Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1210

Archive 1205

←

Archive 1208

Archive 1209

Archive 1210

Archive 1211

Archive 1212

→

Archive 1215

How do í add a link?

Í want to know how to add links to the stuff í add to pages. For example, if í mentioned oranges, í would want to link the word to the page about oranges. 136.33.235.64 (talk) 02:13, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

You appear to be using the source editor, so you should put the text in double brackets: [[like this]]. If you need to link to a page that's different than the text itself, put the page name before a pipe, so [[orange (fruit)|orange]]s would make sure you don't link to the disambiguation page because one might be talking about the fruit or the color, etc.

However, keeping in mind you were just giving an example: you do not want to overlink. Almost no article on the site would require a link to a very common object such as an orange. Remsense留 02:22, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Also: if you'd like to experiment and get comfortable with editing, you should use the Sandbox, or register an account so you can use your own private Sandbox. Remsense留 02:24, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Biased view on historical topics

I have seen many people have added their perception of history and they are not objective on Wikipedia. They have quoted only the biased or marxist historians perspective and not others.

This goes against the basic tenets of producing information for all. Abhimanyu200 (talk) 06:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I have noticed that most people who raise concerns as you have, are objecting to points of view they do not share, and are not raising good-faith concerns about lack of objectivity.

Should you wish to illustrate your general complaint with specific examples, we can investigate and respond. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:31, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

(ec) It is difficult to respond to a general complaint. If there is a specific grievance that you have with an article, you should raise it on that article's talk page. If you have independent reliable sources about a topic that are missing from an article, please offer them and content you feel is missing. Wikipedia does not claim to be "objective" or unbiased, as all sources have biases- sources are presented to readers so they can evaluate and judge them for themselves when determining what to believe.

As Tagishsimon notes, mere disagreement with the points of view offered is not the same as a lack of objectivity. 331dot (talk) 06:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, my coworkers!

_ СтасС (talk) 09:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Nadolig llawen i bawb'r Wicipedia x doktorb _words^deeds 09:45, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Merry Christmas and All of you as well Brandflock (talk) 12:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

new entry

Thanks. yes I can speak english, very well, so please, help me with my question

I just want to make a new publication (a biography) similar to this one:

https://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nelson_Arellano_Roa

with my picture, and a link to my blogger page. I just need an example to make it... or maybe some friend can help me to do that. It will be updated only two or three times a year.

In this blog (in spanish) I published all my books for free, to help people that cannot buy the "physical" book, or cannot find some (most then are sold out)

Thanks in advance !

Luisgilbertosantander (talk) 20:44, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Luisgilbertosantander: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1210. I do not know what the policies are over at the Spanish Wikipedia, but the English Wikipedia isn't to be used for self-promotion, as it goes against policy. Perhaps you might want to try social media instead? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:52, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Are you saying you want to write about yourself? That is not forbidden, but it is discouraged, please read the autobiography policy. Wikipedia wants to know what independent reliable sources say about you, not what you say about yourself, and only if you meet the criteria for an article. 331dot (talk) 20:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@331dot, I think it is pretty much forbidden: Editing a biography about yourself is acceptable only if you are removing unambiguous vandalism or clear-cut and serious violations of our biography of living persons policy. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:55, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Deltaspace42, editing (or of course creating) an article about oneself is pretty much forbidden (aside from the exceptions you've noted); if a COI statement is made, creating (or of course editing) a draft about oneself is unenthusiastically permitted. -- Hoary (talk) 22:03, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Hoary, OK, thank you for clarification! Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 22:11, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Luisgilbertosantander Your saying that the article will be edited only two or three times a year strongly suggests that you don't grasp what Wikipedia is all about. If you do succeed in creating an article that is accepted for Wikipedia, you won't own it, so you'll have zero control over how often it's edited (beyond how often you edit it yourself). So let's say, Monday, you create the article; Tuesday, I come in and edit it (which I have as much right to do as anybody); Wednesday, someone else comes in and edits it; Thursday, you decide you don't like those new edits, so you edit it back; Friday, someone else comes and essentially rewrites the whole thing. That's already more than "two or three times," and it's only been a week. My guess is, you're figuring on updating "your" article now and then with news. Since it's likely that your updates here will be publishing that "news" for the first time here, those updates (assuming anybody's paying attention to the article) will likely be edited (i.e., removed) pretty quickly. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Renaming an article name to a neutral form

Hi there, I tried to rename the article "2024 North Macedonian parliamentary election" to "North Macedonia's 2024 parliamentary election", using the Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) that states: Article names, categories, and templates should avoid adjectival use altogether. The use of neutral formulations such as "of North Macedonia", "in North Macedonia," etc. is preferred. But the action was not completed, because the edit triggered an automated filter for anti-vandalism. I was suggested to ask a more experienced editor here to help me perform that move. MkEditor12 (talk) 22:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@MkEditor12, hello! I've just taken a look at filter logs. It says Filter description: Pagemove throttle for new users. And since you're new and started moving many pages, the filter was triggered. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 23:00, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

If you look at any other election article of any other polity (2021 Canadian federal election for example), you will find it uses that form. It's fair to potentially be confused based on reading that specific policy, but I am not adequately versed in the matter to discern whether this point of contention should override general policy. It'd be significant if so. Remsense留 23:01, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Remsense, @MkEditor12, looking at other election articles, it seems that they all put the year first. I think the consistency in naming elections is more important here, thus the page moves were completely unnecessary. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 23:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I would've certainly started a discussion somewhere to investigate whether the moves were worthwhile first, but I am not aware of the depth of this issue so I'm abstaining a bit here. Remsense留 23:09, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Remsense, just looking at some category related to North Macedonia:

• 1998 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2002 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2006 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2008 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2011 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2014 Macedonian general election
• 2016 Macedonian parliamentary election

And then in the corner:

• North Macedonia's 2020 parliamentary election

Because @MkEditor12 just moved the page. Yeah, it is completely unnecessary, I think they need to be moved back. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 23:10, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I would agree, yes. Remsense留 23:11, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@MkEditor12: I strongly advise you to stop moving articles, until you have a better understanding of wikipedia and until you have consensus for your proposed moves. "North Macedonia's 2024 parliamentary election" is not a page title that would ever be used on wikipedia; WP really does not do possessives, in my experience. "2024 North Macedonian parliamentary election" seems perfectly acceptable, but were it to be changed, it would be more in the direction of "2024 parliamentary election in North Macedonia". --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:10, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I've undone MkEditor12's two successful pagemoves (prior to their hitting the throttle-limit). Indeed this change of a whole suite of currently self-consistent articles should be discussed centrally with some relevant wikiproject. DMacks (talk) 23:12, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@MkEditor12, I've looked a bit, and you may want to discuss your move either on the talk page of the article above, or perhaps in WikiProject North Macedonia (semi-active but perhaps worthwhile), WikiProject International relations, or maybe WikiProject Elections and Referendums. Remsense留 23:17, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Because it is not just one article alone, or one article out-of-sync with closely-related ones, it needs a broader discussion than just on the article's own talkpage. Following Remsense's wikiproject recommendations, I easily found the WP:NC-ELECT standard:

For individual elections and referendums, use the format "[date] [country name or adjectival form] [type] election/referendum".

