's just to post a thank you here at the Teahouse), you should limit your editing to your account's user talk page from hereon. Once again, if you can't edit that talk page, you should seek assistance via UTRS or even possibly WP:DISCORD or WP:IRC. Administrators can often be found on Discord and IRC, and one of them might be able to answer your questions in real time. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

India: The Modi Question

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

The OP has started a discussion about this at WP:ANI#User:Owais Al Qarni attacking Narendra Modi so if anyone wants to comment further, they probably should do so there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:27, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

India: The Modi Question was created by someone working for BBC who wants to defame our dear Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi. Modiji is innocent. How can I delete this article. Somebody help. This article should not exist 2409:40F3:25:FD00:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 06:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP 2409:40F3:25:FD00:8000:0:0:0. You can't WP:DELETE any Wikipedia pages yourself. If you feel there are errors in the page's content or the content is otherwise not in accordance with relevant Wikipedia policies and guidelines, you can try to WP:FIXIT yourself. If others undo the edits you make, then that means they disagree with them and then from that point on you should follow WP:DISPUTERESOLUTION and use the article's talk page to discuss the matter. If the article is truly beyond hope and is impossible to fix, then you can try to establish a WP:CONSENSUS for it to be deleted. Such a step, however, is considered to be a last resort and articles are only deleted when there's a clear consensus to do so, or there are other serious policy related problems to justify speedy deletion. For what it's worth, India: The Modi Question doesn't seem, at least at first glance, to meet any speedy deletion criteria in my opinion; so, your best approach is to use the article's talk page to express whatever concerns you have about it and make suggestions as to ways in which you think it can be approved. Please understand that article talk pages are intended to be places for discussing how article content can be made to be more in accordance with Wikipedia policies and guidelines. Article talk pages are not intended to be forums for general discussion about the article's subject, and they're certainly not intended to be places for trying to set the record straight or making claims about other editors and what you guess their motivation might be like you did in your question above. Be also advised that participants in discussions on article talk pages are expected be WP:CIVIL at all times. So, before you start any such discussion, you might want to look at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines#Behavior that is unacceptable for some examples of behavior not considered acceptable for talk pages. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Dear Marchjulyji, Modiji has managed to delete this violent documentary from YouTube and other social media platforms. Modiji has that much power. I'm sure he will do something to delete this from wikipedia also. BBC is trying to defame Modiji. I can't tolerate that. There is no justice in wikipedia. 2409:40F3:25:FD00:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 06:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Since you've started WP:ANI#User:Owais Al Qarni attacking Narendra Modi, you probably should keep all discussion related to this there and follow the advice given to you there. -- Marchjuly (talk) 07:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

article Conversion of non-Hindu places of worship into temples

Please help me with... in the article Conversion of non-Hindu places of worship into temples, the first reference itself is contradicting what is written in this article and the example of Durga temple in Aihole, India is contradictory to its own Wikipedia article. Trsuyash (talk) 06:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Trsuyash: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. You have asked this at the help desk already. Please only ask in one place to reduce duplication of volunteer effort. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

How to get rid of a space?

In Abraham Lincoln and slavery, in the section "Letter to Greeley," is the phrase " [i]f citizens desired 'to avoid the unsatisfactory' terms of the Final Emancipation Proclamation ... " Until I just edited it, the opening quotation mark was on a different line from the quotation beginning "[i]f." I inserted a code that brought the quotation mark down a line. But it leaves a space before "[i]f," and I can't figure out why or how to eliminate it. Maurice Magnus (talk) 00:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Another editor reverted my edit so that the quotation mark is again on the line above the quotation. I just discovered that clicking the square at the bottom right will fix that in the wider view. But the problem remains in the narrow view that I'd been working in. Maurice Magnus (talk) 01:07, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Done with a {{nowrap}} template. Maproom (talk) 08:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Adding to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Cults

I am trying to simply add; [15] (link would be; https://you-are.space) under category "U". How do I do this so it is approved? 204.237.50.1 (talk) 02:12, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. You don't. That category is only for Wikipedia articles. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:15, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

how would I add an article as this is my first time here doing this?

you-are.space Universe residing (talk) 02:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I strongly suggest you read Your first article and make sure you have suitable reliable sources for your subject to even warrant an article. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:20, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

In addition check that you are writing from a neutral point of view and aren't personally connected to the subject. StarryNightSky11 ☎ 02:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much, take care. Universe residing (talk) 02:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I fixed the broken link in the OP's post, in case anyone feels like taking a journey to that (brief) page. David10244 (talk) 09:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Dilemma of a GA reviewer

Hi, going through the list of Good article nominations, I found an article page and opted to review it. During this course, I researched on the verifiable sources for the topic to find if there's anything more that can be used to improve and expand the article. It turns out that there's quite a good amount of content that can be added.

The criteria of reviewer to not have contributed significantly to the article has put me in dilemma. Now my question is, since I have taken up the task of reviewing the GA nomination, what will be the best course of action - ask & wait for other editors to improve the article or go ahead with my contributions to article? Anand2202 (talk) 06:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Anand2202. This seems like a question that's more suited for WT:GAN than the Teahouse. The general answer normally given here by a Teahouse host would probably be something like "be WP:BOLD and improve the article as much as you can". Whether that creates a conflict of interest due to the fact you're also carrying out a GA review of the same article is probably something that only GA or FA reviewers can really answer. The first solution that pops into my head would be to see if you can find another reviewer to take over for you. Then, you should be able to make the improvements you feel are needed and also avoid any potentional conflict of interest. I don't know if that's possible, but that might be another thing to ask about at WT:GAN. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

[EC] That's a very reasonable question, Anand2202. I have an opinion, but only a very inexpert one, and therefore I shan't inflict it on you. You might be lucky and get somebody here who can speak from experience, but in your place I'd simply move this question of yours from here to Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations, where it certainly would be read by people who know their stuff. -- Hoary (talk) 06:50, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anand2202 In a recent GA review I was involved with, the reviewer made many suggestions but these were implemented (in a modified form sometimes) by others. The discussion is at Talk:Thiamine/GA1 and may be a precedent for what you want to do. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Feedback Draft:Yayzy

Hey guys, anybody can help more with http://wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:yayzy ? Any help is greatly appreciated. Thanks Jerry3zs (talk) 23:06, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Jerry3zs The draft is in the pile of drafts to be reviewed. David10244 (talk) 08:58, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for checking and helping with it. Any other tips on how to get it improved to a better grade? Jerry3zs (talk) 12:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

My talk page says that it does not exist.

My talk page says that it does not exist. Casper king (talk) 16:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hiya Casper king and welcome to The Teahouse! Yes, that's correct. The talk page doesn't exist when your account gets created, and doesn't ever come into existence until someone initiates a conversation there with you or you otherwise create and edit it. This is all fine. - UtherSRG (talk) 16:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Oh, thank you that makes a lot of sense. Casper king (talk) 16:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Created new article

I created this new article Draft:Feminism, Divorce: Challenging Nigeria's Breadwinner Role but was moved to draft. I have improved it; what else can i improve on it further? Thanks. TruthGating14 (talk) 17:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TruthGating14. Your draft starts out talking about the "Breadwinner effect" which seems to be a synonym for the Breadwinner model, but we already have an article on that topic. It then narrows in on Nigeria, and brings feminism and divorce into the discussion. Your draft seems like an essay to me and does not explain why divorce in Nigeria is distinctive as compared to surrounding countries or countries around the world. Cullen328 (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Rejection of an AFC.

Is there any way to challenge the rejection of an AFC ? Kashi Narain Mishra (talk) 14:49, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Kashi Narain Mishra, your draft was declined, not rejected. You will have to improve the article and resubmit the draft. You can resubmit multiple times unless it is rejected. See the comments the reviewer left you at User:Kashi Narain Mishra/sandbox. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:59, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Please also read No original research, neutral point of view, and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. No Wikipedia article should ever use an expression such as "an utter unadulterated lie", except in an explicit direct quotation from a cited source. ColinFine (talk) 18:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

What is the difference between the types of link statuses?

I mostly understand "alive" and "dead", but the other types a bit confusing. Can anyone define what the rest of the statuses mean? - S L A Y T H E - (talk) 18:06, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, SLAYTHE, and welcome to the Teahouse. They are documented at Template:Cite web#url. ColinFine (talk) 18:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

question re signature links on this page

this is a very basic question, but I guess that's what this page is for! how are you all generating these signatures, which includes this set of links, here? |talk|C|TB|) thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 13:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

additional note: I do see that the user interface says to "leave a teahouse talk back template," but I'm not sure how to do so. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 13:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

wait a second, i guess it does so here automatically? can I add that talkback template on other pages? also, how do we leave one manually? ok, sorry for all these question. I guess in some ways I'm still learning my around, maybe?

thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 13:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Sm8900, if you are using the dropdown text box that appears after clicking on the '[ reply ]' link at the end of the signature, the accompanying codes to the dropdown text box will append for you automatically. However, if you are editing directly on an article's talk page, i.e. by clicking on 'Edit source' at the top of the talk page, or in this section, 'edit' at the section header, you should append your signature by ending your text with four tildes, i.e. '~~~~'. Example: "This a sample response. ~~~~" will be rendered as "This is sample response. Robertsky 9:XXPM, Today" upon saving of your changes. – robertsky (talk) 14:03, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Robertsky, thanks so much! I guess it automatically adds a "talkback template," as part of my signature, simply because I'm on this page? thanks very much! --Sm8900 (talk) 16:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Template:Teahouse talkback was a template which at one stage we were encouraged to add to a user's talk page if we answered the user's question at WP:TH, but I don't remember seeing anything recently which encouraged such a use. Where on the user interface did you see the instruction to "leave a teahouse talk back template"? - David Biddulph (talk) 17:10, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@David Biddulph, the message is no longer appearing, but I think that it appears that most or all of the "Talkback links" that were previously displayed here, in people's signatures, are no longer showing up on this page. ok, so perhaps one of the people who maintains this page is workinbg on some of the technical items here. thanks. Sm8900 (talk) 17:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

ok, update, when I typed the reply above, and pressed "publish changes", I got a message box stating "remember to leave a talk back template!", with a blue buttton labaled "OK." I hope that is helpful to clarify this. thanks! --Sm8900 (talk) 17:18, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Interesting. When searching I can't find the string "remember to leave a talk back template" anywhere in any namespace on enwiki. David Biddulph (talk) 17:30, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Does this have something to do with the Teahouse scripts (Teahouse/Host lounge/User scripts), perhaps? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

~~I'm testing it now; it was either when I replied to an existing discussion, or when I posted a new discussion. let me see here...~~

@Sm8900: In User:Sm8900/common.js you import User:Writ Keeper/Scripts/teahouseTalkback.js which says "Remember to leave a Teahouse Talkback template!". I guess that's the message you actually see. The script was made before we got the Notifications system where you can notify a user by just linking their user page in a post, e.g. with {{reply to}}. Talkback templates like {{Teahouse talkback}} haven't been used much since then. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:04, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

ok, that's very interesting to know. and yes, that helps me to know more about these technical things. thanks! Sm8900 (talk) 20:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I've always wondered why talkback templates were a thing. I suppose they're still useful for users who have pings and notifications turned off or for IPs since you can't ping them. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 20:21, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Okanagan Game Farm

Hello, I have some questions about conflict of interest, citing print newspapers as a source, and the use of personal photographs in articles.

I know someone who was a shareholder for the Okanagan Game Farm during the time it was operating. I have heard many stories from them about the game farm, including ones that relate to published news stories. Given this page is a stub and has not had new content added since 2012, and I may be able to access news articles and photographs relating to the game farm that likely would not otherwise be accessible, would it be appropriate for me to edit this page?
If I was citing an article from a print newspaper on Wikipedia, what would be the best way to make the article available for readers to verify the source?
WP:IUP says "Images with you, friends or family prominently featured in a way that distracts from the image topic are not recommended for the main namespace. These images are considered self-promotion and the Wikipedia community has repeatedly reached consensus to delete such images." The photos of the game farm I would have access to prominently feature the shareholder and their family. If the images are labelled in ways that emphasise aspects of the farm rather than the individuals (eg. "a child at the game farm with a tiger cub; animals at the farm were . . ."), would it be appropriate for me to add them to the page?

Thank you very much for your consideration. Oystersauce99 (talk) 11:46, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Oystersauce99 and welcome to the Teahouse. We cite articles from newspapers using the {{cite news}} template, as has already been done in that article. We also assume good faith with editors using WP:OFFLINE sources that the source quoted does actually support the content. Enthusiastic readers could use local libraries or online repositories such as newspaperarchive.com to check sources and that archive is also good for finding more. Your shareholding in the past seems to me to be irrelevant now and the only issue is the photos. If these were taken by you with your own camera, they can be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Stick to uploading images of encyclopaedic value, and you'll be fine. Articles only need a limited number of representative images. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:20, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

"The photos of the game farm I would have access to ..." implies you did not take the photographs yourself. Hence, "No" to your use of them. David notMD (talk) 13:37, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

As you can see from these replies, each correct but almost sounding contradictory, whether you can use the images in the article depends on their copyright status. Please see images for more information. David10244 (talk) 08:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your replies! I will take this into consideration. Oystersauce99 (talk) 20:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf

Who is Blaze wolf Despacito305276 (talk) 21:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Despacito305276, welcome to the Teahouse. Blaze Wolf is an editor here on Wikipedia. You can get in touch with them on their talk page if you have questions for them - it is at User talk:Blaze Wolf. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 21:47, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much I appreciate your assistance. Despacito305276 (talk) 21:00, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Blaze Wolf is me! My talk page is currently protected due to persistent vandalism and harassment from IPs, however if you have any questions feel free to ask them here. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:12, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Blaze Wolf. I have a question. How do I protect my page?Cwater1 (talk) 17:00, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cwater1: Hello Cwater! You can request page protection at WP:RFPP, however it most likely won't be accepted as I don't see any vandalism on your talk page or your userpage. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 17:02, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I saw this so I thought I would quickly ask. I was just curious. Thank you for the info though.Cwater1 (talk) 18:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Zelik family name

What part of Austrial Ottman did the Zeliks come from and are they Jewish background? 2601:240:D780:5FF0:0:0:0:5818 (talk) 06:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to a page of Wikipedia where people are free to ask questions about using Wikipedia. As for your question, you might ask it at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Humanities. -- Hoary (talk) 06:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Changes to entry being rejected

Hello. We work for the organisation we are trying to change as it contains basic factual inaccuracies (not subjective changes) about our name, which was changed a few years ago. How can I override these please? Also, how can I change the name of our entry's page? UWCAtlantic (talk) 12:51, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

This is the entry: Atlantic College UWCAtlantic (talk) 12:52, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

The title of the article is dependent not on what you choose to call it, but on what the majority of independent reliable sources call it. Even if the current name might be the new one, parts of your change are obviously incorrect because they refer to the previous history of the subject. As has been pointed out to you on your user talk page, because of your conflict of interest you should not edit the article yourself, but instead you can use the article talk page to suggest changes, backing up your suggestions with references to independent published reliable sources. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia has been a nightmare to use so far... just for your feedback. ISMORTONUK (talk) 13:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Where is the article talk page?? ISMORTONUK (talk) 13:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

At the top of the article there is a link which says "Talk". - David Biddulph (talk) 13:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you ISMORTONUK (talk) 13:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

You're welcome. As part of your learning curve you do need to read about conflict of interest, and about the mandatory declaration required from those engaged in paid editing. - David Biddulph (talk) 13:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@ISMORTONUK And please read edit requests. David10244 (talk) 08:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Signature causing issues

Hello Teahouse folks. The custom signature of Nilpriyo is somehow causing the "Reply" button to not work. Could someone please help them fix this?

Also it seems that their "Talk" link is misleading, since it goes to WP:Talk. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 23:44, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @MrsSnoozyTurtle and welcome to the Teahouse! Would you please provide an example? You can also message them on their talk page. Happy Editing! ‍ ‍ Helloheart ‍ ‍ 00:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello errr Helloheart :) Thanks for the welcome. Here is an example where the Reply button is missing after Nilpriyo's message: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:Titodutta#Help. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Here are two recent examples, [16] and [17], both of which do link to Talk rather than the editor's talk page. I suspect this is the result of manually adding (or editing) the signature rather than a faulty signature as some of the editor's other signatures do have the correct talk page link, and some have no talk link at all. I will post to the user's talk page. Meters (talk) 00:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I'll also add another one: [18]. Tails Wx 00:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Meters and Wx, much appreciated. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 00:52, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

MrsSnoozyTurtle, I think Nilpriyo is biased against the deletion of the article and trying to plead an "arrangement" for you... Tails Wx 00:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Tails Wx. Yes, it feels like they are trying a covert campaign to get me blocked. Their behaviour is quite odd for someone who has supposedly only been editing for less than two months. Regards, MrsSnoozyTurtle 09:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

A strange edit request

Hello all! Yesterday I came across an edit request like this Template_talk:2022_Russian_invasion_of_Ukraine_infobox#Extended-confirmed-protected_edit_request_on_23_January_2023, I have read it, but I cannot be sure what they want to change. Would anyone care to help? Lemonaka (talk) 09:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Small Q: can I leave this image of a polyhedron?

Hi, I am editing Compound of four tetrahedra and wouldn't mind leaving the picture I uploaded of the main uniform figure described in the article (uniform compound of four dyadic antiprisms UC₂₃), though it is not the general standard image used for polyhedron articles (usually they are images from Stella4D).

I am going to upload a different standardized image in a day or two, but was wondering if I could simply leave this one here, since some other articles use simpler images like the one I am using, though much less often. Radlrb (talk) 07:53, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Radlrb, I don't understand your question, and I don't know which of the four pictures in the article you're referring to. But I will say that I find the fourth one, a photograph, much easier to understand than the other three. I would like to see that photograph in the infobox in place of the image now there. Maproom (talk) 08:16, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

So, normally polyhedron pages have images like the one on the compound of three tetrahedra which contains little balls at the vertices of the figure, though not always.

Unfortunately, I cannot put that image inside there, because that is not an image of the figure being described (the infobox describes a uniform figure, whereas the picture is of a non-uniform figure).

I'll upload a different image for the main image being shown in the infobox, then. Are you unable to see the one I have there now clearly? Thank you for your help!

Radlrb (talk) 08:28, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I can easily see the image now in the infobox, but I find it much harder to interpret than the photograph. I see now that the article is about more than one thing known as "compound of four tetrahedra". It's not clear to me how many such things, nor which one is shown in each image. And the wikilink Robert Webb doesn't go where it claims. Maproom (talk) 08:36, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, normally in these articles you'll see that it can be hard to understand what is being spoken of if your background in polyhedral geometry is not strong. I don't think I need to express anymore than I have that all the images are about compounds of four tetrahedra. They are all images of compounds of four tetrahedra, the ones under the heading uniform are uniform compounds, while the photograph is one of a nonuniform compound, under the heading of Other compounds. The Wikilink for Robert Webb goes to the only Wikilink for Robert Webb's Stella software. I'll change that image though, tomorrow or the day after, I have to invest in the right program - it should be alright for the time being (1 or 2 views a day on average; at least an image is there). Thanks! Radlrb (talk) 08:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I think an animated GIF of one being constructed from its constituent tetrahedra would be interesting, or at least one that rotates. That tends to help make complex 3D shapes easier for humans to interpret than a static image. Can the software you're using to generate them make something like that easily? If not I'll see what I can knock up in Blender when I get home tonight! I think it could generate this procedurally. JeffUK 09:23, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Awesome! Please, feel free. Compound of twenty octahedra with rotational freedom has a nice movement between many images., but I think it is way too large and too grey, for most people to want to fiddle with. However, If you can make an animated gif of the non-uniform compound of 20 octahedra, that would be great. I need to get the right Stella software to generate what I want (just a little short on cash atm), with Antiprism (which is how the images for the uniform forms were generated), it is difficult to do (at least for me). Else, I think I can cook something up in a day or two. Oh, and there is one link where you can rotate the tetrahedra yourself, I forgot to mention (bottom-most external link), ty Jeff

Radlrb (talk) 09:41, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

When I see a mention of Compound of five tetrahedra, I immediately know, and can visualise, what is meant. It seems that Compound of four tetrahedra is much less well defined. It could mean any of several things. An article on it ought to explain what the various structures are, and give evidence that each has been so named. A section for each such structure would be a big help. Maproom (talk) 17:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Correct, that is also in part because the compound of five tetrahedra is immensely much more studied than the compound of four tetrahedra. I won't be able to generate as many images without possibly walking into OR territory, but I'll see what I can concoct that is acceptable from either being already published, or described generally otherwise somewhere else. This compound actually has never really been written about in a formal article journal aside from generalized equations that describe the infinite family of antiprisms that this family is part of. Check also the compound of three tetrahedra, you'll see it is essentially as developed as the article on the compound of four tetrahedra, minus some. It's at least a big improvement from here diff Radlrb (talk) 18:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey @Maproom, take a look at the article now, let us know what you think! Radlrb (talk) 02:55, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

This is much better! I really like the image in the infobox, it's so much better than what was there before (and it rotates at a sensible speed – most such animated images on Wikipedia rotate too fast to be easily understood). I've one comment. There's a section called "Uniform compounds", that gives a good clear account of one such compound, and then describes a class of compounds with an arbitrary angle, still uniform but with a smaller symmetry group (D_4h, I think). Are there any other uniform compounds of four tetrahedra? (My guess is that there aren't, but you don't mention it because you haven't found a proof). Just for my own interest – what is the convex hull of the compound found by Webb? I'm having difficulty visualising it. Maproom (talk) 09:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Right! It's like I am hallucinating. Yes, the image before was there for the moment, though I do have a likeness to it if it were larger, and after knowing what the figure looks like, it's a semi 2-dimensional rendering of the polytope at that angle, colored. The image there now though, is another universe of course, too (more palpable for most people, importantly). Do you like the top and side views? Correct, good point, I will add that Dihedrall symmetry, or if you'd like, please do so yourself, just check and make sure (I can too) at Uniform polyhedron compound (UC23 and UC22) and the values p, q and n. It should be D4h. There is one other nonuniform compound of interest, which is the compound of four tetrahedra whose vertex at their altitudes is common between all four tetrahedra. I will make that one now that I have Stella, I was waiting to have it. Uniform-wise, aside from the inifite of that one range, actually no. This is it, just two. Likewise for all compounds of tetrahedra, and of interest compounds of octahedra (as triangular antiprisms) analogously in their categories (both of these have for example, triangular faces and are antiprismatic. I will get back to you on the convex hull in a bit, hopefully! Radlrb (talk) 09:53, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Translation to a language

I want to improve my language and translation skills. So, I decided to translate articles to Papiamentu. Is it allowed to translate a Wikipedia article to another language? Gabpres4 (talk) 01:07, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Gabpres4. Is there a separate Wikipedia project for Papiamentu? This project, for example, is English Wikipedia. Is there a Papiamentu Wikipedia. If there is and you want to create some Papiamentu Wikipedia articles by translating some English Wikipedia articles, then you can do this but should follow the guidance given in WP:TRANSLATEUS. However, if Papiamentu Wikipedia exists, it may have some additional rules regarding editing exisitng articles or creating new articles, and you will need to ask about them on Papiamentu Wikipedia. Now, if you want to translate English Wikipedia articles for some other purpose, then you should also follow the guidance given in TRANSLATEUS, particularly if you plan to publish your translations in any way. The most important thing would be to make sure you properly attribute the original English Wikipedia article that you translate, and don't try to make it seem as if you're the creator of the original work. A translation of someone else work is a WP:DERIVATIVE work and there can be multiple copyrights involved when translating someone else's work. -- Marchjuly (talk) 01:35, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Página Prinsipal Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Suiiiii

according to Wikipedia Cristiano Ronaldo Suey scores 90.242.160.228 (talk) 10:58, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello IP editor. Welcome to the Teahouse. Do you have a question about editing a Wikipedia article, like that for Cristiano Ronaldo? I'm afraid your comment doesn't make any sense to me as it stands. Nick Moyes (talk) 11:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I am an originator, but nobody knows about it?

OK, I'm a clever sausage, I know that parents place their kids in the right places to develop their [my] potential or visibility to the wider world. But how does a shy and forgiving adult express the value that I have given to the entire world?

I am Garry Salter and I gave e-commerce to the world.

How do I tell my story? Nobody knows it. But I made it. I bought it to market. We made sales. We had amazing press. The world noticed. It was a groundbreaking moment.

I saw something that didn't exist and now it's commonplace. And I'm very proud of it.

Nothing is mentioned about this subject? There may be a latent claim, but honestly, nothing existed. Its worth punting the proposition for me, because I think I was the first to think about how everyone can sell on the internet, not just the silicon valley venture-capital-backed mega money startups.

The initial thought was how to buy proper bacon in America as a UK ex-pat?"

       {!CLOUD BUBBLE MOMENT!}
 "THEN WE CAN SELL THE REST ON THE INTERNET!"

"Socialism Man!... What about the rest of Us!"

That was me, our company was Cossax Software Limited, we were based in the UK. Circa 2000. I cannot find historical records on Companies House, and at the time the Law did not understand software as an aspect to 'patent', the intellectual property could only be copyrighted?!?!?!

So we wrote contracts, ((three inches thick, cossting many thousands of pounds Byfield was in on it ))...

I've been editing too much and gotten too precious. What do you think?ant

I am Garry. has anybody got anything that can help? Dude Level (talk) 02:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

E-commerce was invented significantly before 2000. Michael Aldrich is credited with developing it in 1979. The first e-commerce company was Boston Computer Exchange in the early 1980s. MrOllie (talk) 02:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Dude Level (Garry) and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have any questions about Wikipedia? If so, feel free to ask them here. Happy editing! ‍ ‍ Helloheart ‍ ‍ 02:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Per above and your Talk page, you appear to believe that you or your company are worthy of a Wikipedia article. Wikipedia has a process described at WP:YFA for how to create a referenced draft. First step: references. If there is nothing published about you or the company, then no potential for an article. David notMD (talk) 04:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Companies House keeps pretty thorough records. It would be very odd to not be able to find records there for a company that existed. David10244 (talk) 08:21, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

And the first Software patent was granted in 1962. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

FWIW, and I don't know if it helps much: sounds like this company, inaktive since 1999. [19]. One of the shareholders name is "Salter", as is the OP's name. --Maresa63 ^Talk 11:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Aasim ibn Abi al-Najud

11 days ago, I initiated a discussion at Talk:Aasim ibn Abi al-Najud, with no input so far. Should I be WP:BOLD and make the changes myself (that would be significant changes to the article)? How do I get more input to the conversation? The ⬡ Bestagon ^T/_C 06:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello The Bestagon, and welcome to the Teahouse. One way of getting more input is to look through the article's history, and look for editors who have contributed significantly to the article, and add to your message on the Talk page pinging them. (Note that you must add text containing the ping and sign it: pinging won't work if you try to add it to existing text.) Another way is by posting on the talk pages of suitable WikiProjects: the only one already in place on the talk page is WP:WikiProject Biography, but that seems a bit general to me, and I think you're not likely to get much interest. So I suggest posting at WT:WikiProject Islam. Don't start a new discussion there - post an invitation and link to your existing discussion.

Having said all that, you're perfectly entitled to be BOLD: if anybody disagrees, they can revert you and join the discussion.

Incidentally, you somehow managed to start your new discussion above the existing item, which is six years old, so I've moved it down. ColinFine (talk) 15:27, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Revision history

Why does Wikipedia keep a history of every single edit to every single article/page since the beginning of Wikipedia, apparently going back to the early 2000s? I really appreciate and was blown away by how meticulously everything here is recorded permanently, but my question is why? Gooze1989 (talk) 20:57, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Gooze1989. A slight correction: The very earliest edits in the first few months of Wikipedia used different software and have been mostly lost. The vast majority have been saved. There are many reasons. The free licenses requires that all authors be attributed, and this relate to copyright law. Edit histories allow administrators (and anyone else) to track patterns of vandalism and other forms of disruptive editing. Plus, maximum transparency is part of the Wikipedia culture. Cullen328 (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Backup copies of the earliest edits were found on SourceForge in 2010. You can learn more at History of Wikipedia. Cullen328 (talk) 21:48, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Gooze1989 As well as being very helpful in tracking and reverting vandalism (as Cullen328 has said), I would add that we also have a couple of 'External tools' available in the 'View History' tab that allows you to search for when specified text was first inserted into an article, or when it was last found within it. This is helpful when there are claims that someone has inserted text from another website. We can then use that tool to check whether it was, in fact, that way around, or whether the other website copied it from Wikipedia without attributing the source (which is part of our conditions for re-use). Matching that with the Wayback Machine's archives of some websites can also help. Thus, we can use these recorded versions to prove, avoid (or sometimes even defend against) accusations of copyright theft. To be honest, being able to view the history of edits made to an article are useful in so many ways that I don't think many experienced editors here would manage so effectively without access to it. Thanks for your question, and 'Welcome to Wikipedia'. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:55, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

It can also be great fun for journalists, see Conflict-of-interest editing on Wikipedia. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 23:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Also, the Creative Commons license being used for all content on Wikipedia requires attribution of authors, and keeping a history of contributions satisfies that requirement. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, remarkable nuggets may indeed be mined from histories. A recently noted example is this. -- Hoary (talk) 00:42, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm not at all sure he wrote that but who knows. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Given the context and the date, I think that it is about 99.9% sure that it was written by George Santos. Cullen328 (talk) 17:47, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

2 question

Question 1 I was looking at an article's history and I could not see I all of it the last edit looked like it was from 2017 even though I had edited it just a few days before. is that normal? question 2 how do I follow an article? Casper king (talk) 16:37, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Casper, and welcome to the Teahouse. For the first question, I don't understand why you think anybody is going to be able to help you if you don't tell us which article you are talking about!

For the second question, we don't have the concept of "following" an article, but you can add it to your Watchlist - on the desktop it's the "star" icon at the top right (in the default skin) and on the app "Watch" is an option on the 3-dots menu at the top right. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, the second answer was good. After some poking around I was able to locate the answer to the first question. Casper king (talk) 17:49, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

How to add descriptors

I have a third question how do you add those descriptor things in you bio? Casper king (talk) 16:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Your question is unclear. Do you mean Wikipedia:Userboxes? Take a look at that link. Shantavira|^{feed me} 17:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, that is it thanks. Casper king (talk) 17:50, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Footnote? Reference?

I'm so confused. I've made an edit to the article Curious George Goes to the Hospital. I have added there a link to an audiobook on Internet Archive, and I added a source using the IA link, which automatically added a formatted reference and placed it in (I think) both the Notes and the References sections. why is that? I've also noticed there already was a reference to a newspaper article, located in the Notes section. Should it be there? I'm quite confused about this all and Help:Footnotes is honestly so overwhelming haha.

What should I do? 3point1415 (talk) 15:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Pi, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's in both places because you put it there - or, more precisely, you added it to the text, which automatically puts in the section where the {{reflist}} template appears - usually "References", but in this article somebody has put it in "notes"; and you also added it to an existing entry in the "References" section. I would suggest removing the References section and its entry, and retitling the Notes section "References".

Having said that, one news story is not enough to establish that the book is notable (the citation to the book itself is not independent, so doesn't count towards notability), so the article is liable to get deleted unless somebody finds and adds some further substantial, independent, sources. (And I wonder whether even that story has significant coverage of the book). ColinFine (talk) 19:48, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Actually, now I look further, I don't believe that its being released as an audiobook is encyckopaedic (thousands and thousands of books are released in that way), and have removed that sentence and citation. ColinFine (talk) 19:56, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Help restart RfC?

Hi. I had an RfC going at WP:RSN but it got archived to Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Noticeboard/Archive_396#RfC:_9to5Google.com_reliability?. I thought I had extended it indefinitely, but apparently the bot thought not. Could someone help restart or extend it again, so it can continue and be formally closed as requested here: Special:Diff/1135674234? Thanks. -- Yae4 (talk) 21:04, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

"Magic" References

A while back, I asked about how to be better at fixing bare references.

I'm now curious about how reFill knows to use things like "auto#" in place of typing a reference out entirely and what I should be calling... whatever this is...

Also, are there standards for the labels that should be used?

DarklitShadow (talk) 22:40, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@DarklitShadow: Welcome to the Teahouse! Those are named references, a way cite the same source more than once on a page. GoingBatty (talk) 23:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Margaret Morse Nice Medal

Should the Margaret Morse Nice Medal page be merged with Wilson Ornithological Society? Therapyisgood (talk) 02:08, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Therapyisgood. I know little about ornithology except that it is fascinating and important. The current article about the medal includes only one reference, to the society that grants the medal, Wilson Ornithological Society. That article is also very poorly referenced. Google searches indicate that it is likely that both the society, which is almost 140 years old and publishes an academic journal about birds, and the award are probably both notable. The bottom line is that both articles need work, but perhaps merging might be the best solution. Merging without significantly improving the references would not be a good outcome. Cullen328 (talk) 05:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Curly quotes in citation title

Hello,

Would you leave quotation marks as curly or convert them to straight quotation marks if the title of the article you are citing has curly quotation marks? I'm thinking you would convert them as per MOS:CURLY, but I'm not sure.

Thanks, Purplemountainman^talk contribs 04:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Purplemountainman. I think that you have pretty much answered your own question. As the MOS says "straight" quotation marks, not “curly” ones and Quotation marks and apostrophes in imported material should be changed if necessary. Cullen328 (talk) 06:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Contents/A-Z index

Is Wikipedia the only one that is Contents/A-Z index? What about other sister projects? See example below. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Contents/A%E2%80%93Z_index Ffyyff (talk) 02:41, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Ffyff. I have been editing Wikipedia actively for almost 14 years and had never heard of that page until now. When I look at the talk page, there has been no serious discussion in a dozen years. I have no idea whether or how this page is maintained, but it looks to me like an irrelevant relic of Wikipedia's early years. I have no idea if any sister projects have similar pages, but the Teahouse is to discuss editing of the English Wikipedia only. Cullen328 (talk) 02:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Ffyyff: The alphabetic Special:AllPages is made and maintained completely automatically by the MediaWiki software which powers Wikipedia and our sister projects. The feature allows links like Special:AllPages/Xk to show pages starting at "Xk". Redirects are automatically shown in italics. The page Wikipedia:Contents/A–Z index is made by editors but the only thing the big box there does is to make such links to the already existing AllPages feature. Any wiki could easily make such an index page if they wanted. Wikipedia:Contents/A–Z index (Q3228080) shows three non-Wikipedia sister projects with a corresponding page but not in English. The underlying feature like wiktionary:Special:AllPages still exists whether or not the local editors have made an index to it. PrimeHunter (talk) 07:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

R U Alive ? Have U had a perfect Past ?