So this is a much stronger and broader consensus than just one article, or North Macedonia locally, etc. The only issue is what "country name or adjectival form" is best in this geopolitical area. DMacks (talk) 23:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

DMacks, aye. I assumed that the discussion would naturally get kicked to where it needed to be if it was started on a single talk page, at least. Remsense留 23:34, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Remsense, @DMacks, @Deltaspace42, @Tagishsimon, I've read all your comments and i can agree of everything here said. But i have to add something why I did the name changes of the articles. There was a discussion on one of the articles about using the adjective North Macedonian (Talk:2024 North Macedonian parliamentary election). As the adjective North Macedonian shouldn't be used according to the Prespa agreement. An other user said that WP doesn't follow the Prespa agreement, which is partially true as there is a Wikipedia:Naming conventions (Macedonia) that is a guideline on how to refer to the various geographical and political entities called "Macedonia" and the use of the adjective "Macedonian" (and even the user continuously used the adjective North Macedonian in the discussion). I was waiting one week for someone to have a discussion with me but no one continued it. Yes, "2024 parliamentary election in North Macedonia" would have been a much better name than the possessive form North Macedonia's (that's my bad). All the related categories have the adjective "Macedonian" in them as it was pointed out:

• 1998 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2002 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2006 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2008 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2011 Macedonian parliamentary election
• 2014 Macedonian general election

So why should all the other articles have the adjective "North Macedonian"? In some time in the past the article was moved to "2024 Macedonian parliamentary elections" (you can see the history) but it was reverted to the prior name. The adjective "North Macedonian" is offensive for the Macedonian people (The name of the country is just changed), so that's why i tried to change it to a more neutral form (even though the adjective "Macedonian" is the most correct one to use, some people have a problem with it for some reason). Yeah I should have asked here about your opinions firstly and I apologize about that. MkEditor12 (talk) 12:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

This is, unsurprisingly, a complete misrepresentation of the matter. There was an RfC a while ago in which there was consensus to use "North Macedonian" for government-related matters (which IMO includes elections) where the same adjectival form is used for other countries (which is the case for election articles). It is also worth remembering that disruption in this topic area (such as making multiple page moves without consensus after being advised not to) can result in a block or topic ban from an uninvolved admin. Number 57 13:42, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Help with article

Hi there I recently submitted an article about J Merlin (music producer) and it got rejected due to not having reliable sources even though I did added reliable sources such as press etc however I think the moderator who rejected it may see them as passing mentions instead of significant coverage. I need help with this article, what is really considered a reliable source for a musician?Christoffheaney (talk) 14:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Christoffheaney: Hello! I've just taken a look at the draft and in references I think only this source might be considered reliable and with significant coverage. You need to find more sources like these (like news). To check if the source is really reliable, use Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Perennial sources. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you I will find sources with similar coverage Christoffheaney (talk) 15:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Christoffheaney, and welcome to the Teahouse. There are three separate criteria for a source to be useful for establishing notability - unfortunately the standard decline notice only mentions "reliability".

The three are that the source be reliable (see WP:RSN), that it be independet of the subject, and that it contain significant coverage of the subject.

You need to evaluate each of your sources against these three criteria. If they are not reliable, or mere mentions, remove them. If they are to selling sites like apple music, they are sales links masquerading as citations, and should always be removed. If they are not independent, it may be possible to cite certain information from them (see primary sources) but they will not contribute to establishing that the subject meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability. ColinFine (talk) 15:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi thanks for the advice I will remove the links to Apple Music in the reference section. Christoffheaney (talk) 15:39, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Accused of sockpuppetting in bad faith

Need assistance. I am accused of being a sockpuppet (see User talk:BlueMoonset#Current GAN on Penang) when I had zero idea of that previous user who did the sockpuppeting. How is this good faith and is there any action I can take against that? hundenvonPG (talk) 11:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@HundenvonPenang: Hello! If you are not sockpuppet, then you don't need to worry. There are sockpuppet investigations, which are taken very seriously, and I don't think someone will ban you based just on this accusation by random IP address. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @Deltaspace42:. Might be just trolling, but latest update: there is another IP address joining the fray in BlueMoonset's talk page. Both look like South Korea-based addresses. I'm calling it in: reporting to Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents. hundenvonPG (talk) 16:09, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Scratch that. It's been mediated. Merry Christmas too. hundenvonPG (talk) 16:29, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Grupo Firme rewrite

So I'm on a mini-quest of rewriting articles for popular regional Mexican artists, and right now I'm focusing on Grupo Firme (because they're currently the talk of the internet). Some problems I've hit:

• The band was not as popular when they first started out (like most bands often are), but especially since they're not an English-language band, essentially no information exists about their early releases.
• Many of their more recent hits that have been streaming and chart successes ("El Amor de Su Vida", "Ya Supérame", "El Tóxico", "Calidad", "Qué Onda Perdida", etc) still have little coverage, aside from when their music video released or their chart performance. This includes Spanish-language news outlets.
• Much of the information I've managed to find on them is very contradictory (e. g. one source says that their original name was one thing, while this other source says it was another).

I've encountered similar problems with other artists (Banda MS, Calibre 50, etc) when I tried to rewrite their articles. I was able to rewrite the article for Christian Nodal, and even got it recognized as a GA, so these sort of artists often //do// have a lot of information about them. I just don't know where to dig or how hard I should dig.

Anyways, that's about it. I'd like replies to be specific to VisualEditor.

– Dontuseurrealname (talk) 16:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Dontuseurrealname: Hello! If you looked for sources and couldn't find anything useful, then you may consider nominating an article for AfD, as the subject with little sources probably doesn't meet notability criteria. Not every article needs to be on Wikipedia. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:32, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The problem is mainly with early information, and generally all of their albums, which never got much notoriety anyways. They're mainly popular for their singles. My main problems are with trying to find a cohesive, non-contradictory narrative and some more coverage on their popular releases.

– Dontuseurrealname (talk) 16:36, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Dontuseurrealname: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1210. Don't forget that if they're reliable, non-English sources may also be used (albeit less preferred than English ones). —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:59, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Dontuseurrealname. If there is enough material on them to establish notability, but little indepedendent material on their early career, then the article should simply not try to cover their early career. If the sources you can find are all unreliable, then no information from them should be in the article. ColinFine (talk) 17:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

C-class

Hello, I was just wondering where I could request that my article on Perothopinae could be promoted to C-class, or maybe even B-class? Based on the criteria that I've read, I think the article is okay for B-class. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 01:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Memer15151, hello and welcome to the teahouse. Personally I think the class-rating is not that important: it is usually not displayed to the reader, and there is quite a bit of grey area between different classes. Criteria of WP:Good articles and WP:Featured articles are more clearly defined and objectively enforced. If you wish to do more on Perothopinae, feel free to aim for GA level. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 02:14, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Memer15151, in my opinion, you have done a very good job and this is one of the best articles on a lesser known insect species that I have ever seen. I have upgraded it to B, and encourage you to take it to a Good article review. Cullen328 (talk) 02:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! You made my day. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 02:39, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Memer15151. I was adding my reply while Cullen323 was adding his; so, it seems this has been resolved now. For reference, though, WP:ASSESSMENT ratings (outside of WP:FA and WP:GA) aren't really official ratings per se; for sure, they're based on certain criteria, but basically their assigned by users such as you and me without under going through a formal review process. So, if you feel the article meets the B-class criteria, you can "promote" it yourself; if someone disagrees, they can "demote" it back to where it was. However, since you describe the article as my article it might be better to let someone else promote it instead to avoid any appearance of bias. You can try asking about the article at the WikiProjects whose scope it falls under and explain why you think it meets the "B-class" criteria. Someone may see your post, agree with your assessment, and promote the article. Similarly, someone may see your post, disagree with your assessment and explain why. You could also seek a WP:PEERREVIEW as well. -- Marchjuly (talk) 02:44, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm aware of peer reviews, and I was thinking about it, but I currently have an active peer review for Combat of Goldberg, and based on what I remember, you can only submit one at a time. Thanks for the help! UserMemer (chat) Tribs 02:49, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

fwiw, @Memer15151:, whereas Wikipedia:Peer review seems to be a general 'how could this article be improved' forum which may well have a one article per person per time period restriction, there are other forums for article review. I think the suggestion being made in this thread is that you consider nominating Perothopinae for Wikipedia:Good articles review ... GA being the next higher quality rating for articles above the B-class which is now sported by the article. Having an article in peer review does not prevent you nominating an article for GA. (And after that, you could consider either an A-class review or a featured Article review. Or you could do none of these things :) --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:47, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi again! Yes, I nominated it for a GA. It would be cool to see it become one of the 7 beetle GAs, considering there are hundreds of thousands of beetles.