Ref:https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Village_pump#January_28 How much of your 'bad' past would u like to have plastered all over the web for the world to see ? How 'good' or 'bad' do we want Wikipedia to be? Please discuss at Village_pump. 60.240.196.168 (talk) 11:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

I dont understand? - From Dents (talk) 13:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Just because you don't like it, doesn't mean you need to fix it as the way you want it. - From Dents (talk) 13:19, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Are you Paul Hogan? doktorb _words^deeds 14:16, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

As one of Britain's greatest philosophers once said, "You can't always get what you want". David10244 (talk) 07:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

IP 60.240.196.168 is edit warring at Paul Hogan concerning whether a subsection on tax problems should be in the article or not. A discussion is taking place at the Talk page of the article, which is the only appropriate place. David notMD (talk) 14:09, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Table of contents (desktop version)

Hello all. How do you find the table of contents in whatever article you may be viewing when viewing Wikipedia in Desktop format (instead of mobile)? I don't know where it's at, and it has been a great help in the past to find content in the article easily. Many thanks, 63.248.183.70 (talk) 05:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Are you asking about a sudden change to Wikipedia's appearance? It is because the default skin has changed from the to the new Vector (2022) skin. If you would like to change back to the old one, you can, as a registered user, click on the

in the top-right corner and choose

Preferences. Once there, go to Preferences → Appearance → Skins →

Vector legacy (2010).
If you would like to leave feedback, you can do so at Wikipedia talk:Vector 2022. Cullen328 (talk) 06:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. The table of contents has migrated to a sidebar on the left once you scroll down enough. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Admin

Hello how do I become a admin? Coco152562 (talk) 06:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Coco152562. Spend a couple of years making many thousands of indisputably useful edits. Write at least a few policy compliant and informative new articles, and maintain them. Improve many other articles. Participate in the review of new articles and drafts. Be consistently helpful and useful. Revert vandalism and properly report disruption. Participate in "behind the scenes" parts of the encyclopedia in ways that show you have a solid understanding of Policies and guidelines, and that you are indisputably here to improve the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 06:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

You created an account today, and so far, everyone of your edits has been reverted. I recommend WP:TUTORIAL. David notMD (talk) 09:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Moving on from draft

Hi, We have drafted our page, how do we move it on to get it peer reviewed? I can see lots of third part companies offering to get it approved but would prefer to drive this ourselves. Phil HANTSAR (talk) 18:16, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Hampshire Search and Rescue - 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:18, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Phil HANTSAR: Hello Phil! First, I must ask, who is "we" referring to? Wikipedia accounts cannot be shared by multiple people. Second, I suggest you ignore those third party companies as they are all scams. Third, if this is about Draft:Hampshire Search and Rescue you do not have an AFC template on the page and also have no submitted it which I have done for you. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:21, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, just a clarification here, Did the user specifically ask for an AFC process? Draft articles do not need to go through AFC but can be uploaded directly on to the website. It seems presumptuous, not to mention misleading to take control of a user draft and submit it to AFC, without letting the user in question know the options available.Gumlau (talk) 09:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you Blaze. I could not see a button or a link to submit it so thank you for doing that for me. The us I refer to is the charity, we are not sharing an account. What is an AFC template ?, can you send me a link so I can read up about it please? Phil HANTSAR (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The afc template is the big yellow-ish banner now at the top of the draft, Blaze Wolf added that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:29, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Apologies, I tend to forget that newcomers may not know some of the more technical stuff here on Wikipedia. The AFC template I'm referring to is part of the Articles for Creation process which allows users to create and submit drafts in draft space to be reviewed and either accepted or declined by experienced editors. Specifically the template is {{AFC submission}}. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 18:30, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

At the risk of piling on, Phil HANTSAR: do you understand the purpose of references? You write certain qualifying members were honoured to be awarded the Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal in 2022, the medals being presented at a ceremony at the police training college at Netley in July 2022 by the Hon. Hugo Cubitt DL, with one citation that shows that there is such a thing as the Queen's Platinum Jubilee Medal, and the other that shows that according to thepeerage.com, Cubitt exists. Meither of these does anything at all to support the claim. (In addition, thepeerage.com appears on the list of self-published, and so unreliable, sources at WP:RSP#Self-published peerage websites) The point of a citation is so that a reader in Birmingham next week, or Buffalo next month, or Buenos Aires next year can, in principle check that what the article says is so. ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Right, @Phil HANTSAR, for the phrase "presented at a ceremony at the police training college at Netley in July 2022 by the Hon. Hugo Cubitt DL" you just need to specify where you got that information about the medal being presented. I'm sure you didn't make it up! Cheers. David10244 (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi David,

I was there and photos were taken but our press release was not taken up by the local media.

Thanks for your help Phil HANTSAR (talk) 22:19, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Phil HANTSAR Since the information about the medal and ceremony was not published by a reliable source that can be cited (so that other readers could verify the information if they wanted to), it cannot be used in the draft. Press releases, even when they do get published, also do not make good sources, since they are almost never independent of the subject of the article. The draft has many, many other assertions that are not backed up with inline citations. David10244 (talk) 08:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Phil HANTSAR See WP:TUTORIAL on how to add references correctly, and WP:N on what sources are required for an article to be accepted. However, afaict you have avoided WP:COPYPASTE problems, plus-points for that. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:27, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

copyright

Since coming to WP years ago, copyright has been driven home with no exemptions when it comes to policy, authorship, public domain dates, etc. Can someone please explain how a full movie made in 1957 Plan 9 from Outer Space be uploaded here at WP and not be in violation of copyright? Thanks. Maineartists (talk) 03:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists The movie is in the public domain because it was published between 1928 and 1977 without a copyright notice, hence why the movie was able to be uploaded in full. LilianaUwU ^{(talk / contributions)} 03:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists: More information is available at WP:PD and there's this helpful chart: File:PD-US_table.svg. Also, there are some exemptions. See WP:NFCC for when Wikipedia allows use of copyright material. RudolfRed (talk) 03:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I love that movie. I can't believe it didn't win any Academy Awards! David10244 (talk) 07:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@LilianaUwU. Really? Please provide sources to back this claim. This film has long been debated as to who owns the copyright to this film. According to IMDB "The film's actual copyright is 1957. It previewed as "Grave Robbers from Outer Space" at the Carlton Theater in Los Angeles on March 15, 1957." Furthermore, this is the information listed at www.copyright.gov:

Registration Number: PA-102-338 Title: Plan 9 from outer space / written, produced, directed by Edward D. Wood , Jr. Imprint: [s.l. : A D. C. A. release, 1959] Description: 1 videocassette (V H S) (79 min.) : sd., b & w ; 1/2 in. Note: Title on housing: Plan nine from outer space. Filmed under the title Grave robbers from outer space. Narrated by Criswell. Deposit includes screenplay (1 v.) CAST: Bela Lugosi, Vampira, Lyle Talbot et al.CRED: Director of photography: William C. Thompson; music: Gordon Zahler; film editor: Edward D. Wood, Jr. Claimant: acReynolds Pictures, Inc. Created: 1958 Published: 1May58 Registered: 23Apr81 Author on © Application: Reynolds Pictures, Inc., employer for hire. Miscellaneous: C.O. corres. Special Codes: 4/X/L

Also, "According to the U.S. Copyright Office database, the copyright is live and is owned by Reynolds Pictures." Currently the only online sources that state that this film is PD is Wiki-linked. WP is an encyclopedia, not a cinema. There is no reason, given the uncertainty of this film's copyright to provide the entire film for personal viewing. Maineartists (talk) 05:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists It looks as though you may be correct. The Wikimedia Commons file says it was sourced from youtube (at this link) but if you try the youtube link now, you'll find that they have removed it owing to a copyright claim. The file needs to be tagged for removal here also. Note, however, that the license note here on Commons gives a long justification for it being public domain. As I'm not a lawyer, I'm not going to make a judgement! Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:40, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mike Turnbull I do not believe a good 99% of editors making the decision re: copyright are lawyers here at WP. That being said, the lengthy license note is pure WP:OR and written with conjecture. Sources such as: COPYRIGHT NOTICE From Video-Cellar aren't the most reliable sources for WP. There was a section at the article on copyright in 2015 but was immediately removed per: policy WP:V. See Talk:Plan_9_from_Outer_Space#Copyright status unreliable. The license note took its "justification" verbatim from this section (now removed). I am in agreement that this file needs to be tagged for removal. Maineartists (talk) 14:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Maineartists I found it surprising that anything on Wikipedia would be "removed" and indeed they have not been. There is relevant material at Talk:Plan_9_from_Outer_Space/Archive_2 which also shows that there was a deletion discussion on Commons, which concluded "Keep". That's available c:Commons:Deletion requests/Files in Category:Plan 9 from Outer Space. This makes it much less likely the file will be deleted but you can, of course, make a new proposal at Commons: there's not much point continuing here in this thread. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft Declined

Hi, Please help me understand why my draft was declined. Dacreativebox (talk) 09:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

At User:Dacreativebox/sandbox. David notMD (talk) 09:26, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dacreative. Your draft was declined because it did not convince the reviewer that the topic is notable as Wikipedia defines that term, and that your draft appears promotional. I agree with that assessment. Cullen328 (talk) 09:44, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Big I Art Foundation Siliguri and Declined twice. The Foundation's own website used as a reference does not contribute to establishing Wikipedia notability. David notMD (talk) 15:42, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Mathematics composite numbers

mathematics composite numbers 41.115.20.148 (talk) 18:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. What is your question about editing and using Wikipedia? We have articles on Mathematics and Composite numbers. ColinFine (talk) 18:19, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

how would you continuing Composite numbers 41.115.20.148 (talk) 18:22, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I don't understand your question. What do you mean by "continuing"? ColinFine (talk) 18:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

WP:RM/Elapsed listings

Hi, I've tried in the past to have the elapsed listings (WP:RME) displayed on my user page, every attempt has failed; the entire WP:RM page ends up being displayed rather than the elapsed listings only or nothing at alll. Does anyone know how to have it displayed on the user page? Thanks. Jerium (talk) 18:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I think you can use {{#section-h:Wikipedia:Requested_moves/Current_discussions|Elapsed listings}} (Seems to work on my user page..) JeffUK 18:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

That worked, thank you very much. Jerium (talk) 19:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Deleting a draft

Is there a way to delete a draft? Another user moved my user page to a draft under my name, thinking that my user page was a draft for a different person that I’d put on my user page. I don’t appreciate having a draft under my name, and I left it for more than six months and it didn’t delete itself. I can’t find a way to delete a draft but I’d appreciate it being deleted, and I’m wondering if there is a way to do so? Thanks. DRYT.Motorsport (talk) 18:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, DRYTMotorsport. If you are the only author of the draft, you can request deletion by pasting {{db-author}} (just as you see it here, including the double curly brackets) anywhere on the page. ColinFine (talk) 19:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

National park

National park 41.115.20.148 (talk) 18:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have a question about Wikipedia regarding a national park? GoingBatty (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Can't save my edits to an article

Hi,

I have made a few edits to an article, but need to step away, and come back to editing later on. I can't however, save my changes. When I click on "Publish Changes", I see the "Save your changes" option, but I can't click it.

Please help.

Many thanks. Orenbn (talk) 19:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Orenbn, and welcome to the Sandbox. It is hard to know what to say when you won't tell us which article! ColinFine (talk) 22:03, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi ColinFine, thank you for your reply and question. I was editing this article - Business route, when I encountered the issue. In the meanwhile, I abandoned my edits and started again, completed editing the article, and published the changes. However, the question still remains as to how I can save changes I have made prior to actually publishing my changes, so I can leave and then come back to complete my editing work.... Orenbn (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Orenbn If you want to work on an edit that you think will take some time, you could write it out in your sandbox and then "Publish changes" will just save it to your sandbox. Then when you have finished the edit you can copy and paste it into the article. There is no other way AFAIK to save an edit in progress. 331dot (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Understood. Thanks very much. Orenbn (talk) 07:04, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

But if you go down the sandbox route as suggested by 331dot, you ought to check whether other edits have been made to the article during your time away from it. - David Biddulph (talk) 20:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Criticizing Wikipedias F and EF Scale color change

This isn't really a question, but i thought i would get this out there, and i really didn't know where else to put this, and this place is what came to mind.

A few months ago, Wikipedia changed the color of the Fujita and Enhanced Fujita scales. The most notable changes are to the EF4 and EF5 ratings, as they have both been replaced with a lighter color. This is mostly unnecessary, as every other tornado-related group or company uses the old colors (e.g. EF4 is red and EF5 is purple). Secondly, the colors don't really represent the significance of these tornadoes. For example, the 2021 Western Kentucky tornado was extremely powerful (mind you some people believed it should have been rated EF5), and yet after devastating multiple towns on a 165-mile track, the rating color is shown as a reddish orange, which is absolutely ridiculous in showing the power of that tornado.

I'll also say that EF5 tornadoes are badly misrepresented. Take a twister like the Joplin tornado. That thing was even more powerful, and despite literally shifting an entire hospitals foundation and sweeping multiple well-constructed and anchor-bolted homes off their foundations, the rating color is red. This does not show the tornados power very well, which is a problem with a tornado of that magnitude.

The EF3 tornadoes also had their color changed, but to a lesser extent that probably nobody will care about. I'd also like to talk with the person who brought up these new colors in the first place. Anyways, feel free to oppose me, as these are just my thoughts. Poodle23 (talk) 19:46, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Poodle, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not "Wikipedia" that changed it, but "a Wikipedia editor" - perhaps on their own initiative, or perhaps after a discussion with others. The best place to discuss this is probably Template talk:Infobox storm (I'm assuming it's the colour in the header of the infobox you're talking about); or else at WT:WikiProject Severe weather. Have a look through the archives of those talk pages - you might find a previous discussion; otherwise you can start a new one. ColinFine (talk) 20:01, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Poodle23 (talk) 20:03, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Poodle23: Last year there was some activity with colors mentioned at Module talk:Storm categories. Might have something to do with the above? DB1729^talk 20:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Found the guy who started it all. I sent him a talk page message, so now i guess i just play the waiting game. Poodle23 (talk) 21:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Poodle23, ColinFine, and DB1729: The colours have had to change, so that we can be accessible to various editors, who may have difficulties reading the colours because of health reasons (Cataract, Colour Blindness etc). As a result, the weather project is basically located inbetween a rock and a hard place as while people dont want them to change, we have been told that they have to change so that our articles can remain accessible to all. As a result, I applaud @Hurricane Noah: for all of his work so far on trying to get them changed. If you wish to discuss the colours or help us figure out which colours should be used, there is an ongoing conversation here.Jason Rees (talk) 21:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Lacks independent sourcing. - Need help!

Hi there,

Today I submitted my first article. The article was focused on my business. I did tons of research and thought I did everything correctly but within an hour I received notice article my was reviewed and not accepted. The reviewer said this:

"Lacks independent sourcing."

Draft:Bridgetown_Garden_Tools

All of my sources are independent so hoping I can get some guidance and help from this group! Thank you so much. Djconn (talk) 02:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Nope. Most of the content is what the company says about itself ("The initial vision for the company..."). All of that has to be removed. The company fails WP:NCORP. The three refs establish that the company exists and that it has a registered trademark, and describes a hoe. None of that has significant content ABOUT the company, published by people with no connection to the company. David notMD (talk) 02:43, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Given it is your business, your connection must be declared on your User page. David notMD (talk) 04:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Okay I think I did it right Djconn (talk) 02:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I've removed the unnecessary copy as suggested. Djconn (talk) 02:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Djconn "Independent sources" in the Wikipedia sense are defined here. David10244 (talk) 07:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Great thanks. I add some additional independent sources. Djconn (talk) 02:20, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

help

i have a article on my page and they said I made a mistake and like if someone can take a look at it if possible Michealscott2000 (talk) 14:55, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 You had a draft of the biography in your sandbox at User:Michealscott2000/sandbox and essentially the same draft has been reviewed and declined today at Draft:Yun Kobe. Among several issues with the draft is that it does not have reliable sources to back up the facts. Wikipedia is particularly strict when it comes to biographies of living people. You need to read WP:CITE carefully: we don't use external links within article text, for example. There are other helpful links in the decline notice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Michealscott, and welcome to the Teahouse. As well as Mike Turnbull's comments, I suggest you look at your first article, WP:BACKWARD and NCREATIVE ColinFine (talk) 15:14, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 Yes, please delete the content of that page before an administrator deletes the entire page for not being the appropriate place to create a draft article. If the version is more up-to-date than the one in your sandbox, by all means copy it over. But make getting rid of it from your userpage a priority, please. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:34, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

oh okay .I understand

do you mind taking a look at it and see which have to take off plz Michealscott2000 (talk) 15:37, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Per the reviews and the comments at Draft:Yun Kobe, remove all hyperlinks from text, create reliable source references, remove promotional wording. David notMD (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 I think that Nick Moyes may have misunderstood where you located the drafts. The only inappropriate place would have been your own User Page but I don't think you have ever placed contents there. I noticed you had used your sandbox (that's fine) as well as Draft:Yun Kobe and I now see that you have yet another version at User:Michealscott2000/Sample page. Creating subpages for you own purposes is allowed but it is unwise to make multiple drafts as you and others will be confused about which one is to be reviewed. I suggest you incorporate everything useful at Draft:Yun Kobe and blank all other subpages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Yes, my mistake - a clumsy error. Sorry Michealscott2000. Nick Moyes (talk) 23:47, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Example of unacceptable language: "He is commonly regarded as one of his generation's most influential hip-hop artists and is often cited as one of the greatest rappers of all time." And "This talented artiste keeps showing he is a born talent, with positive vibes, lyrics, and rap skills." David notMD (talk) 15:48, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

okay i understand i remove my sandbox now so u mind checking see if i did well and just did the yunkobe draft Michealscott2000 (talk) 15:49, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michealscott2000 The version you just re-submitted had no citations at all and hence has immediately been declined. It is mandatory that you provide a citation for everything written. I have checked and can see that some of what you have written came from this webpage. It uses a cropped version of the image you have uploaded to Commons as being your own work. Please can you indicate what your relationship to Kobe is and whether you have a confict of interest? Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

so yun Kobe is a friend and musician and that page is mine also that why i use that so please if you can help me with the right one be nice please i took off the ref and ext all so please Michealscott2000 (talk) 16:24, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I think the best course of action here, to save your time and Wikipedia volunteers' time, is to simply abandon the draft. If Yun Kobe is truly notable, someone unaffiliated with him will come along, notice the news coverage, awards, or something else in line with WP:NMUSICIAN, and create the article.

If you truly wish to continue, you still have not added references, the tone of the draft is too promotional and unencyclopedic, and there might be copyright issues mentioned above. Fix those. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

okay so let say if you were to write it how will do that because i am the only one he want me to or asking if i can and i try .he has 5 award post on different website .can i get ur email so we talk more about it if we have to pay we will Michealscott2000 (talk) 16:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Michealscott2000, you should simply list the reasons why he is notable, why he meets the criteria for WP:NMUSICIAN or WP:GNG, at Draft talk:Yun Kobe. A reviewer will see this and will decide if the explanation is sufficient. I am not an AfC reviewer.

It is impossible to 'pay' for a Wikipedia article. You can pay someone to write an article, but in the end, notability needs to be demonstrated and you cannot artificially create it. If you want to hire someone to write a Wikipedia article for you, be very careful of scams. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

So please can you help me with it Michealscott2000 (talk) 16:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Micheal, a whole load of people have given you help above, in the form of advice on what to do and what to read. It is unlikely that anybody here is going to work on your draft.

My advice, beyond what I've already given, is to put aside the very difficult task of creating a new article, and spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles.

Judging from what you have just written above, your purpose here is to promote your friend. Please understand that promotion or any kind is forbidden in Wikipedia. If Kobe meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then there may be an article about him, but it will not belong to him or to you, it will not be controlled by him or by you, and it should be based almost entirely on what people wholly unconnected with him have chosen to publish about him - good or bad - not on what he says or wants to say about himself. Please see An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 17:05, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

This essay is a very good read Wikipedia:Writing_Wikipedia_articles_backward; If you're writing the content then going off to find sources to support what you already believe to be true, you're writing the article backwards. Once you're at this point, just 'Adding references' is not a good way to proceed. You need to start and end with what reliable sources say. JeffUK 18:58, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to be authors or co-authors. Do not resubmit until you find valid references, and then delete all content not confirmed by those references. David notMD (talk) 03:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Partial italics in article title

How are italics achieved for one word in an article's title (without italicising the entire title) as is done in the Nassau-class battleship article? Thanks – Olympian ^loquere 13:12, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Olympian. {{DISPLAYTITLE:''Nassau''-class battleship}}. It's often done via a template. {{italic title|string=Nassau}} is a general template for it. Some ship templates have code to analyze the page name and automatically try to guess which part to italicize. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:34, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you, @PrimeHunter! – Olympian ^loquere 20:41, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter To be clear, does WP:MOS support italicising transliterated/romanised terms in an article title? For example, the Baku uezd (whose term uezd is romanised from Russian: уезд). Thanks. – Olympian ^loquere 04:38, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Olympian: I'm not sure how to treat uezd but WP:ITALICTITLE says: "foreign phrases are italicized both in ordinary text and in article titles". PrimeHunter (talk) 05:07, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Citation template

How does one make a template for a particular reference's citation, for example {cite encyclopedia} or {cite eb1922}? – Olympian ^loquere 05:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Olympian, take "cite encyclopedia" for example. The template is already made. Read about it in Template:Cite encyclopedia/doc, which explains how to use it. If there's anything in that page that you don't understand, feel free to ask about it here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:00, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary Sorry, I used a poor example with "{cite encyclopedia}", what I'm trying to do is make a template specific to one commonly appearing source (Kavkazskiy kalendar), so it would appear something like {kavkazskiykalendar|1914|p=123}. Hope that explains it. Thanks, – Olympian ^loquere 12:59, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Olympian: First, see Help:Template. Then you could go to Template:Cite EB1922, click "Edit source", and copy the wikitext. Then go to Template:Cite Kavkazskiykalendar, paste the text, and tweak it accordingly until it works the way you want. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:39, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Thanks for your help, I made several template citations for pasting into the bibliography section of articles (e.g. template:Kavkazskiykalendar1917. My question is: is it acceptable for all sources to be made into a template so that they can be consistent across Wikipedia, or are template sources generally frowned upon? Thanks! – Olympian ^loquere 04:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Olympian No, it would not be acceptable for ALL sources to be made into a template - only those that would be frequently used. GoingBatty (talk) 05:09, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Content review - rejected updates

Hello everyone, I'm Lucie, and I work for a company with a Wikipedia page. Unfortunately, most facts and figures are outdated (since 2016). I submitted new content today, and it got rejected. Can someone help me review it and tell me what should be changed? Thank you. LucieG-PR (talk) 14:54, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Lucie, and welcome to the Teahouse. Thank you for making the declaration of your conflict of interest; however, I'm afraid that is not enough. You are a paid editor, and you must declare that - see that link.

Then please read PSCOI. In short you should not edit Beretta Holding at all, but should instead make edit requests on its talk page. It is helpful to make them as precise as possible, and to include sources for any information you want to introduce. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Looking over the edits you made it is clear that you, like most people, have a fundamental misunderstanding of what Wikipedia is. Wikipedia is what reliable sources say about a company, not what the company wants to say. You edited that article to read like an advertisement. Wikipedia is supposed to be neutral. Esolo5002 (talk) 20:31, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@LucieG-PR It looks like your edits were reverted. I removed a bit more puffery after that. It doesn't read too badly now, but Lucie, please follow ColinFine's advice and propose updates to the article. An editor will consider each of your proposed changes, check the references you supply, and make the edits if appropriate. Be sure to follow the steps at the link Colin gave. It's pretty straightforward.

We often tell editors that this is not "your company's Wikipedia page"; instead, it is Wikipedia's article about a company -- and of course you might have an affiliation with that company.

If you enter the edit requests, and they are backed up with sources, the changes you seek will probably be made. David10244 (talk) 07:54, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi David,

Thanks a lot for your positive and kind answer! LucieG-PR (talk) 06:14, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

'like most people'... LucieG-PR (talk) 06:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Edit Kalamazoo River oil spill

Can someone correct the article; it lists the spill as occurring near Grand Rapids Minnesota. It Occurred south of Grand Rapids Michigan, near Marshall Michigan, Battle Creek Michigan, and Kalamazoo Michigan MKuiper269 (talk) 21:23, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@MKuiper269 Welcome to the Teahouse. Thanks for your concern over the accuracy of an article (Kalamazoo River oil spill). Please would you post you concern on the talkpage of that article (see here), citing a reliable source that supports what you say. If you're able to suggest the precise wording that you would like to see it changed to, that will really help a lot.

To call attention to your post, you may, if you wish, follow the guidance at WP:EDITREQUEST to ensure someone's attention is drawn to it. Otherwise it could be some while before another editor interested in that article spots your post - as it doesn't look like an article with heavy traffic. I hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MKuiper269, and welcome to the Teahouse.

Are you the person who made this edit to Kalamazoo River oil spill earlier, before creating your account? The reason that you did not see the change in the article is that you did not edit the text of the article, but the title of the source. I have reverted your change, because the source https://www.grandrapidsmn.com/opinion/happy-anniversary-the-largest-inland-oil-spill-in-u-s-history-happened-in-minnesota/article_2ade2706-004f-11e7-9023-2b31a01741a6.html is quite clearly titled "Happy Anniversary: The largest inland oil spill in U.S. history happened in Minnesota", and Wikipedia works on the basis of what the reliable sources say: see WP:V.

If you think that the Herald Review was wrong, then you'll need to find other reliable published sources that say differently, and then argue the case on the Wikipedia article's talk page. That, or get the Herald Review to publish a retraction. ColinFine (talk) 22:12, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@MKuiper269 I believe the parenthetical statement you're concerned with is talking about a different spill, not the spill of the article. To paraphrase, "This resulted in one of the biggest spills in US history (the actual largest was in Minnesota)." HerrWaus (talk) 22:51, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Correct, and the first state mentioned in the article being Minnesota, not Michigan, is evidently not as clear as it could be. I've added the location to the first sentence, but left in the parenthesis (it seems relevant enough, it a little tangential, maybe it should be a 'See Also') JeffUK 09:03, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Difference

What's the difference between Wikipedia:Sandbox and Draft:Sandbox? Gooze1989 (talk) 17:31, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Gooze1989. There is no real difference. They are both places for short term testing purposes. Both are cleared out regularly by bots and human editors. Neither are intended for long term work. Cullen328 (talk) 18:11, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 The Draft:Sandbox says this: "To edit this sandbox, you can either edit the source code ("Edit source" tab above) or use VisualEditor ("Edit" tab above)."

But it's not true. There is no "Edit" tab above. Do you think it's worth getting the text clarified? If so, where would I post this? Thanks. David10244 (talk) 07:06, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

David10244, I rarely use the VisualEditor, so I cannot provide advice about its numerous problems. My personal philosophy is that the Wikimedia Foundation should not roll out any new software versions unless they are as fully functional as the "source code" desktop site. But the WMF keeps cranking out less functional software, presumably to keep coders employed who have failed to meet their goals after years and years of effort. It is 2023 and there is still not a fully functional WYSIWIG interface that supports productive, collaborative editing. Very sad but who can stop a spending juggernaut with hundreds of millions of dollars in the bank? Cullen328 (talk) 07:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 I agree with your statement about having a fully functional WISYWIG editor. Other sites can do this, and it's not a new, unsolved problem. And there's no lack of money, except it's mostly being socked away. After lurking here and reading "backstage" stuff at en:wp for a couple of years, it's clear from the software development debates that the volunteer community should control which things are worked on by the WMF developers, rather than supplying a "wish list". David10244 (talk) 11:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 And ny earlier point was that the instructions given are incorrect -- there is no "edit" tab for anyone who has not customized their sk8n. David10244 (talk) 12:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft: zr saimun

write an article about living person named zr saimun unfortunately the submission was declined. 2A00:23C5:9198:A901:D1D1:6DCE:CB36:66B2 (talk) 23:36, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

You copied the article Amal Clooney and changed it slightly. The references link to the Clooney page. There is no evidence in the article that Z R Saimun even exists. This appears to be a hoax article. If such a person is real, erase everything there, read Help:Your first article and find references, then start again. StarryGrandma (talk) 00:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

For the love of all things Wikipedia will someone please Speedy delete Draft:ZR Saimun. David notMD (talk) 02:35, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

David notMD, I have made this fervent wish of yours come true. (For those who might be wondering what this could be about, here's a representative sample: Amal has three siblings—one sister, Tala, and two half-brothers, Samer and Ziad, from her father's first marriage.This is a great lesson Europe has to offer…That we have today turned towards India's hoary past and have set our selves to glean rich resources from it is unquestionably the outcome of the new educative influence of Europe.) This is the third deletion of a concoction titled Draft:ZR Saimun; and if the first and second had been more recent I'd have salted the thing. Oh, and David notMD, I infer that you're not an admin. Time for you to fix that. -- Hoary (talk) 11:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Not, and no desire to be. Here at Teahouse I am more akin to that dog that ranges ahead of the hunters with shotguns, then freezes to a still point to indicate birds on the ground, ready to be flushed into the air. David notMD (talk) 15:25, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Great visual. David10244 (talk) 12:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Yugur peoples in western China, Xinjiang, just in general more information on them?

Hello!

I have been trying to read a bit more about the Yugur peoples, and I'm having trouble finding any resources for the History and culture of the Yugur peoples, not to be confused with the Uyghurs. Any resources or help is appreciated, thanks!

(also, History of the Uyghur people is a messy article and if anyone knows what are some first steps to clean it up that would be great) 98.59.80.64 (talk) 08:30, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

I can't tell if you're talking about the Yugurs or Uyghurs. Look in the #References, #External links, and #Further reading sections (if they exist) and you may find useful material. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:15, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

You can also ask for more info at the Wikipedia:Reference_desk, probably under Humanities. Someone may suggest some books, etc. Then you can certainly help improve the article, along with enriching your own knowledge. David10244 (talk) 12:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

How to open a Simple wikipedia

get of link to https://simple.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page and go now to Simple wikipedia 122.52.84.177 (talk) 02:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! You could try [[:simple:Main Page]] to generate simple:Main Page, or a piped link like [[:simple:Main Page|Simple Wikipedia Main Page]] to generate a link like Simple Wikipedia Main Page. Hope this is what you're looking for. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:45, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP user. Note that the template {{ill}} works with simple English. So you could have Prime Minister of New Zealand [en-simple; fr] for example, linking to the simple and the French versions of Wikipedia as well as the English article. See my source code for the way to achieve this. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I'm working on translating some articles in Portuguese. Wikipedia says: "This tool is limited to extended confirmed editors"

The question is: How can I become a extended confirmed editor? Goliv04053 (talk) 20:22, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goliv04053: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. To become an extended confirmed editor, you need to have made at least 500 edits and an account that is at least 30 days old. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Goliv04053. If you are fluent in both English and Portuguese, you can translate articles without using a tool. Please read WP:TRANSLATE and WP:TRANSLATEUS. Attribution is a legal requirement. Cullen328 (talk) 21:34, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

I am fluent in Portuguese and English but use the translation platform as an aid. On the platform I can look at both articles at the same time, work and adapt the translation. Furthermore, the platform helps me translate faster by copying the complete original text and I make adjustments and the translations myself or if I have problems understanding a word or something I use a translator and correct the translation if it sounds and look strange or bad. Goliv04053 (talk) 21:42, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goliv04053 In my opinion, it's unfortunate that you can't use the tool. I think the restriction is there to ensure that translators have a good amount of experience. It sounds like you know what you are doing.

I thought I read somewhere that EC can be granted in certain cases, before 500 edits. To the other hosts, is that true, and would it be a good idea? David10244 (talk) 07:11, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Goliv04053: Assuming you want to translate articles from Portuguese into English, you might request an early grant of ECP via Wikipedia:Requests_for_permissions#Extended_confirmed. Given that you have a clearly-articulated need and a reasonable amount of experience on pt-wp, I think you have a good chance to get it. At the very least, that would not be a frivolous request. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 11:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for that info, @Tigraan. I hope @Goliv04053 can be approved. It might help to refer to this discussion, in your request. David10244 (talk) 12:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I sent a request today. Wikipedia:Requests for permissions/Extended confirmed Goliv04053 (talk) 14:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Help on my Draft

Hello. I'm trying to submit my article once again, but I want to ask for help before I do it and, maybe, get declined again. The issues seems to be the reliable sources. I've tried adding more so every statement has claims, but I don't know if I could be missing something important.

The article is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Universidad_Modelo

I would appreciate any help, as this is the first article I've tried to submit and it's not impossible I overlooked some sort of mistake. If there's any tip of suggestion of how it could improve as an article, I'd also greatly appreciate it. Either way, thank you for reading. TheXaton (talk) 15:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

In general, when there is an issue with reliable sources, it isn't the quantity of sources being called out, but the quality of the sources. For a large (but far from exhaustive) list or sources and which ones are allowed and which aren't, please see WP:RS/P. I hope this helps! - UtherSRG (talk) 15:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Gevi Movie article Creation

Hi Team,

We are trying to create an article in Wikipedia regarding our film which is to be released in theatres soon, we submitted the draft for approval. Due to some reasons it has been rejected can the team help us in creating the Wiki page for our Movie Gevi.

Thanks Gevi Movie (talk) 15:55, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Gevi Movie You must A) change your User name (see Comment at the draft); B) you must declare your paid status on your User page (see your Talk page and WP:PAID); C) it was Declined, which is not as severe/final as Rejected. Lastly, until the movie is released and reviewed, and the reviews used as references, probably WP:TOOSOON to have a draft approved by a reviewer. David notMD (talk) 16:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

i am buisness man in uae

I am a indian Buisness Man Buisness Setup In UAE 2015 Steel Trading Buisness Iam here In UAE Job Purpose But UAE My LIfe Line In Change Steel Trading Group Shams Al Madina Steel Group UAE No 1 Steel Trading Company in middle east All kind of structural steel items sale Rajeev saluja (talk) 12:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Well, Rajeev saluja, if you have a question about using Wikipedia, then you can ask it here. -- Hoary (talk) 12:34, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Rajeev saluja Wikipedia is not a place to advertise your company. That would best be done at your social media of choice. Club On a Sub 20 (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

And I am a retired software engineer in Yorkshire. Welcome to the Teahouse, Rajeev

Like most of the people on this planet, I do not meet Wikipedia's criteria for WP:notability, so there is not, and will not be, a Wikipedia article about me (even though I am mentioned in one article). Do you meet those criteria Rajeev? ColinFine (talk) 16:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

What is considered an acceptable edit to become autoconfirmed

Hello All,

My apologies for the newbie question - but I was wondering what level of editing do I need to perform for an edit to be considered one of the 10 towards auto-confirmation. For example, is simply adding a single comma to an article considered a valid edit or is there some form of minimum work that needs to be done?