Kind regards, UserMemer (chat) Tribs 12:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

More images would be nice. In nature. larvae. Eggs. Wings open? And curious, could you provide links to a few of the beetle GAs? David notMD (talk) 19:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd like to say that the image I added is the only one I found licensed under CC-BY, CC0 or CC-BY-SA. Examples of GA-class beetle articles include Colorado potato beetle, Emerald ash borer and Tansy beetle. UserMemer (chat) Tribs 19:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Can I include in Donald Trump and Joe Biden's Wiki?

Biden’s economy vs. Trump’s, in 12 charts[1] from Washington Post. I want to anlyse the idea given by them.

Brandflock (talk) 08:04, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It's unlikely to be a good idea. Commentators opinions on the US economy probably have little to do with biographies of the two individuals. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Brandflock, discussions of the economic performances during the two most recent administrations are better suited to Presidency of Donald Trump and Presidency of Joe Biden. The article you linked to is probably not the best source, since it is a high level overview based on discussing charts and graphs. I think that using more analytical pieces that quote a range of prominent economists would be a better approach. That's my opinion, at least. Cullen328 (talk) 08:26, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

So you don't think that Washington Post crticsed them and it will create bad impact to the world? Brandflock (talk) 08:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

This has little or nothing to do with wikipedia. No, today's washington post opinion is tomorrow's chip wrapper. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:43, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I can see millions of Wikipedia articles which criticised wiki's. I am thinking because noone noticed it and I am not political wikipedia editor, I relate myself with business and economics here so please check the reference I given as link. Brandflock (talk) 09:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It is one of tens of thousands of articles on economics loosely related to politics. It does not move the dial. It has little or no significance. It is unlikely you will be able to make the encyclopedia better by doing anything as a result of the article. Please take the advice being given to you and drop this idea. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

World recieved conflicts because of economics and its significant topic as I can see and it will remark Wikipedia more in the world so people should get aware of the drama behind business and economics. Brandflock (talk) 09:58, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

But it would need to be written up in WP by someone with competence. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:10, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It got covered by an experienced media executive so I came here to take solution that can be in wiki or you all be disagree and if you all are not able to help me then why you should be agree on me. Brandflock (talk) 12:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

stop. ltbdl (talk) 16:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Brandflock indef'ed. We're done here. DMacks (talk) 22:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Citations with authors with middle names

When citing a work where the author has one or more middle names, should the middle name be put in the last name or the first name parameter, or outright ignored? Examples:

Last name param: Mackenzie, William Lyon, Title; OR Mackenzie, W. L., Title

First name param: Lyon Mackenzie, William, Title; OR Lyon Mackenzie, W., Title

Ignored: Mackenzie, William, Title; OR Mackenzie, W., Title

Which is correct? Cremastra (talk) 17:17, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Cremastra: Hello! I usually put the middlename along with the first name, but you also can do |author= instead of |last=, |first= Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:23, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks; I also usually put it in with the first name. Forgot about the author param. Cremastra (talk) 17:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It depends on whether his surname is "Mackenzie" or "Lyon Mackenzie". Both are possible, in general. But looking at the article, it seems clear that this particular man's surname was "Mackenzie", so he should appear as "Mackenzie, William Lyon". ColinFine (talk) 17:32, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Since we have some "usually"s and a "wrong venue", seconding ColinFine just above that the general case is unanswerable. It will always depend on what the "middle" name connotes for the individual in question. For most individuals of Anglospheric cultural extraction, the "middle" name is a second bit of the personal name. Not so everywhere, and WP:SUR has got guidance about it, including the fun exception (paraphrasing) "if not covered here, check this". Folly Mox (talk) 18:50, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It doesn't matter, but experienced editors usually post at the Help Desk Mach61 (talk) 17:57, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It's easier when people put hyphens in their own names, so A-B C has first=A-B and A B-C has last=B-C. That used to be common practise for UK surnames but I see it less these days. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:27, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Creating a soccer national team page

Hi there,

I'm trying to create my first national soccer team page and I'm having issues. When I click on publish the players, results and references mess up and move to the side (looks okay when I click edit). Can anyone assist with this issue?

This is the page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3AMcwamcwa%2FSouth_Africa_national_under-15_soccer_team&wvprov=sticky-header Mcwamcwa (talk) 22:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello Mcwamcwa,

I saw the article, good work!

It seems to me that all of the stats are in one of the boxes on the table. Try separating all of the boxes out.

Happy editing! Geardona (talk) 22:53, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:02, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The problem seems to the player box. I tried adding spaces in between and everytime I do they get removed and the template sticks to it's default setting. Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Hmm, let me try to fix it, I will try to keep the info intact but may need to use placeholders. Geardona (talk) 23:08, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, I fixed it, the issue was in the source editor, the templates needed space. Geardona (talk) 23:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mcwamcwa: I can understand if you are confused. You used VisualEditor which sometimes render differently than the saved page. The "Show preview" button in the source editor shows how the page will really look if it's saved. The end of Help:VisualEditor#Getting started: the VisualEditor toolbar mentions "The Switch editor button" you could use. Some things are also easier to do in the source editor, and some are simply impossible in VisualEditor. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I'll try source editor next time. Mcwamcwa (talk) 23:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Query about coding language

What coding language does source editing use? Adityaverma8998 (talk) 17:33, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998: Hello! See Help:Wikitext. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:34, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your help but I have another question, which is that if any article uses complex language and jargon the can I use ChatGPT or Bard to make it more simple to understand and replace the complex language of the article to simple language to make it comprehensible to a wider audience? Adityaverma8998 (talk) 18:05, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998: It depends on the subject of the article. If it is something niche, for example, something related to category theory, then I don't think it is a good idea to simplify existing text. Also, check out https://simple.wikipedia.org Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

In addition, be wary of using AI to make edits to Wikipedia. In general, human edits are preferred and AI edits have some issues, both in accuracy and in copyright status. I'd recommend using AI to help you (like brainstorming) but not to generate actual article text. This legal note from the Wikimedia Foundation elaborates a bit: m:Wikilegal/Copyright Analysis of ChatGPT. Bsoyka (talk) 18:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998: Absolutely not. Do not use the output of ChatGPT as an input for Wikipedia. Fullstop. See Wikipedia:Large language models. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I think you misunderstood me. I am not saying that AI can be used as input in wiki articles. The question was can complex sentences by simplified using AI because a simpler version would be comprehesible to wider audience.

Picking up info or data from AI is obviously not a good idea. Adityaverma8998 (talk) 20:48, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Adityaverma8998 However you phrase the question the answer remains the same. No. 🇺🇦 Fiddle^Timtrent Faddle^Talk to me 🇺🇦 20:56, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

How are you going to replace complex sentences with simple sentences generated by ChatGPT if those simple sentences are not an input to Wikipedia? Look, Adityaverma8998, I'm not up for playing with words. I'm not misunderstanding you. You want to remove human-written sentences and replace them with ChatGPT-written sentences, because you believe for some reason that there are complex sentences which readers do not understand, which could be simplified so that readers do understand them. It may or it may not be that there are complex sentences which could be simplified. It may or may not be that ChatGPT could achieve the simplification. The jury must be out on both of those two speculations. But the guideline answer is still no; use of ChatGPT on WP is not welcome. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:03, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

At this point my request is close to being a moot point, but anyway: Adding references to examples of such texts might have been an idea... Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 21:38, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Such simplifications may be more appropriate in the Simple English Wikipedia.

In this 'Main' English Wikipedia, the level of language complexity is, I believe, ideally intended to be suitable for a University undergraduate not studying the topic in question (although I can't now find where I read that). See also Wikipedia:Manual of Style, Sections 15 and 16, and Wikipedia:What_Wikipedia_is_not#Wikipedia_is_not_a_manual,_guidebook,_textbook,_or_scientific_journal, Point 7.