I ask, because I found myself editing an article yesterday, and I simply did not have time to continue. I did quite a bit, so I'm pretty sure its valid, but it got me wondering...

Many thanks, Orenbn (talk) 07:29, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Orenbn. If an editor's work comes under scrutiny, then the contexts of their edits will be examined. A hypothetical "new" editor who makes ten minor "comma" edits and then immediately plunges into making controversial edits on controversial topics is likely to be seen as trying to "game the system" to qualify to push a specific point of view. Editors are frequently blocked for this pattern of behavior. On the other hand, an editor who edits cautiously at first and with increasing confidence as time goes by, trying as they learn to comply with Wikipedia's norms, will be welcomed with open arms. Cullen328 (talk) 08:09, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Many thanks @Cullen328, I believe I understand. Orenbn (talk) 00:00, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Sometimes an article really needs a comma! David10244 (talk) 12:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

-)) Couldn't agree more. Orenbn (talk) 18:59, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

entry change/title change

I am trying to change the name of the article since our congregation has changed its name. I don't know how to change the title. Unitarian Church in Westport. We are no longer a church, we are The Unitarian Universalist Congregation in Westport. I made that change in the text but don't know how to change the title. ENCliff (talk) 20:02, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hiya ENCliff and welcome to The Teahouse! You do that via a page move. However, we have some strict policies on this. The primary one is WP:COMMONNAME - we care about what the entity's most common name is, not what it's official name is. Currently, the article has the correct title given this policy. You can look at how to request a page move at WP:RM. - UtherSRG (talk) 20:25, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Why was my edit reverted?

I made an edit to the movie Z (2019) where instead of the one line movie "plot", I wrote out the entire plot to the movie. However, it was reverted as not being "constructive" when literally adding the ENTIRE plot is constructive. Many other movies have the entire plot. I'm confused. Iamglory (talk) 22:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@Philipnelson99: Could you please answer this question? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:11, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Iamglory, and welcome to the Teahouse. It can be discouraging when that happens. But it's the way Wikipedia works: it's edited by thousands of editors, each with their own view on what an article should say, and sometimes different understandings of what Wikipedia's policies mean.

So, when your edit gets reverted, this is not "Wikipedia" saying your edit is unconstructive: it's one particular editor, in this case Philipnelson99, who didn't think your edit was helpful. The thing to do now is to engage in a discussion with him: maybe you'll persuade him your edit was good, maybe he'll persuade you that it wasn't helpful, and maybe you'll come to a compromise. So, start a discussion on the article's talk page, maybe you won't be able to agree, and then there are ways to go further and involve other people. See WP:BRD for more about how this works. ColinFine (talk) 23:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Iamglory. According to MOS:PLOT, a plot summary should be "succinct" and no more than 700 words. Your summary is way too long and way too detailed. Cullen328 (talk) 23:20, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328, I've answered the editor's question below with the same. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @Iamglory, I reverted it as nonconstructive. MOS:PLOT says plot summary length should be written relative to the size of the other section of the article. You added a plot section that was nearly 7 times more content than what was in the article to begin with, that's why I reverted it as nonconstructive. I hope that helps. Philipnelson99 (talk) 23:23, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

To be more specific, per WP:FILMPLOT, film plot summaries should be between 400 and 700 words - so the previous plot of 12 words was far too short, but equally, your summary of 4275 words was far too long - we need a happy medium - Arjayay (talk) 23:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

This makes sense. Now I understand. Thanks guys! Iamglory (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Taj Mahal

I read the Wikipedia insight on the Taj Mahal and was confused. It says the Emperor was born in 1628. Then the construction of the building was commissioned in 1632 after his wife died in 1631 giving birth to their 14th child. I'm usually pretty fair at math. But this has me puzzled. 2603:6010:210B:6FD6:F0ED:BC7F:158D:EC3E (talk) 17:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

The emperor was born in 1592, but the article states when his reign began, in 1628. – dudhhr^talk _contribs (he/they) 17:23, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Specifically, Taj Mahal says: "It was commissioned in 1631 by the Mughal emperor Shah Jahan (r. 1628–1658)". I see a dotted line under "r." to indicate there is hover text: "reigned". PrimeHunter (talk) 20:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Enforcing Community Guidelines, Terms of Use

It has always been so impressive to see how well the larger community and/or admins moderate the content which violates the community guidelines. I assume that process is quite time consuming for the various people involved, between the vast uploads, pages, complexities in determining if content is violative, and across the many languages. There are various software solutions which help make that effort more efficient. I was wondering if this platform has any automation to this problem set, or if it is done manually by admins and the general user populace? Max, Not Bill (talk) 00:37, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Max, Not Bill: Hello Max! The answer is sort of. For vandalism we have User:ClueBot NG which works pretty good for extremely obvious vandalism. I know there are some other bots that handle images, but there's no bots that handle images. Generally things are not automated here because of the varying amount of stuff that can be vandalism and since there are actual humans here, the risk of a false positive is high. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:45, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey thanks for the response Blaze, very interesting. Do the bots also assist in flagging the harmful content of repeat offenders? I read that either the Wikimedia Community of admin can block or ban user accounts. How do you keep track of those persons? Max, Not Bill (talk) 01:13, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Max, Not Bill: No problem. Usually no they don't, although I wouldn't be surprised if that's partially how ClueBot NG functions. The answer to "How do you keep track of those persons?" is it depends. If they're an LTA (Long term abuse) then we used to create LTA pages on them so users would have information on how they function and what their edits might look like. IF they've been blocked and have created alt accounts to get around their block hen those are usually kept track of at Sockpuppet investigations pages. There are some other processes in which we keep track on users who have been blocked/banned (mainly the Arbitration committee), however most of the time after a user is blocked they either request an unblock or never return so there's usually no need to keep track of them. If a user has been blocked previously their blocks are recorded in their block log. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 01:19, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Hey Blaze, thanks for your candid responses. Do you think the admin community would benefit from some form of platform to manage the efforts you mentioned? Some kind of automated workflow system to become more efficient? And Cheers to your retirement (whenever that is in the near future)!!!! Max, Not Bill (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Max, Not Bill: Hello again Max. I honestly don't think so due to the intricacies of the project and the varying situations in which someone might be blocked. I don't think it would be wise to trust an automated system to block vandals for vandalism because if there's a false positive then it creates a lot of work and can potentially hurt the project by making people scared to edit. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 16:09, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf The answer is always sort of, right? David10244 (talk) 07:59, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244: Mostly yes. There are some things that are for sure, but automation isn't one of them. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 13:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@Blaze Wolf: retirement? —usernamekiran (talk) 21:29, 30 January 2023 (UTC)
@Usernamekiran: What about it? ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 21:35, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Draft Submission Reply

Hi, I have been working on a page: Draft:Truescope and have gone back and forth with a few edits etc. however I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions on what can be done to improve it? Techora (talk) 23:18, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Techora and welcome to the Teahouse! This is what I see after a quick skim:

I would rename the "Features" section, since that makes it sound like an advertisement.
The sources seem a little bit questionable to me. Are there any others you can use?
"Truescope partnered with Dataxet to operationalise its Singapore business and Fuseworks in New Zealand"- reword this to maybe "In ____ (when?), in the intent of putting its Singapore business and Fuseworks in New Zealand into operation, Truescope partnered with Dataxet, a ..... company. (what kind of company is Dataxet?)"
"Founded by John Croll and Michael Bade, Truescope is headquartered in Sydney, Australia, with additional offices in New Zealand, Singapore and the US. - This seems fine
"In 2022, it was announced leading venture capital firms Investible and Jelix Ventures led Truescope’s $6.2 million seed round, with the funding to support the company’s international expansion plans in the US."- Change maybe to "In 2022, it was announced by ____ (whom?) that a venture capital firm, Investible, and Jelix Ventures (who are they?) had led Truescope's $6.2 million seed round, with funding to support plans to expand the company into the United States."
The lead needs to be cited.
Overall, the article reads like an advertisement. It'll need more cleaning up.

I'd like any other editor input. Hope this helps! Happy Editing -- ‍ ‍ Helloheart ‍ ‍ 23:36, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Techora: Hi there! I see that most of your edits have been about Truescope, and that another editor posted about conflict of interest on your talk page. I made some layout tweaks and updated some of the references. The first two references are from the same day with the same quotes, so these seem like rehashed press releases. The other references seem to be of similar quality. I hope you can find independent reliable sources that provide significant coverage of the company to improve the draft. GoingBatty (talk) 04:17, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

There's only half a sentence on what the company's products do. More on that would be more relevant than its history and its fund-raising. Maproom (talk) 08:32, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @Techora, fund-raising information doesn't tell the reader much, if anything, about why a company is notable. I recommend that you remove this. It's also quite boring data, IMO. David10244 (talk) 15:16, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @David10244, @Maproom, @GoingBatty and @Helloheart. Much appreciated. Will look into all thoughts and suggestions. Techora (talk) 21:43, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ryu Si-won & BLP?

I'm trying to improve the article Ryu Si-won, and there's been an edit on there since December ~~of last year~~ of 2021 made by an IP. It just added the sentence "[Ryu] was convicted of stalking his wife (now ex wife) in 2013" in the lead section. It is true that Ryu was convicted of this offense (see this link), but 1. I'm not sure this needs to be in the lead section and 2. The source provided for the claim has nothing to do with it (it's an article about a Japanese album release by Ryu, IIRC). I've been hesitant to delete it without adding my own section about it, though, because I'm scared I'll start an edit war or be accused of removing it because I'm his fan (I'm not) if I just delete it. But the issue regarding him and his wife is complicated, so it'll take time making my own section.

Still, Ryu Si-won is a living person, and criminal records are contentious information. Citing the biographies of living persons policy, is it safe to remove the edit without adding a better section about it?

(I'm not sure if this is the place to ask, I'm not new to Wikipedia but I'm new to this big editing stuff. I just had a question to ask, and this is the only place I know where to ask questions...) Wuju Daisuki (talk) 12:28, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Wuju Daisuki, the first place to bring up the matter is Talk:Ryu Si-won. If a problem persists, then the next place to ask is probably WP:BLPN; however, before doing so, please digest what's said at the top of that page. -- Hoary (talk) 12:41, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Since it's not a very seen page, I'm not sure if it'll get a reply. Still, I'll try bringing it up there. Wuju Daisuki (talk) 13:12, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

That's a good message you placed there, Wuju Daisuki. In your place, I'd now wait one week; and then, if there's still no response (which is indeed likely), put a brief message up on WP:BLPN mentioning your question on the talk page and inviting people to comment on that talk page (rather than on BLPN). -- Hoary (talk) 22:04, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

December of the year before last, not last year. - David Biddulph (talk) 12:44, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

editing/review

Hi Im new here, i think its worth to write about this organisation, can you help me to check/review the draft it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Zo_Indigenous_Forum Pangkhua (talk) 21:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Pangkhua: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. I'm not a reviewer but I'll tell you that no reviewer will accept it as is because it is blatant advertising for this group. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:54, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Pangkhua, and welcome to the Teahouse. Please understand 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) 22:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

those d*ng unsigned comments

Just to be sure. Is it a good idea to add the unsigned comment template whenever one of those mild inconveniences pop up?

If I haven't been using everything wrong, that would involve tracking down who said it and when, but that should be a small price to pay for having the reply button. cogsan (talk) 20:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san: User:SineBot normally handles that, although there are some cases it won't sign. You can see more details on that bot's user page. RudolfRed (talk) 20:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

oops, typo RudolfRed (talk) 20:22, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

minor spelling mistake, i win

_{what was the minor spelling mistake} cogsan (talk) 20:31, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Unless I misread something, unsigned IP comments seem to be just an oddly common oopsie, which isn't really worth addressing. cogsan (talk) 20:30, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cog-san - Unsigned (and therefore undated) comments can cause a section to not archive automatically. I use User:Anomie/unsignedhelper.js to add {{UnsignedIP}} when appropriate. GoingBatty (talk) 22:27, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Colonial Bread on old screen doors

From years ago there were screen doors located at mom and pop grocery stores that had printed in red paint”colonial Bread”Am I wrong about this? 198.13.94.86 (talk) 22:42, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. This page is for asking about using or editing Wikipedia. We don't seem to have an article about Colonial Bread (which is why that link appears in red), but it is mentioned in Bud Light Daredevils. The place to ask this sort of question is at the Reference desk. ColinFine (talk) 22:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

If you Google "colonial bread screen door", you will find plenty of nostalgia about this marketing campaign. Cullen328 (talk) 01:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

When will the article I created be indexed on Google?

Kaifi Khalil created this article yesterday. But won't show up on Google results by searching it by name?

I added more content with reliable sources after notability tag was placed on it. So I think there is no notability issue? Uzek (talk) 21:54, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Uzek: It won't be indexed by search engines until it has been approved by the New Pages Patrol or 90 days, whichever happens first. RudolfRed (talk) 22:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@Uzek And the article has been proposed for deletion. David10244 (talk) 14:47, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Uzek You have a history of adding content without references. I see that on 11 January, @Anand2202 wrote a lengthy admonishment on your Talk page about references and your editing style. Before that, @Ad Orientem blocked you for (I think) adding unreferenced material. Since you have EC status, you can certainly create articles directly in mainspace, but I predict this article will eventually end up in a deletion review. If the references are good enough, it should survive. If not, it probably won't. David10244 (talk) 15:13, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean deletion discussion, as opposed to deletion review? - UtherSRG (talk) 15:19, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I think there is enough cited coverage that I'm not comfortable with a Prod and have declined it accordingly. If doubts remain, I suggest AfD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 15:36, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@David10244, @RudolfRed the article is now at AfD. -Ad Orientem (talk) 01:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, @UtherSRG, deletion discussion is what I meant. Thanks. David10244 (talk) 07:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Instagram as a Reference: Notable if from verified source?

I'm working on a new project and wasn't sure if I was able use an Instagram post as a citation. The source in question was posted by the official "TikTokCreators" account which is run by TikTok/ByteDance. If I were to use a post as a source, referencing my subjects involvement with the platform through this post, is this source considered notable or should I strictly reference other online news?

Source in Question: Here DestinyinDestiny (talk) 06:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi DestinyinDestiny. Generally, Wikipedia is more concerned about reliability than notability when assessing a source. Instagram is certainly Wikipedia notable and thus can have a Wikipedia article written about it, but it's generally considered to be user generated content and a self-published source, and thus not typically considered to be reliable for Wikipedia purposes. In some cases, a subject's official Instagram account might be considered a WP:PRIMARY source, but the way primary sources can be cited is limited to certain types of content; moreover, they are never useful in establishing a subject's Wikipedia notability. Furthermore, if content in question is related to a living person, then there are even more restrictions in place per WP:BLPSELFPUB and WP:ABOUTSELF. Is there a specific article where you want cite this Instagram post? Perhaps if you can give the name of the article, someone might be able to give you a better assessment of the source. -- Marchjuly (talk) 08:03, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@DestinyinDestiny: The linked post says (paraphrased) that persons X, Y, Z are part of program W from TikTok. I will assume that the account is indeed run by TikTok.

That post is certainly a reliable source for the assertion that X, Y, Z are part of program W. However, that assertion might be undue weight to mention on the pages of X, Y, Z, or TikTok. It might not be a significant enough development to merit a mention on Wikipedia.

It is not a good source either to prove the "notability" of X, Y, Z (it is a short mention of something that may or may not have a big significance), nor W (the source is the originator of W, so it is not independent). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

creating account in Vector 2022

@GoingBatty creating new account pls 119.95.103.16 (talk) 10:42, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor. When you access, for example, the Wikipedia Main page at this URL in your browser and have no account, you should see a link called "Create account" near the top right of the page. Click on that and follow the instructions. Note that, once you have an account but are not yet logged in to it, there are three dots to the right of "Create account" which when clicked lead to additional options, including the ability to login. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:35, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Special:Contributions/119.95.103.16 states that "This IP address is currently blocked...with an expiration time of 72 hours (anon. only, account creation blocked)". Creating a new account during this time might be seen as block evasion. GoingBatty (talk) 14:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty My typical problem with WP:AGF. The account was blocked today at 12:05 UTC+0, so when I replied it wasn't. I have my preferences set so that I see usernames from blocked accounts struck out so as to try to WP:DENY. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Sorry, I should have made it more clear that I was responding to the IP, and not criticizing your kind response to the IP. GoingBatty (talk) 14:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Lost articles

I am curious about an article that used to exist but now is gone. I'm not talking about a stub that never got going but a modest but true article: getcited.org . That it once existed is attested at https://academia.stackexchange.com/questions/2175/what-are-getcited-org-and-getcited-com-for . When I entered "getcited" into Search, I got a message that it didn't exist and a few hits where it was mentioned in articles about various scholars. I am worried that some other articles will also simply disappear. Kdammers (talk) 19:48, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kdammers: GetCITED was deleted in 2017 for lack of notability at this discussion. – dudhhr^talk _contribs (he/they) 19:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kdammers: articles get deleted literally every day, for a variety of reasons. See WP:DELETION -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 12:38, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Kdammers One of the flaws with the Wikipedia search box is that when you "search for pages containing getcited" when that page doesn't exist, you will be offered output saying The page "Getcited" does not exist. You can click on the redlink and create it. However, it is only when you use the specific capitalisation of the original article, which was GetCITED that clicking on the redlink will point out that such an article existed in the past, giving a link to the deletion discussion and date (try these two redlinks and note the difference). There may be a way round this limitation but I don't know it! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

On diffusing sub-categories

Hi! I was a bit curious on when to and not to diffuse a sub-category. Should a category be diffused in all cases when an article fits in both, or only some? For example, I understand that categories specifying gender and whatnot are almost always diffused, but what about those specifying levels of experience or rank within a profession. An example using the category that prompted the question would be whether articles in Category:Bolivian trade union leaders should also be included in Category:Bolivian trade unionists. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 01:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi Krisgabwoosh. I think your question is best answered by the section Wikipedia:Categorization#Subcategorization. Generally an article ...should be categorised under the most specific parent categories possible and Items may belong to more than one category, but normally not to a category and its parent. There are exceptions to this rule, like with non-diffusing categories.

The next sections of that guideline go into explaining diffusing and non-diffusing categories. An important point it makes is Non-diffusing subcategories should be identified with a template on the category page.

In other words, follow WP:SUBCAT unless stated otherwise. Using this rule in your example, articles appearing in Category:Bolivian trade union leaders should not also appear in Category:Bolivian trade unionists, assuming the category structure is correct.

If you need further explanation, a good place to ask would be at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories. --DB1729^talk 06:12, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Forgot to ping @Krisgabwoosh: and it seems you may actually be asking if we should convert the categories in your example to non-diffusing? I'm not sure how to answer that, but I can say I deal with categories a lot and non-diffusing cats seem to be pretty rare. I assume they are larger ones and made non-diffusing for a good reason. The US state river cats are none-diffusing, see for example Category:Rivers of Colorado, Category:Rivers of Colorado by county and note the notification banner on those, but I don't know or remember why they were made that tbh. Again Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Categories would be good place to ask. --DB1729^talk 06:14, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@DB1729: Am I correct in saying it's a bit arbitrary, then? All women politician categories are non-diffusing. This is because they're both "women politicians" and, definitionally, just "politicians". Although trade union leaders may be, definitionally, also trade unionists, they only go into the one category.

I'm not suggesting any changes, mind you, but I'm curious as to what the cutoff is for when to and not to diffuse. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 08:18, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

When working with and trying to make sense of Wikipedia categorization, sometimes it's easy to fall down a rabbit hole and often find at the bottom, nothing makes sense. DB1729^talk 12:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

How existential, ha ha. Thanks anyway for the thoughtful response. Krisgabwoosh (talk) 16:21, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Krisgabwoosh take a look at WP:EGRS which specifically addresses categories related to ethnicity, gender, and other factors where non-difusing is important. Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 16:35, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Has there been a discussion or guideline established about AI-generated images?

I've done a cursory bit of searching, but didn't find anything in this area of policy. I personally believe we do not need imaginings, for example, of how historical figures or events might have appeared, but maybe not everyone shares this opinion. — Anon423 (talk) 19:56, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anon423 AFAIK there is no policy just yet, however, this has been discussed Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#Wikipedia response to chatbot-generated content and there is a policy proposal at Wikipedia:Large language models. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 21:21, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anon423 My view is that there is little to no place whatsoever in an encyclopaedia for 'imaginings' unless a reconstruction is based upon serious academic research. I get quite cross seeing certain users uploading colourful but amateurish and incompetent imaginings of pre-Cambrian lifeforms as if they were academically sound. Recently , a well-meaning project met with community concern when artists were employed to make drawings of certain notable individuals, based on photographs which really should have been used instead. Reconstructions of how an archaeological site might have looked at the time could be valid if done by a competent authority. But, I agree with you, that there is no place here for wild imaginings in order to make an article a bit more pretty to the eye, whether human drawn or done by AI. The key driver for any opinion would be this. We don't need pictures to have an article. A misleading or imaginary image just promotes misunderstanding if not done with academic rigour. Nick Moyes (talk) 22:08, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anon423:, I totally agree, and in a sense we don't actually need a different policy. An AI-generated image of what a historical personality might have looked like is clearly based on some information it got from somewhere. And since it hasn't referenced from where it got the information, it can be removed as unsourced. I cannot write "Cleopatra had brown eyebrows" without finding an Egyptologist to back it up. Why should I be allowed to show a picture of her with brown eye-brows? Elemimele (talk) 17:52, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Understanding WikiProject Spam/linkReports

I have recently joined Wikipedia, and a friend of mine sent me your "fakesources" page, which is very useful. Thank you. Currently, I am in the process of increasing my understanding of policies and norms on Wikipedia. In this regard, I was checking sources and their usability/credibility on Wikipedia. Some of which appeared in multiple Wikipedia: WikiProject Spam/linkReports. However, they were not mentioned in your list. I want to understand, what's the purpose of WikiProject Spam and how they help us. Should we consider sources appearing in Wikipedia: WikiProject Spam/linkReports, as non-credible, or the specific article would be considered non-credible? Please, help.

Thanks in advance. 1OA9 (talk) 21:46, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@1OA9: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you don't receive an answer here, I suggest posting at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:24, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thank you, a lot. 1OA9 (talk) 13:49, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@1OA9 The spam project is specifically aimed at removing links that people add to articles to promote their own websites or for other WP:VANDALISM (i.e. they know their addition will damage rather than improve the encyclopaedia). They are in general not "sources" for anything useful and there could not be a full listing as they pop up all the time. It is better to approach sourcing the other way round: we have a page about reliable sources and a list of possible sources which are regularly debated about where consensus one way or another has been agreed (see WP:RSPS). To take an example from the list, the Internet Movie Database is not considered reliable, although it is frequently mentioned in the "External links" section of articles about actors or films. On the other hand, Rotten Tomatoes is considered reliable, especially for film reviews. As a newcomer, you should probably read WP:REFB. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:48, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull Thanks a lot. One more question, So, if a source has been mentioned in a spam report, does it mean that we can remove the mentioned platform, in any of the clean ups or we would have to see individual articles?

P.S I have read both WP:REFB and reliable sources pages.

P. P.S. I did the comment to @Kuru he couldn't reply, so I copy pasted the whole thing. This (User:Kuru/fakesources) is the fakesources link in my question. 1OA9 (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@1OA9 I've not seen that list before but it does look well-researched, so I certainly think that citations using these sources should be removed on sight. Of course, like any other edit, you need to be prepared to discuss with other editors on the relevant Talk Page why you removed something: that's the standard WP:BRD process. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull ok... Thanks a lot. :) 1OA9 (talk) 18:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Help needed to wikify my draft

Draft:Stephan Ulamec

Hello people,

Is there anyone willing to help me find sources for this page about this academic person involved in space missions?

Best regards! MANARAJu (talk) 10:50, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

MANARAJu Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to be co-authors or reference finders. Per the Declined, you have content in Career and Awards that is not referenced, and you have unreferenced content in the Lead that is not expanded upon nor referenced in the body of the article. David notMD (talk) 11:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@MANARAJu What I think would be a good idea for you to do is to go through each statement, line by line. Ask yourself "how can I show this statement is true?" If he won an award, cite a link to prove it. If you say he was born on 27th January 1966, link to something reliable that shows this to be correct. A bio on a university website is deemed to be reliable in ways that my bio on a private website is not. The university is deemed to have checked and approved such content.

If you have one source but want to use it multiple times in an article, that is not a problem. Both our editing tools permit reuse of an existing citation elsewhere in an article.

If you can't provide a published source, then just remove that statement and work with what other sources can prove. I think you've got the outline of a reasonable article that might meet WP:NPROF, but you need to pare it down so that everything can be shown to be correct, and there's nothing left that can be challenged. If you can't, then I have to ask how you know those statement to be correct in the first place?

I have since seen that you've declared your employer, but it would be appropriate to follow guidance at WP:COI and ensure there's a clear statement linking your editing to this person. We don't ban it, but we do require clarity in declaration. In fact, for an employee who is working in public relations for a scientific organisation, it would be obligatory requirement for you to indicate which article you are editing as part of your work. I would also invite you to write the text of your userpage in English, not French, as this is the language we use on this particular version of Wikipedia. I hope this all helps a bit, and 'bon chance'! Nick Moyes (talk) 11:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: Did you mean to recommend WP:COI to @MANARAJu? GoingBatty (talk) 13:57, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

User:Nick Moyes Thanks, mate. MANARAJu (talk) 14:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Thanks for your guidance.

by the way it's "Bonne chance" MANARAJu (talk) 14:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@David notMD Fixed it - thanks. @MANARAJu That's why I don't edit fr.wiki. But you get the sentiment, I hope.

. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:23, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Yes, indeed!

MERCI ! MANARAJu (talk) 15:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Why not search it up on the website? It would be better though. 204.129.232.191 (talk) 18:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Please ignore the reply above from 204.129.232.191, who has been blocked for 3 years. David Biddulph (talk) 19:08, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

large data table views

I'm just a Wiki user and would really like to see the title row of large data table stay locked on top as i scroll down the list... when i get to the row I'm interested in, i have to scroll back up to see the headings This not something I'm trying to do, but rathe ask the developers to promote locking header header rows. Thank you 142.116.69.122 (talk) 12:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

This is available to registered users as a gadget named Make headers of tables display as long as the table is in view, i.e. "sticky".

Head over to Special:CreateAccount, and you'll be able to turn it on in Special:Preferences under the gadgets section. WindTempos ^{(talk • contribs)} 14:26, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@WindTempos Thanks for your really helpful answer to the IP user. TBH: I hadn't noticed that gadget before, and have just turned it on. Incredibly useful! Nick Moyes (talk) 18:40, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes: I'm glad you found it helpful! WindTempos ^{(talk • contribs)} 19:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Horse Extinction in north America

I would like to reference this article on the BBC website on 28/01/2023 this link, https://www.bbc.com/travel/article/20230126-the-return-of-the-spirit-horse-to-canada On the article about the Horse extintion in wikipedia the paragraph on Taxonomy and evolution it states as follows "By about 15,000 years ago, Equus ferus was a widespread holarctic species. Horse bones from this time period, the late Pleistocene, are found in Europe, Eurasia, Beringia, and North America. Yet between 10,000 and 7,600 years ago, the horse became extinct in North America and rare elsewhere. The reasons for this extinction are not fully known, but one theory notes that extinction in North America paralleled human arrival. Another theory points to climate change, noting that approximately 12,500 years ago, the grasses characteristic of a steppe ecosystem gave way to shrub tundra, which was covered with unpalatable plants" The article on BBC refutes this theory by this in the article as follows:The Spanish did bring horses to what is now Mexico in 1519, but research by Dr Yvette Running Horse Collin cites written Spanish accounts that place herds in what is now Georgia and the Carolinas in 1521. Proof, she argues, that horses were here before the Europeans: as Collin notes, it would have been impossible for those Spanish horses to have multiplied and travelled so far in just two years. When it comes to the Ojibwe spirit horse, according to the Ojibwe Horse Society, DNA testing shows they are a separate breed from the horses introduced to North America by Europeans. Please correct or confirm if this is wrong or other as both can't be correct. 123.243.15.64 (talk) 03:38, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

We have no article on horse extinction, but we have a section on it in Horses in the United States. It would be best to start a discussion at Talk:Horses in the United States, not here. As for referencing it, be bold and go ahead. If you need help citing sources, see WP:CITE or look at other examples of citations in the article you want to edit. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:17, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

@Anachronist pure fringe, see Talk:Anachronisms in the Book of Mormon#Horses in pre-Columbian]]. I can't find the DNA test that was supposed to have been done and I spent a lot of time on it. Now at WP:FTN. Doug Weller talk 13:57, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

but if there were horses in what are now Georgia and the Carolinas, that means horses never went extinct in the first place. it also raises the question of why they werent widespread outside of those 3 states. where is the corroborating evidence from the archeological and fossil record? Omsk346 (talk) 20:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@Omsk346, if you want to challenge statements in the article, or discuss the addition of new information (supported by reliable sources), the place to do so is Talk:Horses in the United States, as mentioned above. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 20:19, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Celtic throne

Hi, I'd like to create a Wikipedia page for our dance show (similar to Riverdance) Celtic Throne. https://celticthrone.com We have toured the USA twice and plan on touring again this year. A wikipedia page will help provide more information to potential viewers - Riverdance has a page and we are an Irish Dance show similar in nature. I understand if I am not able to create it myself, as I am affiliated, but perhaps someone could help me or draft one for me. Thanks, WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi @WikiEdits728, welcome to the Teahouse. The most important thing is to establish whether the show is notable by Wikipedia's standards. Are there published reviews of the show by critics? Has it won any important awards? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi,

Here are some news clips: https://kdvr.com/news/celtic-throne-coming-to-the-newman-center/

https://www.newscenter1.tv/celtic-throne-returns-to-rapid-city-at-the-monument-on-june-13/

https://edmondlifeandleisure.com/third-us-tour-set-for-celtic-throne-troupe-edmond-based-entertainers-also-p22663-99.htm

as well as the Music for the production was composed by Brian Byrne (he is a golden-globe nominee and the same composer for the show Heartbeat of Home)

We also had a former Riverdance Lead comment “Easily the best dance show I’ve seen since the originals. An absolute must see. As an ex-Riverdance lead dancer, I know brilliant when I see it.”

— Darren Maguire

Does this Help? WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, WikiEdits728. Those are routine event announcements published to promote upcoming performances with repetitive language indicating that the coverage was generated by press releases. What is required is independent coverage. Cullen328 (talk) 16:33, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Not in the least, I'm afraid. Routine announcements do not contribute to notability. Basically, what you are explicitly doing is trying to use Wikipedia for promotion - which is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia. Once several people, wholly unconnected with you, have chosen to write significant coverage of your show, published in reliable sources, then there could be an article about the show. Note that such an article would not be owned by you, would not be controlled by you, might contain material you did not like, and should be based almost entirely on what those independent commentators have said about it - good and bad - not on what you or your associates say or want to say. Please see There are no deadlines, and an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 16:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@WikiEdits728 I did a quick Google of your company name and couldn't find any obviously useful sources. However, if you wish to create a draft article (not "page": we are not social media), that is allowed provided you declare your conflict of interest and probably WP:PAID status on your User Page. Once the article draft is accepted, if it is, you will not be able to edit it further except in limited circumstances. Please read WP:YFA carefully before starting and you may also find this essay helpful. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:45, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks WikiEdits728 (talk) 16:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Ignoring the primary sources, I would like to mention that the citations are bare URLs. I have went in to fix headings and repeat citations. One tip I have is that the visual editor allows easier filling of citations and other templates.

I know that it has already been said but please get more secondary sources, try to at least get one secondary source for every primary one. ✶Mitch 199811✶ 21:10, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Regarding Review of Draft:Bhaskar Sen

Courtesy link: Draft:Bhaskar Sen

Hello all, I got the following message on the review of the submission. "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." It seems I have referenced sources adequately and all sources are vetted and reliable. Including sources from reputed national dailies. Please let me know what changes to do, to get the write up published successfully. Could someone please help and explain the reason behind decline in a little more delay? Thank You very very much Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:06, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mayukhsenkar. If he competed in the Olympics, then why is there no coverage of his results there? Cullen328 (talk) 18:32, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Cullen328 Thank you for replying. He has been covered extensively for participating in Karate at Olympics. The Karate event was an additional event in Tokyo 2020 where it included pre-matches and test events. He may have participated in them.

The athlete has been a part of Olympic 365 community also which has been shown by his correspondence with the IOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:38, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Mayukhsenkar our article Karate at the 2020 Summer Olympics does not list India as a participating nation. Please clarify. Cullen328 (talk) 18:52, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Cullen328 for replying and guiding. On a brief check for Karate Event in Tokyo 2020, it did have test and pre-matches as recorded by various sources : https://www.wkf.net/news-center-new/ready-steady-tokyo-karate-test-event-underway-at-nippon-budokan/1060, https://olympics.com/en/news/karate-follows-judo-with-successful-budokan-test, https://www.wkf.net/news-center-new/ready-steady-tokyo-karate-test-event-shows-karates-determination-to-shine-at-olympic-games/1061. The event has been covered by reputed Sports Journals like InsidetheGames also. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 19:40, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

Mayukhsenkar, none of those references mention Sen. They describe a test event that took place before the Olympics and the world class athletes were not present. Your statement Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics seems inaccurate and misleading. Cullen328 (talk) 21:07, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Cullen328 None of the test event persons are mentioned , not only him. It mentions local representatives, which according to WKF definition is previous champions. His performance at Olympics has been widely published, also IOC has corresponded to him as Olympic 365 member and mentor, which is given to Olympians.

The statement is well corroborated. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 21:39, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

He did not compete in the Olympics. Olympic Athletes 365 is a developmental program that includes a wide range of athletes, not just Olympic competitors. Cullen328 (talk) 23:13, 23 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar Hi there! You wrote "His performance at Olympics has been widely published". Could you please provide three published reliable sources that provide significant coverage of his performance? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 03:49, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

Olympic 365 mentorship is only for Olympians as mentorship is in collaboration with WOA.