Wikipedia currently contains a good deal of over-complex language, usually in articles written by experts in their applicable field, and certainly this should be clarified, but preferably by a fluent native/competent English speaker/writer capable of doing so without distorting the text's meaning or introducing falsifications – so far AI applications have not demonstrated the ability to do this. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 00:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

do examples need citations?

So i am wondering if examples require citations like if i said that a example of a emergency was a house fire would i have to cite somewhere that said that? 50tr5 (talk) 22:06, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a bit silly, 50tr5, to provide a reference for an assertion familiar to most people and questioned by almost none. I don't suppose you're really asking about that example. Which examples of what are you actually asking about? (Just reveal one or two examples of the examples.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:15, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:SKYISBLUE. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

requests for [insert word beginning with c here]

how does starting an rfc work? do you just use the template in any given article's talk page and ask about whatever it is that might require more people's opinions? cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 00:50, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

RFC's are a part of dispute resolution, intended for users who have a content disagreement with each other.(read this) for more.

If you do feel a RFC is necessary these are the steps to create one, there is a template in the article I have linked.

Hope this helps,

Geardona (talk) 00:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

so it's just adding the template, putting fitting words under it, and not using it for small scale squabbles between two people, because that's what third opinions are for

thanks cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 01:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

That is correct (to my knowledge). Geardona (talk) 01:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Featured article

How do I get something to be the featured article on Wikipedia? I’m trying to put Weezer on there. Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:03, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

See WP:FAR --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:13, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:FA & WP:FAC, it needs to go through a lengthy process before it can be featured. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:05, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:26, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

@Theobegley2013: Can I help you? As Tagishsimon said, the process to have it featured is long and complicated. Raising the article to Good Article status is probably a good first step before shooting for Featured Article. And even Good Articles are pretty hard! You'd need to do a lot of work. (for reference, here's an example of an unsuccessful GA review). Cremastra (talk) 22:31, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Indeed. Here's a Featured article candidate review which took about 6 weeks to complete starting from the point that the nominator thought the article was of sufficient quality. FA is super-hard to achieve. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:07, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Theobegley2013. You might want to aim for WP:GA status first since the process is a bit less rigorous and everything needed for GA-status is going to also be needed for FA-status. You might also want to discuss this on Talk:Weezer to see whether you can find anyone else interested in helping you or get some other input. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:22, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Why are you using WP abbreviations? Theobegley2013 (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

Click on the links, Theobegley2013. --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:27, 21 December 2023 (UTC)

I agree to aim for taking the article from B-class to Good article before nominating for FA. For both GA and FA, reviewers like to see that you made significant improvements, as evidenced by many edits, before nominating. David notMD (talk) 03:19, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

And for GA there's the 10% threshold, correct? Cremastra (talk) 13:12, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@Cremastra 10% of Wikipedia articles happen to have GA status, but that's not a threshold rule. It could be 100% if the rate of improvement of existing articles outpaced creation of new/unmaintained articles. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:13, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Shushugah: I meant that the nominator had to have contributed more than 10% of the article. I'm pretty sure that's one of the GA criteria. Or am I hallucinating? Cremastra (talk) 02:18, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

It's not an explicit part of the WP:GAN instructions, however there is certainly discussion. Part of the issue is technical, who gets credit, when there's mixed/multiple authors? Last relevant discussion I found is here Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations/Archive 15 § Overanxious nominators ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:26, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Don't worry, you're not hallucinating. At WP:GAN/I, there's a footnote stating that a nomination is uncontroversially drive-by when the nominator is either less than 10% of the article or ranked sixth or lower in authorship, and there is no post on the article talk page. I believe the post on the article talk page part covers when there's mixed/multiple editors. (There's a warning template for it as well: Template:Uw-ga-driveby) ayakanaa ( t · c ) 01:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Where to begin?

Hi! I've been lurking on Wikipedia for a year now (and refuse to log in on my phone), but I'm not really sure where to start. I've basically run out of copyediting tasks or I'm hesitant to move on to the harder ones given a general lack of knowledge on both source & visual editor.

Also, what is the best place to report vandalism? I watch recent changes quite often, but often don't know what the best place to report those is. Thanks in advance! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 01:27, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish thank you for your contributions. Best place to report vandalism (if necessary) is Wikipedia:Administrator intervention against vandalism and I would recommend installing WP:TWINKLE to make warnings easier. Is there a reason you don't log in on your phone? It would make additional tooling/communication easier. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 02:07, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I use a manager. Would having a mobile-exclusive account be alright, as long as I make it clear that it's me on the other device? Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:14, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes; something like "User:Schrödinger's jellyfish on mobile", perhaps. -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Schrödinger's jellyfish, your first paragraph: Forget visual editor: you're likely to run into its limitations sooner or later. (Or so I infer from what I've read about it. I've never been tempted to try it.) Source editing with syntax highlighting is the way to go. (Unfortunately I'm chronically unable to remember where within Special:Preferences I've enabled syntax highlighting; and when I look for this option there, I don't find it.) You will often be warned not to rely on your own knowledge when augmenting articles. And indeed you should not do so. However, your own knowledge is of great importance when editing: it helps you find good materials, to understand those good materials, and to faithfully summarize what's said in those good materials. So start with articles on subjects you know something about. -- Hoary (talk) 02:19, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Syntax highlighting is under Gadgets → Editing. Folly Mox (talk) 02:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you both! I've turned it on. Already makes it a million times easier to use! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

As for editing on your phone, Schrödinger's jellyfish, I am going to be immodest here, and suggest that you read my essay, User:Cullen328/Smartphone editing. I have done 99% of my editing from smartphones for many years. Cullen328 (talk) 06:29, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much! I've linked it on User:Phönedinger's jellyfish's page so I can get to it more easily. I didn't even know about the smart punctuation thing! Just disabled it. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish: If you're looking for more copyediting tasks, you could try updating these articles to remove the "double dollars" (e.g. change "$50,000 dollars" to "$50,000"). The same issue occurs with euros and pounds. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 16:53, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Some help at Miss Universe Philippines 2023

Hi, I'm currently dealing with another editor adding unsourced content after I remove it from the article. Is there a limit to how many reverts I can do? I've put some notices on their talk page asking for them to add sources. I will revert for a third time, and then leave it. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:47, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

For the record, I think they're good faith changes, I just don't think they know how to access their talk page or they're not seeing my edit summaries. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Given this edit and their overall pattern of inserting the same sentence or two in many different places in the article, it's clear this editor is not able to contribute constructively, so I have blocked them. Wikipedia:Mobile communication bugs or not, edit-warring and disruption with BLP implications cannot be allowed to continue. DMacks (talk) 02:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much! Would someone editing like this instead go to WP:AIV? Not sure if it's just disruptive editing, or if it's vandalism. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

AIV is ok for extensive and obvious disruption that's not literally "vandalism" (in the wikipedia-specific meaning). It's typical after escallating user-warnings to level 3/4 with no change in behavior. But admins are active (or at least lurking:) in lots of other places too. DMacks (talk) 03:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

If you're still around, we've got a similar disruption going on at Dissocation here. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 02:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

That's just vandalism, but multiple IPs joining in. Will push some buttons after I refill my coffee.... DMacks (talk) 03:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

A few others did the needful. DMacks (talk) 03:11, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

The needful may need to be done again... is there a chance that User:Mutia ti la union updates or User talk:110.54.154.78 are trying to do the same thing? My hackles may just be raised for no good reason. I'm aware that IP connections can't really be disclosed, but probably worth keeping an eye on. Same wording of "there are 5 presenters". Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 03:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm aware of WP:SPI but don't know if I should post there with only IPs. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 03:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, SPI would be slow and not very helpful. Takes a few days, it's obvious, and only really IPs involved. And Philippines IP pools are fairly dynamic. So it doesn't need CU tools but instead needs prompt "any admin can do this" action. WP:RFPP is the alternative when lots of IPs/accounts are a problem on one page. DMacks (talk) 03:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Alright, I'll keep that in mind for the future! I've put a request for protection on the page. Thank you for the help in reverting, blocking, and sending me to the right places! :) Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 03:30, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Indexing my page in search engine