@GoingBatty https://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2021/08/bhaskar-becomes-the-first-indian-to-attend-the-olympic-karate-event/, https://readscoops.com/sports/bhaskar-sen-karate-olympic-hero/, https://www.hindustantimes.com/delhi/du-s-karate-kid-aspires-to-represent-india-at-next-olympics/story-7cPxsxLZLVKRIwCnxs3UBL.html two of the sources are primary and one is a national daily, on giving a quick look, there are many more sources which report on his participation. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 07:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar I asked you to provide sources that provide significant coverage of his performance in the Olympics. The Hindustan Times article is from 2016, so it obviously doesn't say anything about what he did in 2020. The YKA and Read Scoops mention his background and other achievements, but don't seem to contain even a single sentence about what Sen did at the "Olympic Karate Event". Do you have any independent reliable sources that state what he actually did at the Olympics? GoingBatty (talk) 14:08, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty The source of Hindustan Times states about his selection into the Olympics, the other two sources speak at length about his qualification which is inline with the qualification guidelines of Tokyo 2020. I would like to politely make a correction to your sentence where you describe "2020" when Olympic Event happened on 2021. Since the Kata Event which he was qualified for was a round robin according to the Olympic rules, the articles stating his participation are technically correct. An olympic event is not 1v1 where his performance "against" an athlete needs to be shown. The Qualification happened based on ranking https://setopen.sportdata.org/wkfranking/ranking_main_competitor.php?ranking_country=IND&ranking_competitor=IND178&hidemenu=true, is the basis of ranking. This link could be traced back from archives to check his scores, however, current points on his profile may not reflect what the point were before olympics since, WKF follows a yearly depletion mechanism of points. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 16:43, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar I do not see a sentence in the Hindustan Times article that "states about his selection into the Olympics". Thank you for correcting me on when the Olympic Event occurred. I don't understand why the draft would state "Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics" if he only attended an Olympic Karate Event in 2021. GoingBatty (talk) 18:00, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The HT article speaks about his previous achievements marking him as a qualifiable athlete as per qualification guidelines.

The Olympic Event comes under the aegis of Tokyo Olympiad which ocurred on 2021. Hence, the athletes representation was passed by the NOC, that means that the athlete was not attending as "Bhaskar Sen" but "Bhaskar Sen(India)" as given in Olympic Organization Rules of 2021 released by LOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 20:20, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar While the HT article speaks about his previous achievements, it does not explicitly state that those achievements mark him as a qualifiable athlete as per qualification guidelines. Your draft should summarize what the published reliable sources state, without you adding any personal knowledge. GoingBatty (talk) 22:26, 24 January 2023 (UTC)

The reliable sources which are mentioned in the draft are primary, i.e. they are primarily obtained from the athlete and the others paragraphs contain information on his qualification trail, which details the stages and route. The published reliable sources state so in full. None of the statements are personal remarks but statements from sources and as released from Olympic bodies. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 08:20, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar If the sources say that he meets the qualifications for being selected to the Olympics, but do not explicitly say that he was selected, then you are making an inference, which is wp:Synthesis and the source doesn't support the statement. David10244 (talk) 12:59, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar Also, don't miss Cullen328's important note: "He did not compete in the Olympics. Olympic Athletes 365 is a developmental program that includes a wide range of athletes, not just Olympic competitors." Olympic development events are not the Olympics. David10244 (talk) 13:06, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The NOC approved Karate India's participation in the Olympics as can be seen in the present sources, also please refer to the Sportdata point system which show he gained points which make him qualify, Olympic Pre-event is under Tokyo 2020 LOC, which means he did participate, the same happened for all other "additional sports" like sport climbing, baseball etc.

I think the reviewers and Teahouse counter-argue-ers are missing the Point. Olympic 365 did not organize the event for which he has been made noteworthy. The event itself is Olympic 2020. Olympic 365 being any program IS a program under the IOC, where mentorship is only for Olympians in WOA. Please consider. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 15:56, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, you have not produced any reliable sources which refer to the subject as an Olympic athlete. You have not even produced sources which directly state that he participated in Olympic-affiliated events. It seems that you are relying on your own original research into primary sources. That is not allowed here on Wikipedia, and will only result in your draft continuing to be declined. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 16:17, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The original draft does contain reference to the Olympic Athlete, I provide resources and sources here which "corroborate" the fact. The same corroboration is present for other noteworthy athlete who are approved on Wiki. The "original research" was only to corroborate and support the claim. The original research is not "emailing the IOC for a comment on his participation". All sources are secondary in nature. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:15, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, please read WP:OTHERSTUFFEXISTS - the existence of other poorly-sourced articles does not justify including more poorly-sourced articles. So far, you have provided (here) no sources which corroborate your claims. Do you have other sources you haven't presented here yet? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:28, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

I think Olympic qualification happening thru sportdata can not be categorized as poor. Citing qualification rules is not poor, athlete belonging to WOA is not poor, NOC's list for Tokyo 2020 is not poor. The article is not poorly sourced as defined by WP: VERIFICATION, YKA as a source has been listed for other athletes, SK is a regularly cited source, HT is a national daily. WKF is the world body. The said source already sets the claim. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:36, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, none of those will be useful here. You must provide a reliable source which directly states that the subject represented India at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. Not a combination or analysis of other sources which implies it. Do you have such a source? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:44, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

Two of the Sources in the article state explicitly he represented India. The Counter-argument here was regarding performance measure, which has been clarified, then the question was regarding sources for significant coverage, which has been clarified again.

'Implying' would be the act of deduction. Which is primary according to WP: Citation.

I have simply corroborated, thru media and Sportdata, which are all secondary. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:49, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar, please give us, here, the two sources which state that he represented India at the 2020 Tokyo Olympics. I assume they are not the same as the sources already posted above. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:55, 25 January 2023 (UTC)

The two sources are the ones which have been given in the article in question. https://www.youthkiawaaz.com/2021/08/bhaskar-becomes-the-first-indian-to-attend-the-olympic-karate-event/, https://readscoops.com/sports/bhaskar-sen-karate-olympic-hero/. The sources already cited in this Trail were corroboration of his qualification and endorsement from the NOC. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:17, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll ping @Cullen328 and @GoingBatty, in case they want to review these added sources (I can't access them myself). 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:16, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar We're going in circles. The YKA and Read Scoops mention his background and other achievements, but do not support the claim in the draft that he is "Known to have represented India at the Tokyo 2020 Olympics". GoingBatty (talk) 15:41, 26 January 2023 (UTC)

@Mayukhsenkar I agree with @GoingBatty that the Readscoops article does not say that he was a competitor in the Olympic games. It implies that he is close. The article has a bit of a rah-rah tone. I didn't read the other article.

Please quote the phrase from Readscoops that confirms that he was an Olympic competitor. David10244 (talk) 08:25, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@199.208.172.35 Thank you for making your position clear. Reviewers with the ability to understand and comprehend are welcome. @GoingBatty I think we are not in circles, the terms of reference and context keeps changing here, your previous contention was regarding his performance which I clarified, regarding the Operation of an Olympic Karate Event. The article mentions 1. the place where the Olympic Event Occurred 2. The event which he participated. 3. How he got to represent India.

@David10244 The Readscoops article title and the intro itself contains the lines that he participated in Olympics. I think you are mixing up the sources, I encourage you to diligently "read", by which I mean please provide the paragraph(s) in the news pieces you allege to be out of context. Also, for simplicity please clarify what does "rah-rah" mean, since it is not mentioned as per WP: Citation and looks as a frivolous claim by a Teahouse reviewer.

For the record as requested by @David10244 I can state the sentence "You don’t usually think of karate and that’s where we want to introduce you to someone called Bhaskar Sen, who made the country proud by becoming the only Indian athlete to attend the Olympic Karate Event in Nippon Budokan." Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:39, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Mayukhsenkar, you have been editing Wikipedia for about a week. If multiple editors with much longer experience tell you the sources are insufficient, chances are they are right. When you say stuff like "all sources are secondary in nature", it shows a lack of understanding of Wikipedia policies. It is entirely normal, but a bit of humility would not hurt.

In the present case, Becoming the only Indian athlete to attend the Olympic Karate Event in Nippon Budokan is not a sufficient source for is representing India. There is a significant difference between "he’s the only Indian attending" and "he was selected by official instances to represent India".

For an extreme example of this, Ian Nepomniachtchi (a chess grandmaster who will be playing in this year’s chess world championship match) is a Russian national. He will be playing under the world chess federation’s flag, because Russia is under sanctions. Presumably lots of Russians feel that he represents them, lots of non-Russians feel he represents Russia, and the Russian chess federation would give its OK for him to play under the Russian flag; yet you will not find a source that states that Ian "represents Russia", because officially, he does not. Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:17, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

@Tigraan Thank you for replying. I think if you track my posts on this page, I have maintained a very courteous outlook to the whole counter-arguments. I doubt that editing many articles makes one gain extraordinary talent in a specific field having different niches and mechanisms. As has been pointed out several times in this thread. I respect the fact that reviewers here have immense experience, however, ignorance on some facts says contrary to that.

I understand the example and your point. The article states "attend" which is the frequently used word in the Karate discipline of Kata, where individual performances are evaluated. If I understand your point, represent( which is the commonly used word for NOC qualified athletes for a certain sport event ) would mean certain qualifications and endorsements by the NOC. Ian's sport is not an Olympic Sport so it is outside the purview and scope of discussion. Earlier in this thread I have shown proof of his qualification and his endorsement thru the NOC which is the legal representative of IOC in the athlete's country. Please refer to above thread where I clarified his Participation as Bhaskar Sen(India) and not Bhaskar Sen. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 15:29, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

India didn't compete in Karate at all in the 2020 Olympics. It didn't happen, so there is simply no way you are going to find a reliable source that makes this person an Olympian. And he's not going to have another opportunity next year, because the Karate events were dropped from the 2024 Olympics. You're going to have to establish notability some other way. MrOllie (talk) 15:38, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

A Karate Event consists of various events. Attending an Olympic Event does constitute participation. Especially if the athlete has been qualified and the NOC has endorsed, this is as per the LOC Organization Rules. If he would be able to participate in the next Olympics or the next-to-next is out of the purview of this discussion. The notability of the athlete apart from the Olympic Aspect can be established thru his wins at World Championships ( rank 6) which has been corroborated sufficiently in the article. His various previous achievement in retrospect are unprecedented by any other Indian, known in the public domain. This is in the premise of WP: Notability and WP : Sports.

On the notion of him being an Olympian, Please read the thread diligently. Olympic 365 Mentorship is only given to Olympians under WOA, hence his address as an Olympian is well established. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 09:32, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

No, you are mistaken. Athlete 365 memberships and/or mentorships are not limited to Olympians. MrOllie (talk) 14:06, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Please read the Statues of WOA, it is by virtue of that membership he was granted mentorship. I think there is clear definition difference between "membership" which you state and the "mentorship". A tertiary skim-through of the athlete365 home page does not warrant a thorough knowledge of the Olympic, NOC and WOA mechanism. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 21:31, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

No. He didn't complete in the olympics. The article also claims he ranked in the 2009 World Karate Championships - but there is no such event. That tournament is held every other years - in 2008 and 2010. It appears the entire article is a hoax. MrOllie (talk) 21:51, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Competing in Olympics is thru a verified and well maintained process for which sportdata reference has been given, which is further the core point system used for qualification. The 2009 World Cup is an official event by the WKF. Sudden adrenaline rush to give a shoddy search on Google and random hyperbole here regarding a niche event undermines the credibility of a reviewer and a counter-argue-er on this forum. Suggest you to be diligent on the subject accordingly. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 22:01, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

There was no 2009 World Championship. There was a Cadet World Championship in 2009 - the junior league for the teens. The article have as you have written it is simply incorrect - at best you are grossly mistaken. But given your resistence to correction I now think it is likely you are deliberately exaggerating this athlete's accomplishments. MrOllie (talk) 22:05, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

Please check the reply on the separate thread, ignorance of Sportdata ranking points and non-diligence of Olympic guidelines and qualification criterion shall not be appreciated and shall not be entertained.

The Olympic event includes age group of 16 and above where the sportdata points were transferred from the cadet group. The sportdata link clearly shows his participation. The Sportdata points further sum up to his qualification score which was then endorsed by the NOC. The "resistance" here is not against the correction but due to shoddy overviewing of facts which are due to a non-diligent understanding from a reviewer. Athletes accomplishments are thoroughly vetted by national bodies and world bodies, any exaggeration is baseless as the article is heavily cited by relevant and thorough sources. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 22:14, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

None of that matters - he didn't participate in the events the article claims he did. Maybe he participated in other events organized by the same bodies, but that is not at all the same thing. - MrOllie (talk) 23:15, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

This brings to question your previous claims and hyphenation seen. Which in turns shows how shallow a diligence of a reviewer can be. The "events" has not been defined by you. Nor the Other "events" has been defined by you. Contention without basis renders it infructuous.

He did participate in the events the article states and so has been aptly and justly corroborated according to the relevant guidelines. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 23:33, 28 January 2023 (UTC)

The reviewer was 100% right. This article is full of false claims and unreliable sourcing. If it somehow ends up in the mainspace anyway, I am certain that it would be deleted. You should consider expending your efforts on fixing the article's flaws rather than arguing with the people who are pointing them out. MrOllie (talk) 18:10, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

When the reviewer points to baseless interpretation of superflous research, the edit is bound to be reverted. The article flaws have been fixed and the sources have been checked to the full extent. The "other people" have expressed their views and they have been answered accordingly. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 18:13, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

So far, I count 5 people answering you in this thread (including me) plus one reviewer at the draft. Of those 6 people, 100% disagree with you.

After such a long thread, whether you are right or not is irrelevant. What is relevant is that those are the sort of people you need to convince if you want your draft to be published. If it is impossible because they are too daft, there is no point wasting your time, is there? Just leave them altogether and go do something more productive, whether on-wiki (editing another article) or off-wiki (read a book, take a walk, etc.).

Of course, if you have a reason to believe that those 6 people are somehow more stupid or biased against you than the general population of active Wikipedia editors, you might have other options (but make sure to read WP:BOOMERANG before choosing them). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 10:53, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

I think the "count" or the "number" of people is not the bone of the contention here. This thread is not about my editorial abilities or ex-wiki errands. The reviewer of the draft has been repeatedly unresponsive which goes against the Wikipedia:Active editing and Wikipedia: Golden Rules.

I would like to rephrase your comment about irrelevancy of my facts being right, the facts which are reported here are the bone of contention. The crux is not about who is convinced or not, for each one may have their own reasons of "interpretation" but it does not reflect the factual scenario. I am sure that a forum like Wikipedia does not support/is not a place of emotional whataboutery.

I am having trouble understanding the "they" you use in your comment, since wikipedia is certainly not governed by the 6 persons you counted. On that note, what I do off-wiki is and should not be a matter of anyone's concern but me. I think you would appreciate that I never mentioned the 6 persons to be "stupid" like you perceived, nor did I "presume" an in-built bias against me.

WP:Boomerang talks of " reporting" which I have not done till now, nor did I have an inkling towards it. Instead, there has been highly hyperbolic and ballistic driven replies and threats of supposed "violation of WP policies" by one of the persons among the group. I would like to direct your suggestion of WP:Boomerang towards them. In collaborative efforts always, Regards. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 08:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

OK, let me try again.

You want certain things to happen on Wikipedia: that your draft be accepted, that it describes as a fact that Bhaskar Sen represented India in a given event, etc. These things will be achieved only if some other people take certain actions, or refrain from blocking your actions. (It is impossible to know who "these people" are in advance: decisions about individual pages are usually taken by a very small number of editors, fewer than ten, and there is no central committee exercising strong control.)

Therefore, you need to convince these people. If you don’t, the things you want will not happen. It may be contrary to Wikipedia’s own guidelines, it might be unfair in a sense of immanent justice, but such considerations will not change what the Wikipedia page will say to readers.

This is post #48 of that thread if I counted right. Before you type post #49, please make sure that it has a chance to work where posts #1 through #47 did not.

I do not intend to reply any further (which, contrary to your apparent belief, is entirely allowed either from me or from article reviewers - see WP:VOLUNTEER, which is a well-respected essay and not a historical page). Tigraan^{Click here for my talk page ("private" contact)} 12:37, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I would still reply to your points, since I follow the Wiki best practices which say that an editor "should" be responsible for his article and justify the content in a way that can be corroborated.

I think again, I would like to mention that the question of "who" blocks is not a matter of concern, but why. Time and again counter-argue-ers here seem to have acted on superficial curation only to bulldoze verifiable claims and called out the writer unjustifiably. If wiki being an encyclopedic resource, can not or will not provide safeguards against such practices, then the process itself is brought to question.

Again, the count of posts is of little consequence/matter when the contentions have been dealt with by sufficient depth of research and curation.

Lastly, whether you have the "free-will" to not reply or not is certainly not the point I raised. The reviewer who declined indeed should be responsible/accountable for his decision, otherwise, the rights distribution mechanism of wiki becomes infructuous. Since, my belief in free-for-all knowledge and authentic encyclopedic resource is still undeterred, I tend to think the contrary. Hence, it brings to question the laissez-faire and indifferent manner of the reviewer which is again against Wikipedia:Active editing and Wikipedia: Golden Rules. Mayukhsenkar (talk) 21:23, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Citing a patent

I'm new to Wikipedia and interested in making an addition to an existing article that involves citing a patent. Is there a method for inserting a patent or is it treated like any other published document? 10346Charlie (talk) 23:07, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

10346Charlie Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm wondering why you need to cite a patent, which is a primary source. 331dot (talk) 23:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

10346Charlie, as 331dot implies, patents should be cited only with good reason. Template:Cite patent provides a standardized method. Cullen328 (talk) 23:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @10346Charlie. You asked this question several days ago. The previous question and its answers are archived here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 23:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

How to turn off new user landing page?

Hello there,

Does anyone know how to turn off the new user landing page that appears whenever I go to a page that doesn't exist?

Thanks,

LOOKSQUARE (talk) 14:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@LOOKSQUARE There are checkboxes at the very bottom of Special:Preferences for newcomer editors. Unchecking them may help, although I'm not sure that's the relevant feature. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I turned them off a few days ago, but nothing changed.

LOOKSQUARE (talk) 14:34, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Do you mean the pages with the image of three flowers and text like "Start a discussion with..." when you hit a redlink to a user page or article Talk Page that doesn't exist, such as User talk:DestinyinDestiny? That text and image is added by the software and can't be switched off: its not just for new users. When I click on a potential article that doesn't exist such as junkxyz I get a page where an article could be created that has a warning message starting "Before creating an article, please read Wikipedia:Your first article". Are you seeing something else in that case? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:20, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@LOOKSQUARE: Are you still getting the new user landing page? It should stop when your account is four days old and has made ten edits. The account is eight days old and your first post here was your tenth edit. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:32, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

The user landing page has stopped showing up. Thanks for the help!

LOOKSQUARE (talk) 01:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Bytedance ownership

This youtuber https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A1WddKQ7ZTw says that there is a significant ownership change in Bytedance suggesting complete CCP takeover. Bytedance is behind TikTok. Maybe something that would merit some investigation and potentially change in the Bytedance Wikipedia page? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ByteDance 84.248.14.197 (talk) 11:06, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. We don't go by what random "YouTubers" say, but what independent reliable sources say about a topic. YouTube is generally not a reliable source(as anyone can post anything on YouTube) unless the video is from a recognized news outlet from their verified channel. 331dot (talk) 11:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Deletion of Photos

I have been redirected from the page Wikipedia talk:Deletion policy to here. I am asking this in the full belief that this is the correct page to ask.

I have seen an article about a person deleted a decade back. She was a non-notable person, and the article seemed to be written by her friends or family members, or for money. That article was proposed for deletion, and after 2 weeks of no objection whatsoever, it was proposed for speedy deletion, and was then deleted within days. That article has not been ever recreated, as far as I understand. But her photo is still visible on this site. The file page says this: "No pages on the English Wikipedia use this file (pages on other projects are not listed)".

How to nominate that photo for deletion? 117.213.59.69 (talk) 09:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Could you please add the name of the person and the file name? Otherwise contributors on Wikimedia Commons would likely be more useful, although there are many Commons contributors on Wikipedia. JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) JML1148 (Talk | Contribs) 09:33, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

The file in question is this:

File:Urmila Varma.jpg

I see no reason that this file is to be kept on Wikipedia. 117.213.59.69 (talk) 09:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hello. You can nominate the file for deletion at Commons:File:Urmila Varma.jpg (there's a "Nominate for deletion" in the menu on the left). I have only ever nominated files for deletion for copyright reasons, so I'm not familiar other reasons; but I think you will need to make an argument based on commons:Commons:Deletion policy. ColinFine (talk) 11:03, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Nominated. I shall get back if there are more questions in the future. 117.213.59.69 (talk) 11:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Editing

I'm working on the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jingbo_Wang, It was declined due to the sources not being adequate. The sources are all peer reviewed journals. I'm unsure why these sources are not reliable. Massie314 (talk) 01:22, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Massie314. I believe that Wang meets the Notability guideline for academics #3 as a Fellow of the Australian Institute of Physics. I am pinging TheChunky, the reviewer who declined the draft, for their input. Cullen328 (talk) 01:35, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Cullen328. I'm new to wikipedia, is there anything that I can do or should I wait for some further feedback from TheChunky? Massie314 (talk) 01:43, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Most of the sources seem to be to her own work, not what others say about her work. 331dot (talk) 01:39, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

331dot, WP:NACADEMIC is an explicit exception to the usual requirement for independent sources. Cullen328 (talk) 01:46, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thanks for pinging me. The subject might pass WP:NACADEMIC, but the personal information about the subject should have at least secondary and independent reliable sources. But I saw that most of the sources were self-published. The subject shouldn't depend on self-published sources (as per WP:SELFPUB). Notability is not so simple, and if a subject is connected to the source, we can't consider it to establish notability. Thanks again.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️) 02:59, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I agree more references about her would be helpful. As it stands now, refs 2-21 are to scientific journal articles (in peer-reviewed journals, thus in my opinion not self-published). David notMD (talk) 03:15, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

TheChunky, articles coauthored by Wang and published in respected, peer-reviewed scientific journals are not "self-published" in any way, shape or form. What gave you that idea? Cullen328 (talk) 03:17, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

TheChunky, the nutshell section of WP:ACADEMIC says that Many scientists, researchers, philosophers, and other scholars (collectively referred to as "academics" for convenience) are notably influential in the world of ideas without their biographies being the subject of secondary sources.. Notability of academics is evaluated with completely different metrics than other topics. Drafts that are more likely than not to survive an AfD debate should be accepted. I cannot imagine a biography of a fellow of a major national academy of physics being deleted at AfD. Cullen328 (talk) 03:29, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

Thanks to all. Could someone have another review of this page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Jingbo_Wang? It has been further revised. Dongdian (talk) 13:47, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 Thanks for your explanation. Well, I am not much of an experienced reviewer of academic articles; I just observed that the subject was connected with most of the references, so I declined the submission. As you said, there are exceptions to the academic notability criteria, so this can be accepted. The creator should resubmit and any reviewer who have academic articles experience can review it. Thanks again.❯❯❯ Chunky aka Al Kashmiri (✍️)

Tool on the tip of my tongue, please help me find

Hi! A while back in one of my wiki-browsing adventures, someone linked to a tool (I think it was somewhere on xtools or toolforge) where you can input two editors usernames and it will tell you the articles they both edited and the interval between the edits on that of those editors. Now I can’t find it! Does anyone have a link? Thanks in advance :) BhamBoi (talk) 10:28, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hi BhamBoi. There are a couple of "tools" that you can use to do this, but the one you're asking about is (I think) the "Editor Interaction Analyzer". -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:33, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, I actually don’t think that was it…

The one in the back of my brain was more like

(Inputted 2 usernames)

List:

PAGETITLE Edited 2 weeks apart

OTHERPAGE Edited 14 seconds apart

Someone used it in an RFA to show that they had the same interests by having lots of articles they both worked on. BhamBoi (talk) 10:53, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@BhamBoi So not: https://sigma.toolforge.org/editorinteract.py ? (Which produces results like this) Nick Moyes (talk) 12:52, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

That is is! Much thanks! BhamBoi (talk) 19:17, 29 January 2023 (UTC)

@BhamBoi: That is the same "Editor Interaction Analyzer" tool that I linked to above. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:39, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

@Marchjuly Yep - I knew that, too. Just thought I'd link to it directly as I was sure you were correct. Nick Moyes (talk) 10:50, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

That's OK Nick. I should've linked to that particular section instead of simply the page in general. -- Marchjuly (talk) 10:52, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

My bad too. I was on mobile so the site was hard to navigate if I wasn't on the exact right page to use it. Thanks to both of you! BhamBoi (talk) 20:15, 30 January 2023 (UTC)

No worries. It was a pleasure to have been of help to you. Nick Moyes (talk) 14:13, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Need help edit page about new hacker group

I need help editing a page about the KiraSec hacker group

I ask experienced users to help edit this page.

This hacker group is relatively new, but it is already mentioned in the media website: IBTimes.

2A03:EC00:B144:56D:C5CA:DC51:C833:3CD9 (talk) 15:14, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi IP editor, welcome to the Teahouse. JBW left some very good and detailed advice on the draft at User talk:Samuels99917 - have you seen that post? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:26, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi. It's me. And can I ask you to correct mistakes on this page? I'm just new to Wikipedia... Samuels99917 (talk) 15:38, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Samuels99917. Most folks here are volunteers; we work on whatever happens to interest us. People with similar interests create or join WikiProjects to work as a team in order to improve specific areas. WikiProject Internet culture covers hacker groups, so that's probably the best place to find people who might be willing to help. Their talk page is here. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 15:47, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

David Del Valle article

Hello, everyone. I just did a pretty complete overhaul of the writer about horror David Del Valle, adding many non primary source citations like from Entertainment Weekly, Video Watchdog, the Texas A&M University Libraries, Fangoria and a lot of others. There were tags for "primary sources" and for "notability." I just wanted to let everyone know in case it wasn't OK to remove them but I think it probably was? Thank you to everyone here. - The Horror, The Horror (talk) 04:09, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

@The Horror, The Horror: Thank you for improving the article. I suggest posting this information at Talk:David Del Valle, as people interested in that article probably won't come here looking for information on why you removed the templates. Keep up the good work, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:00, 31 January 2023 (UTC)

I will! Thank you! You have always been helpful & supportive. - The Horror, The Horror (talk) 15:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Dr. Phil (talk show)

On the Dr. Phil talk show, can a list of episodes be added into the article. Not sure if this is the best place to ask but thought I could since there may be experts on Wikipedia may know if it is needed or not.Cwater1 (talk) 18:37, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi again @Cwater1. Have you considered asking the folks at WikiProject Television? 199.208.172.35 (talk) 18:45, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi. I didn't think of that. I will do that. Thank you!Cwater1 (talk) 18:48, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

See the topic I added. Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Television#Dr. Phil (talk show)Cwater1 (talk) 18:51, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Mobile App

The Mobile app needs the sister sites on it like Commons and Wiki Voyage. Or at least make them separate apps. MeltanFlood (talk) 16:57, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Hi @MeltanFlood, welcome to the Teahouse. If you want to leave feedback about one of the mobile apps, the team working on them has a page here. You can post on the discussion page or follow one of the links to the Android- or iOS-specific FAQ pages and leave a comment on the discussion page there. 199.208.172.35 (talk) 17:21, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

MeltanFlood This is a proposal in the Community Wishlist Survey. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:10, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Tag: Disambiguation links added

But, I didn't add Disambiguation link. Did i overlook something? See Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive/2023. --SilverMatsu (talk) 05:04, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Silvermatsu: Welcome to the Teahouse! I don't understand what Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive/2023 has to do with you or disambiguation links. Could you please restate your question, with links to the related articles and/or discussions? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 05:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you your reply. Sorry, that tag (section title) was added to to the edit summary. See Revision history. --SilverMatsu (talk) 05:49, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

Stress tensor is a disambiguation page. - David Biddulph (talk) 10:05, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Silvermatsu If you add this code .mw-disambig { color: #FF8921 !important; } /* Orange */ to your common.css at Special:MyPage/common.css, then all disambiguation links will show in orange, which makes it much easier to notice them. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:07, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

It's easier to enable "Display links to disambiguation pages in orange" at Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-gadgets. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:32, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

True! I learned the other method from a Teahouse post by someone else a couple of years ago. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:27, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@David Biddulph, Michael D. Turnbull, and PrimeHunter: Thank you for teaching me ! The disambiguation link that the "template:Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Mathematics/Archive/2023/Xxx" called was displayed in orange, so it seems to have triggered the tag. --SilverMatsu (talk) 02:38, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

What to write in regards to unverifiable material?

Heya, folks. For the past month or so I've been creating an article (Sandbox draft here) on a band from Northern Norway, but there is one thing I'm uncertain about. In its early history (when information about the band was more poorly documented), there was a member called Marianne Hanssen who seems to have left sometime in 2005. The thing I'm concerned about is that there are no sources that say she left, nor when her final perfomance with the band was, so there would be no way to verify this information without it being original research.

The last source that mentions her by name (at least in connection to the band) was from 28 May 2005, but she may very well have had performances after that. The next source I could find that details the members of the band is from November 2005, with no mention of Hanssen. A source from 2009 says that she was a member, but not when she left. I've written something akin to "By [November 2005], the band consisted of [members here]", which sidesteps the issue of writing about Hanssen entirely. Is this the right approach? ArcticSeeress (talk) 01:27, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

ArcticSeeress, that seems OK to me. -- Hoary (talk) 05:31, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Language link

Hello. I have translated the article Neuro-sama into Chinese, and I am sure that I have set the language link in Wikidata correctly. It does seem good in Chinese Wikipedia. However, in English Wikipedia, there is an unknown language "Norsk nynorsk" in "Languages", and it points to the page "[[nn:Mal:Aipire]]", which doesn't exist. How to deal with it? Thanks! --Yining Chen (talk) 02:44, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Other languages can be added directly to an article through text, like the following: [[zh:Neuro-Sama]]. The text [[nn:Mal:Aispire]] was added to the template Template:Compu-ai-stub by an IP editor last month, which is currently transcluded to the Neuro-Sama article. I've gone ahead and removed it. ArcticSeeress (talk) 04:59, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! --Yining Chen (talk) 05:50, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

Shy editor, requests feedback for new edit

Hello, I recently edited the Indonesia–Israel relations page, to update it with 2023 news about Israeli Olympic shooter Sergy Rikhter withdrawing from ISSF meet in Jakarta.

I left a request for feedback on it's talk page—however, despite it being around for 12+ years, the page is listed as low to mid-importance on a variety of projects + there is only one other "talk" topic. I'm afraid it will be overlooked. I'm generally shy about significant edits and have been mostly lurking and making minor edits. Reverses and hard-nosed pushback seems to be de rigueur, so I admit I've been languishing. This seems silly, and I'd like to try to push through whatever hurdles and blocks exist for me to become a more dedicated editor.

I'd appreciate some patient editor/mod taking a look at my brief contribution and offering feedback. On the talk page I asked for ways to improve or pointing out glaring errors, but allowing the ability to correct errors on my own. Thank you!! 🙏 mazal (talk) 23:15, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lezelmaz: Hi there! I made some tweaks to your addition, including combining two paragraphs into one and updating the references. I suggest removing the sentence stating "Richter won gold...", as that level of detail is better for the article about Richter. Does one of the reliable sources explain why the ISSF refused to allow him to compete with any ISR symbols? Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 01:25, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty, thanks for the help! In particular the guidance of removing FB tracking garbage is enlightening. Although I would have appreciated the chance to fix it, I understand you might have thought it would be overly technical. Can we discuss your suggestion to remove the sentence regarding Richter's athletic accomplishments? I get the logic of why you think it's misplaced, and perhaps that's due to my clunky prose. My intention is very briefly to offer context for why Richter's withdrawal is significant enough to post on a page dedicated to Indonesia—Israel relations. It's also written about in both cited articles. The articles also go into great detail about the markings on Richter's weapons, etc., which I didn't feel added any situational value, and left out. Regarding Q2: (explanation for why ISSF refused ISR symbols?) One of the articles only intimates the lack of diplomatic ties, but doesn't offer a specific ISSF statement or rational. Since the "History" section of the wiki page is literally the progression of repeated, but ultimately failed, attempts at establishing formal diplomatic ties, I left it at that. I took the time to review all the rest of your tweaks not related to my edit, which I hope you might let me inquire about. mazal (talk) 03:41, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lezelmaz: I think describing him as an Olympic athlete is sufficient to explain why his withdrawal is significant, without needing to list some of his medals. However, I don't feel strongly enough to remove it myself. I also copied your work into the article about Sergy Rikhter, and tweaked it a bit. Happy to discuss the details of my edits further if you like. GoingBatty (talk) 04:13, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Oh, nice. I sent a thanks. :) I'll leave it for now and revisit in a few days to see how it feels. Perhaps all the wikilink decorations give it more weight than necessary? I appreciate the breathing room. Re many of other tweaks, perhaps it's too pedantic on my part but I'm curious about converting most(?) of the citations in "publisher" to "work" field. I took a quick peek at the template you reference in summary. I'm not deeply schooled in every citation style, but your conversion seem very journal-centric (as opposed to web-based, and news)? Anyway it just peaked my interest. I also noted expanding "language" field, among others, which is obviously logical—and helpful. Thank you for all the attention! mazal (talk) 04:40, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

@Lezelmaz: Newspapers/magazine/journal titles should be italicized, and changing |publisher= to |work= does that italicization. GoingBatty (talk) 06:12, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

welcome message on my talk page

I received a welcome message on my talk page. There is a "reply" button but it doesn't work (I tested this bug on both windows and macOs). Is there anywhere I can report issues about wikipedia templates ? (also isn't it a bit weird to receive a welcome message long after I create my account ? ) Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 20:23, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

@Vincent-vst: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1178. Normally if there's an issue with a particular template, you'd find that template's talk page to mention the issue. However, the Reply tool does not fall under that, and you are best going to the village pump (technical) to find more tech-savvy Wikipedians to help you.
I'll note that I tried fiddling around on your talk page, and it seems the tool works on almost every comment except for the ones that follow the welcome template. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:36, 1 February 2023 (UTC)

thank you Vincent-vst🚀 (talk) 07:26, 2 February 2023 (UTC)

[1] "foley"%29?type=edismax&hidden_filter%5B0%5D=ancestors_ms%3A%28"uofm%3A1243378"%29&f%5B0%5D=mods_originInfo_dateIssued_dt%3A%5B1908-05-04T00%3A00%3A00Z%20TO%201908-05-05T00%3A00%3A00Z%5D "Winnipeg Tribune". lib.umanitoba.ca. 4 May 1908. p. 2.

[2] "Winnipeg Tribune". lib.umanitoba.ca. 4 May 1908. p. 2.

[1]

[1]