How to fix my page is not indexed in search engine. When i search the name of article. Chparveshtaak (talk) 02:28, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Chparveshtaak: If it is a new article, then it may not have been through WP:NPP review yet, as there is a large backlog. Unreviewed articles are not indexed by search engines. If not reviewed in 90 days, then it will be indexable by search engines. RudolfRed (talk) 02:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Chparveshtaak: Please be specific and name the page and search engine. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:40, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Chparveshtaak: Are you referring to the Dangar Khera article you created? (Remember that it is not your page - see WP:OWN). GoingBatty (talk) 04:08, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Disappearing pictures

Is there a problem with Commons? I'm not seeing any images, just blank spaces in articles? Murgatroyd49 (talk) 20:51, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49, hello! For me it's normal, the problem is likely on your side. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:53, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

That's what I was afraid of! I've done a complete reboot and tried different devices, still no images. All other websites I've tried are fine. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 21:02, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

@Murgatroyd49: Our actual images (not the file pages) are stored at https://upload.wikimedia.org. Claygate railway station displays an image at https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg/300px-Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg. Does that link work for you? If not then it may be your Internet provider which currently fails to retrieve pages from that domain. Such things can happen. A few interface images are hosted here at en.wikipedia.org. For example, https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.png is displayed in the lower right corner. Does that work? PrimeHunter (talk) 23:43, 22 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I can see the button but not the Claygate image. The link just locked up so it looks like I can't access the server. Must have words with my ISP. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:30, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

Right, contacted my ISP and they twiddled a few things and the images came back. Murgatroyd49 (talk) 09:45, 23 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm seeing the blank spaces too. I can see images if I go to Commons, but not on Wikipedia, apart from the main page. --Northernhenge (talk) 22:21, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Northernhenge: If Commons works then it's probably a different issue. Maybe someting in your browser or a browser extension is set to block images which are loaded from another domain than the page you are viewing. Commons is at https://commons.wikimedia.org and our images are loaded from https://upload.wikimedia.org so they are both at wikimedia.org. Can you see https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/33/Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg/300px-Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg? Can you see the same image in the infobox at Claygate railway station? If the anwers are yes and no then my domain theory sounds right except it doesn't explain why you can see main page images. What is your browser? Years ago one of the common browsers (not sure which one) had a feature where it was easy to accidentally block images from another domain. Can you try another browser on the same computer or Internet connection and test whether it works there? PrimeHunter (talk) 22:46, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes and no on Safari on iPadOS 17.2, but the Claygate page displays correctly on Android Chrome v120. I therefore assume it's a setting on the iPad. Thanks for your help. --Northernhenge (talk) 00:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Northernhenge: I'm trying to narrow down what may be blocked. Can you see the Claygate image at https://www.wikidata.org/wiki/Q1937264#P18? At https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Claygate_station_-_geograph.org.uk_-_1022355.jpg? Can you see an image saying "a WIKIMEDIA project" at https://en.wikipedia.org/static/images/footer/wikimedia-button.png? (One of a few interface images which are loaded from en.wikipedia.org and not upload.wikimedia.org) Can you see the same image in the lower right corner of this page? If you have a "Desktop" link at the bottom of the page (meaning you are on the mobile version of Wikipedia) then click that before checking the lower right corner. You can return to the mobile version by clicking "Mobile view" at the bottom of the desktop version. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I can see the wikimedia button image but not the others. Northernhenge (talk) 01:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks @PrimeHunter: for your continuing help. Unfortunately I need to go offline for a while, but it's much appreciated. --Northernhenge (talk) 01:05, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

And now I’m not seeing images in Commons either. I’ll keep looking for iPad settings, given that it seems ok on Android. Northernhenge (talk) 00:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

If images come and go at Commons then it may not be a setting after all. Somebody at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)#Images slow to load mentioned a varying image problem which appears to affect the UK. I guess from User:Northernhenge that you are in the UK so maybe you just have to wait for something to become more stable. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Not sure if red-herring or related, but T353849 is a server-side parser error related to images with geotagging. DMacks (talk) 04:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Trying to add withdrawal info of a train from a UK train operator

I'm trying to figure out how to add information that Nova 3 trains have been withdrawn from TransPennine Express service as off the December 2023 timetable on this Article. The issue I'm having is that the only sources about the withdrawal are from before the withdrawal took place so any edits keep being reverted due to lack of recent sources. The only other evidence is that the trains have been removed from the TransPennine website, have not been visibly recorded (that I can find) on any services since the timetable change and do not show up on any services on RealTimeTrains. I was wondering if I was to email TransPennine directly and get a direct quote that the trains have infact been withdrawn (as announced in August) by email, if there would be a way to cite that and if that would be a valid source for wikipedia?

Thanks in advance

@Alexbrassington Alexbrassington (talk) 20:01, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

@Alexbrassington: Welcome to the Teahouse! Email correspondence from the company would not count as a verifiable published source. I suggest posting at Talk:TransPennine Express do see if other editors could help you find sources. GoingBatty (talk) 20:07, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

References such as this would be fine. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:11, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Myself and others have already tried to use the articles from September and August as sources but each time the edits have been reverted due to no source of withdrawal, just an announcement from the past that they would be Alexbrassington (talk) 20:19, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

So sounds like it would have to be a case of trying to get the company to publish an article or press release confirming that the trains have been withdrawn? I don't see how this would be different to them confirming by email but I understand that it's hard to prove that an email is genuine so I suspected that would be the answer. Surely though, if they said in August that the trains would be withdrawn and have said nothing since then the assumption should be that they didn't change their mind rather than assuming that they did? Alexbrassington (talk) 20:17, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Perhaps @Danners430: could explain why they are accepting forward-looking statements in citations 28 & 29 such as this supporting the assertion that TPE will be using a rolling stock in the future, but not supporting forward-looking statements that TPE will not be using the rolling stock in the future. It seems like very unhelpful WP:POINTY editing to use two different standards. --Tagishsimon (talk) 20:40, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

The difference is that that’s a published image in a rail magazine showing a locomotive that has already been liveried - it’s not a statement for example from TPE saying “we will apply this livery”, it’s already been applied. When it comes to the withdrawal, no source that I’ve found states that the plans to withdraw actually have gone ahead - how often have we seen plans to withdraw stock being announced, then being pushed back quietly? Example being GWR’s Castle HSTs. Of course, you and I know this isn’t the case - but it’s not WP:VERIFIABLE.

I might also add that the above source was likely added before I was regularly active, so I can’t really comment on whether it should’ve been used - I haven’t retrospectively looked at sourced in most cases. Danners430 (talk) 20:55, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Both references are of the same type, in that they both make forward-looking statements. If your head is turned by one having an image, I have a bridge to sell you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:13, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

It seems to me to be completely appropriate for the article to say that the company announced on such and such a date that they will start or stop using particular stock. But in the absence of a reliable report that they have done so, the article should not say anything further. A picture in a reliable source with an appropriate caption would be adequate for this, but not a picture on a random website. ColinFine (talk) 21:50, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

This has been my view, and in the absence of any other consensus what has been written in the article. Danners430 (talk) 21:57, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I've amended the page per https://www.tpexpress.co.uk/travelling-with-us/the-nova-fleets ... we are entitled per WP:PRIMARY to rely on TPE to define what its current trainsets are. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:13, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Alexbrassington, the best place to discuss this is Talk:TransPennine Express. Please ping the editors who objected. Cullen328 (talk) 21:16, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I hadn’t spotted that TPE had updated their site - that definitely counts as a source! Danners430 (talk) 08:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

What to do about a conflict of interest with removal of sourced information?

It's me again! At both Rukhsar Rehman & Faruk Kabir, User:BAPASSPHD has been removing sourced information without providing a good reason. On their talk page here, they claim to be from their legal team. This is a violation of WP:COI, right?

I'm unsure how to proceed here and would appreciate some help! Thank you for your time! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 04:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish: User talk:BAPASSPHD shows that the user has been blocked. GoingBatty (talk) 05:32, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

The blocked user may have a point. There was a rash of stories, all from unreliable sources, all echoing eachother, all the 29 and 30 Jun 2023, specifying that the couple had decided to end their marriage. That has somehow been parleyed into 'they are divorced' on WP. Seems like a major BLP fail on WPs part. --Tagishsimon (talk) 05:44, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, I wasn't too sure on that part. I did check the deprecated sources on WP:RS, but didn't see the cited one (or any of the top results) on the list. What's the right thing to do here - edit the text of the article to just reflect "they are ending their marriage", remove the claim entirely, or keep it as-is? Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 05:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I've put a note on both talk pages. I'd be in favour of removing the divorce business from both articles, since the sources are unreliable, and the supposed divorce may not have happened. --Tagishsimon (talk) 05:56, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm so so sorry - I just did some further looking and it looks like the same articles are popping up from June of this year. Read over a few of the articles and they're essentially garbage. 100% worth removing. In the future, I'll be sure to look more into BLPs before charging in headfirst. Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 06:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

No reason for you to be sorry; you were trying to do the right thing in dealing with the COI editor & you're clearly acting in good faith. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Schrödinger's jellyfish: I also added {{connected contributor}} on the article talk pages. GoingBatty (talk) 05:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Apparently, User:BAPASSPHD now indef blocked despite having been confirmed correct in denying the divorce. I left a note on Talk page how to appeal block, and in the future, because paid, propose changes on Talk pages versus editing articles directly. David notMD (talk) 09:38, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

How to delete a redirect?

I want to create a new article, but there's a redirect obstructing it. How can I have the redirect deleted to claim that namespace for my upcoming article? Sajjad Altaf (talk) 01:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Sajjad Altaf. If it's OK that you will not be registered as the page creator then you can convert the redirect to an article. See Wikipedia:Redirect#How to edit a redirect or convert it into an article. Your contributions will still appear in the page history. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Isn't there an alternative solution? Is there a template available that I can place at the beginning of the article to request its deletion? Sajjad Altaf (talk) 02:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sajjad Altaf: If the draft has been approved by WP:AFC you can use {{Db-afc-move}}, otherwise you need to list it at WP:RFD. Whatr is wrong with PrimeHunter's solution? RudolfRed (talk) 02:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

If you submit a draft for review at WP:AFC then others will probably take care of it for you if the draft is approved. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:59, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I see Sajjad Altaf has chosen to create their article at Khurd, Pakistan, leaving Khurd as a redirect to Khurd and Kalan. Honestly, until we get the ability to receive notifications for arbitrary articles (not just ones where we're in the database as first editor), I can't really fault the decision, even if it does feel a little vain. No comment on notability, sourcing, or article title. Folly Mox (talk) 04:30, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Khurd and Kalan may be the primary topic anyway. I have added a hatnote there to Khurd, Pakistan.[2] PrimeHunter (talk) 12:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

First Steps in Article Creation

Merry Christmas to all you fine folks at the Teahouse.

I was just wondering, how do I start creating pages and articles on Wikipedia? I want to do so for a cartoon I'm surprised hasn't had a dedicated page to it. The show in question is Kody Kapow, a cartoon that used to air on Sprout, and later Universal Kids for a short while after the rebrand of the channel. You don't have to provide me with exhaustive details, but I was wondering how to begin making an article, as I have yet to do so. Specifically, however, I was wondering what some good sources are which relate to the show. Accurate sources, I mean. I hope it's not too much trouble and not too silly a request and question.

Thank you, and I hope your holidays are going merrily. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 06:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

We would probably point you at WP:YFA and WP:RS, but equally note that there is no certainty that reliable sources exist for Kody Kapow, which might be why there is no article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:14, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. If perhaps you can find an accurate source, would you please let me know? I'm pretty sure I can explain the synopsis, characters, and (if I can find some way to watch them) the episodes, but I would like to fact check myself, just in case, because if I can help it, if it's inaccurate, I wouldn't include it. If I know it's inaccurate, anyway. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 06:19, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

This, probably. Maybe this. Again, maybe. ditto. This. The common theme for all of these is that they look like legitimate news sources, not blogs, fandoms, streaming services &c. Good luck. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for going through the trouble. Hopefully I can find at least something I can use. I won't ask for any more assistance, because I don't want you to go on potential wild goose chases, since into is so scarce, though I will let you know if what I read is accurate. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 06:39, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Triviatronic9000. The first step is also the most important step by far. Identify several reliable published sources that are entirely independent of Kody Kapow, and that devote significant coverage to that topic. The next step is to format references to those reliable sources, which is described in Referencing for Beginners. At this point, the most difficult part of the process is done, and you have not yet written a single word of prose. Then, you neutrally summarize in your own words what the reliable sources say, leaving out everything that is not verified by those sources. The rest is formatting the draft to Wikipedia's house style but that is straightforward. The first step is the hardest and most important step. Without identifying sources that comply with policy, it is not possible to write an acceptable Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 06:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I do not like to disagree with Tagishsimon, but, in my opinion, all the coverage in the sources linked above was generated by press releases and public relations by the show's creators. I do not see any independent coverage there. A phrase like The show is billed to launch followed by lengthy quotes from a network executive does not indicate independent coverage. A phrase that says that Sprouts has greenlighted a new animated series is evidence that the coverage is generated by public relations, as the author has clearly not seen the (future, at that time) series, and is parroting network talking points. We learn from another that Jason Alexander has been tapped to lead the voice cast which is set for premiere July 15. This is not independent reporting. It is clearly recapitulation of a network press release. And so on. Cullen328 (talk) 07:09, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. Can I use the website of the company that made the show? Or is that not independent enough? I ask because I saw that it was on there. Kodiak, the production company is. Triviatronic9000 (talk) 13:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

You can use that to corroborate uncontentious facts about the show, but not to demonstrate the Notability of the show, as it is clearly not independent of the show. Indeed, it's about as non-independent as a source could be. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 14:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Replacing a redirect with a new article

Hi, the article draft https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kezia_Hayter is ready to publish but there is a redirect on the page "Kezia Hayter". Can someone please publish the draft over the redirect, or leave me instructions on how to do so? Thanks and merry Christmas to all those celebrating today! MurielMary (talk) 10:49, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Done! -- Hoary (talk) 12:27, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

It was indeed ready to publish. Good work on that draft-now-article by both of you. A merry Ziemassvētki to you and all. -- Hoary (talk) 12:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@MurielMary: You could have used {{db-afc-move}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 13:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I've also found the folks at the technical move requests board helpful, especially if you explain that the draft in question is ready for mainspace. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Citation

Can this be used as a citation for an article? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 20:48, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping: Hello! Which article are you referring to and where do you want to include the citation? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping Welcome to the Teahouse this Christmas Day. You didn't supply any context to your question, but I'm pretty sure the answer is likely to be "No!". A short looping video with Josh Hutcherson's name on it hardly seems like proof of anything other than the fact he may exist - and that is not in doubt. How exactly would you propose it would be supporting a specific factual statement added to the article about him? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Can A Muslim Say Merry Christmas

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.

OP's question not related to Wikipedia editing at all, seems to be rhetorical and most likely runs afoul of WP:NOTFORUM. -- Marchjuly (talk) 21:37, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

---

Muslims are warned not to say “Merry Christmas” in Islam. This is because Islam teaches us to stay away from joining in festivals and traditions that do not agree with our beliefs. “Merry Christmas” could seem like something nice, however, it may also be seen as supporting beliefs that are against Islamic principles. Preventing the copying of rituals from other religions is the main problem. Muslims are reminded to uphold their religious beliefs and avoid celebrations connected to other religions, such as Christmas. To put it another way, Muslims are advised to show others kindness and friendship in non-Christmas-related ways. Talhaahmed25 (talk) 17:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Talhaahmed25: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Do you have any questions related to Wikipedia? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Can A Muslim Say Merry Christmas Talhaahmed25 (talk) 17:29, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Folly Mox (talk) 17:31, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

the answer is not Muslims are warned not to say “Merry Christmas” in Islam. This is because Islam teaches us to stay away from joining in festivals and traditions that do not agree with our beliefs. “Merry Christmas” could seem like something nice, however, it may also be seen as supporting beliefs that are against Islamic principles. Preventing the copying of rituals from other religions is the main problem. Muslims are reminded to uphold their religious beliefs and avoid celebrations connected to other religions, such as Christmas. To put it another way, Muslims are advised to show others kindness and friendship in non-Christmas-related ways Talhaahmed25 (talk) 17:33, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I don’t think this is Wikipedia related, do you have anything actually related to editing? Babysharkboss2 was here!! (Talking Heads) (DANTE) 18:01, 25 December 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.

How do I go about making a page about this foundation I am in

Hi, Im new on wikipedia. My friends gave me the task of making a wiki page but i got a speedy decline. What should i do. this is the draft of the article.

Extended content

Title: Puzzler Foundation Introduction: The Puzzler Foundation is a non-profit organization, registered as a 501(c)(3), dedicated to supporting underprivileged children through various educational initiatives. Founded on December 2nd, 2021, and headquartered in Michigan, USA, the foundation's mission revolves around leveling the educational playing field for children with limited resources. With a strong emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics) education, the foundation has been instrumental in providing books, educational tools, and infrastructure support to enhance learning opportunities for children in underserved communities. The Puzzler Foundation's approach is rooted in the belief that access to modern technology and quality education is crucial for fostering confidence and competitiveness in today's global, tech-centric society. Its efforts extend beyond the local community, having made a significant impact across several continents, particularly by donating STEM-focused books and facilitating essential infrastructure development in educational settings. History: The Puzzler Foundation was established in 2021 by individuals deeply motivated by their personal experiences and family histories. The founders, having a direct connection to the challenges of growing up in underprivileged environments, particularly in rural India, were inspired to create an organization that could make a tangible difference in the lives of children facing similar challenges. This background played a pivotal role in shaping the foundation’s mission and approach. In its early years, the foundation focused on small-scale, community-based projects, gradually expanding its reach and impact. Over time, the Puzzler Foundation has evolved, marking significant milestones such as expanding its programs to multiple continents, reaching thousands of children through its book donation and STEM education initiatives, and developing substantial infrastructure projects to aid educational development. Mission and Vision: The mission of the Puzzler Foundation is to enrich the lives of underprivileged children by providing them with the necessary tools and resources to succeed in a technology-driven world. The foundation is committed to fostering an environment where every child, regardless of their socioeconomic background, has access to quality education and the opportunity to develop critical skills for their future. The vision of the Puzzler Foundation is a world where educational inequalities are minimized, and every child has the chance to reach their full potential. This vision is pursued through a combination of direct educational support, resource provision, and infrastructure development, all aimed at creating a more equitable future for children in underserved communities. Programs and Activities: The Puzzler Foundation operates several key programs to fulfill its mission. One of the primary focuses is on STEM education, where the foundation provides resources and learning opportunities to spark interest in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. This is achieved through the donation of STEM-focused books, educational toys, and STEM kits. Another significant area of work is infrastructure development, where the foundation contributes to building and enhancing educational facilities to create conducive learning environments. In an orphanage location in Tamil Nadu, they have worked on giving food, beds, and a wall, and more recently, they have received a donation to build a solar water heater so the children can have running water throughout the day and night. Additionally, the foundation organizes book donation drives, offering a range of educational and enriching reading materials to children. These books have been provided to schools near their headquarters in Detroit, Michigan. These programs are designed not just to provide immediate educational resources but also to inspire a long-term love of learning and exploration in the children they serve. Funding and Support: The Puzzler Foundation's operations and programs are funded through a combination of private donations, corporate sponsorships, and fundraising events. As a registered 501(c)(3) nonprofit, it relies heavily on the generosity of individual donors and the support of businesses committed to corporate social responsibility. The foundation also engages in crowdfunding campaigns to support specific projects and initiatives. This diverse funding model enables the Puzzler Foundation to maintain and expand its outreach and impact. The foundation places a high value on transparency and stewardship, ensuring that the funds received are used effectively to advance its mission of empowering underprivileged children through education. They are currently accepting donations through their website at https://puzzlerfoundation.org/.

Thank you Clarkgf1 (talk) 21:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Clarkgf1: Hello! Did you post it on your user page? Because I see that it got deleted previously and on the talk page there is a message about speedy deletion of your user page. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:21, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

"How do I go about making a page about this foundation I am in?" The short answer is that you don't. Theroadislong (talk) 21:22, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: the version that @Clarkgf1 posted here also falls under WP:G11, what do you think? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:24, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes precisely it is unambiguous advertising or promotion and would be speedy deleted. Theroadislong (talk) 21:28, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Clarkgf1, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you look back through this page and its archives, you will find hundreds and hundreds of questions that are basically the same as yours, many of them based on the fundamental misunderstanding that Wikipedia is a place to tell the world about yourself or something your are involved in. I recommend that you look at WP:BOSS.

If your organisation meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability - basically that there has been enough independent material reliably published about it to base an article on - then there could be an article about it. Since you are connected with the organisation (you have a conflict of interest) you are likely to find it hard to write in a sufficiently neutral way about it, and you are discouraged from doing so. If you press ahead with it, you will need to forget everything you know about it, and write a summary of what the independent sources say even if you think they are wrong. "Mission and Vision" is exactly the sort of thing that does not belong in a Wikipedia article, except in the rare case that an independent commentator has specifically discussed these.

Also, since you talk about being "in the foundation", you are almost certainly what Wikipedia regards as a paid editor (even if you are not financially compensated), and must make the appropriate formal declaration.

My suggestion would be that if you wish to contribute to this amazing resource, you forget about your foundation entirely and find existing articles that you would like to improve; but if you are here solely to tell the world about your foundation, then you find another outlet for your promotion. ColinFine (talk) 22:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding information based on what one's family members said...

... is not allowed. Perhaps someone can explain this better than I did to a new well-meaning editor here. He already made one edit and I fear we have to revert them. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 03:12, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Archive my talk page

Can someone help me place what's on my talk page in the archive. Everytime I try to do it I make a horrible hash of it. TIA MaskedSinger (talk) 19:18, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

I just added the boilerplate to automate archiving on your talkpage. Hopefully within a day or so it will trigger for you. It's a little annoying that the standard user-talk header, the auto-archiver, and the archives-list are three separate templates that also interact with each other sometimes. DMacks (talk) 20:20, 24 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you so much!! MaskedSinger (talk) 05:03, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Looks like you're all set: [3] [4] Enjoy the lack of clutter! DMacks (talk) 03:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

how make new name for link

Not sure if I'm using the correct terminology. To get to the "Encephalitozoon cuniculi" article, I can type in that name or "E. cuniculi" or "E cuniculi". However, if I'm editing a different article & want to link to that article, within the square double brackets, if I put in "E. cuniculi", it gives a red link (page does not exist). How do I edit it for this to work? I know I can do "E Cuniculi | E. Cuniculi", but my understanding is that using "E." is the correct way to indicate this organism. Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 02:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

Try expanding the name maybe, or am I misunderstanding the question?

Thanks

Geardona (talk) 02:12, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I want to be able to put into my article "E. Cuniculi" (in double brackets) but that does not work. Sunandshade (talk) 02:20, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Sunandshade and welcome to the Teahouse! E. cuniculi should work (not piped), but if you capitalize cuniculi (you shouldn't anyway, per WP:NCCAPS) it won't work. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 02:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. It was capitalized. I did a cut/paste from somewhere & didn't notice that. I know it should NOT be capitalized but I missed it. But funny how "E Cuniculi" (no period, capitalized) DOES work. But I'm not going to use that. I'll be using "E. cuniculi". Sunandshade (talk) 02:29, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: E. cuniculi is a blue link for me. Can you clarify your question? — Preceding unsigned comment added by RudolfRed (talk • contribs)

@RudolfRed:: One pedantic, but important point: That the link is blue, only says that it exists - I've lost count of the number of links I've had to correct because somebody ignored the question of whether the link was for the correct "John Smith", so please get in the habit of checking this... Autokefal Dialytiker (talk) 08:42, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: This shows the only current redirects are E Cuniculi and E. cuniculi. Wikilinks are case sensitive on all characters except the first so E cuniculi and E. Cuniculi don't work. The search box is not case sensitive so you can enter "E cuniculi" or "E. Cuniculi" in the search box. See Wikipedia:Redirect for how to make more redirects, but we try to limit redirects which only differ in their casing. If E. cuniculi is the correct or preferred way to write the name then a redirect on E. Cuniculi would encourage editors who write it in a poor way. We do have many redirects from poor casing but a lot of them go back to before the search box became case insensitive, or they were made by editors who remember that time. PrimeHunter (talk) 03:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for explaining that. The proper way is for the redirect to be only "E. cuniculi". That way editors are forced to write it correctly. However, if "E Cuniculi" is removed, that could break a lot of links. However, if I'm reading this correctly, only Holland Lop uses the (incorrect) link. The others are this discussion & my sandbox. Is it ok for me to remove that redirect? But then someone searching would have to type the "." after the E. What is best? Sunandshade (talk) 05:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: I updated the Holland Lop article to use the correct redirect. GoingBatty (talk) 05:55, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Great. Should I remove the "E Cuniculi" redirect, as discussed above? I'm new here & don't want to make changes in haste. Sunandshade (talk) 06:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: Redirects can only be deleted by administrators. Others can nominate for deletion at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. E Cuniculi was created in 2010. It takes more to delete an old than a new redirect because it may have unknown incoming links from external sites, and it may be linked in old revisions in page histories. Also, there is no redirect on E cuniculi or any other casing without a period so if we delete it then it will not work to type "E cuniculi" or other casings in the search box, and we do like that to work for plausible searches. I would just leave it. PrimeHunter (talk) 12:45, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. I appreciate you explaining the history of how things work here. Let sleeping dogs lie, as they say. Sunandshade (talk) 04:20, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

How do I get a second wiki user name?

I would like a second username to separate contributions on a completely different topic. How can this be done, please? This is for a guebuibe "sock puppet :-)" ----MountVic127 (talk) 07:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

create a second account. Do check if it passes WP:LEGITSOCK though. – robertsky (talk) 09:35, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Where to report bugs on Wikipedia

I guess I've found a bug on Wikipedia. Where can I report it? Aredoros87 (talk) 15:53, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: Hello! See Wikipedia:Bug_reports_and_feature_requests. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:54, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks! Aredoros87 (talk) 15:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: I suggest you first say what it's about here. Then we can guide you to the right place, say if it has already been reported, or maybe fix it right away or explain that it's not a real problem. Most things don't belong at Phabricator. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:17, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, I already reported it. Here's the link. Aredoros87 (talk) 18:23, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: Yeah, it's definitely a weird glitch, I tried doing it and not only the note dublicates, it triples when "Cite" is unclicked and gets quadrupled when clicked again and so on. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

I didn't know about the clicks. Good catch :) Aredoros87 (talk) 20:15, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: I made a simpler test page User:PrimeHunter/VisualEditor note duplication. Phabricator does seem appropriate here although I'm, not sure they will care enough to work on a fix. They may just write it off as an odd but inconsequential interaction between VisualEditor and the implementation of {{Infobox scientist}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:02, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

It's not specific to scientist infobox. I tried it with different infobox. And I still reproduce the issue. Aredoros87 (talk) 21:10, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Actually it's way more complex. Now I added another note with same group name outside of the infobox. When I switch to VisualEdit mode, this time the note outside of infobox disappears. Aredoros87 (talk) 21:13, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

@Aredoros87: Is it related to Wikipedia:VisualEditor#Limitations footnotes issue with infoboxes? RudolfRed (talk) 21:46, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Not exactly I guess. Aredoros87 (talk) 11:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Svg logo

Hello everyone! How to create svg logo for Wikipedia articles? Do not forget to tag me while replying. – 𝙰𝚔𝚜𝚑𝚊𝚍𝚎𝚟™ 🗿 08:13, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Akshadev You may find the advice and guidance that you need on logo re-use in articles at Wikipedia:Logos. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 11:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Image crop gone wrong?

Hello, I tried cropping the fair use image on Neuro-sama's infobox to center it better, but instead of having the updated picture on the article, now we have a distorted version of the old image. Does anyone know what went wrong and how to fix it? Thanks. SunflowerYuri (talk) 11:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @SunflowerYuri, not exactly sure about your concern. From what I can see, the figure is in the center of the image, and every thing looks good. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 11:42, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@SunflowerYuri This is almost certainly an issue with your browser. Try to WP:BYPASS your cache. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, you were right, this was an issue with my browser. I tried on another browser and it looks right. Thank you for your help! SunflowerYuri (talk) 12:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

How can I get this post approved?

Hello,

I tried to publish a biography about Cal Currier, the youngest person to sail trans-Atlantic solo, and it was denied for being "not adequately supported by reliable sources." It was supported by 10 news articles and he has been a highly publicized person. What can I do to make the article better so that it is approved?

Thanks,

West WestCurrier (talk) 06:00, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

It - Draft:Cal Currier - seems a bit WP:BLP1E and a bit WP:NOTNEWS. And you may well have a WP:COI. I don't see why sailing a boat from place A to place B merits an encyclopedia article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:13, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@WestCurrier: I suggest starting a discussion at Talk:Transatlantic crossing to see if it would be a good fit to include this person's achievement in that article instead of trying to write a full article about it. RudolfRed (talk) 06:20, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

In my opinion, his solo crossing does not belong in Transatlantic crossing or Transatlantic sailing record. I cleaned up the draft, but Tagishsimon's points probably apply. David notMD (talk) 12:25, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Maplink Template

When I try using the Maplink template, the map doesn't show at all, just an error message. The template instructions just doesn't seem to give me the right details, and it seems these maps are connected and created by an outside source. How do I pinpoint what location I want to find on the Maplink and in what form? (e.g. zoom, line, shape, etc.)
- Alex26337 (talk) 11:03, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, so update: I found some information, but now I don't know how to find the QID on Open Street Maps. Can someone give me a detailed, understandable answer? (I've been confused for some of the instructions on the Help pages) - Alex26337 (talk) 11:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Alex26337: Hello! Please tell me what article are you working on? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:53, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm working on Matshakatini Nature Reserve. I recently created this article and I'm just trying to add more information. - Alex26337 (talk) 12:46, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Alex26337, the openstreetmap id for the locator map of Musina seems to be 611439. I'm not sure if you will be able to add that to the template or whether you'll need to create a Wikidata item for Matshakatini itself. Folly Mox (talk) 12:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh right, the how-to bit: click on "Wikidata item" from the vertical ellipsis menu (or wherever the page tools spawn in your skin). The Wikidata page should have an Open Street Map number. Folly Mox (talk) 12:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Folly Mox Firstly, I see this location has the wikidata ID, which is what I'm mainly looking for. However, the one I need is for this location, which doesn't have its own wikidata ID, and I don't think I can just plug one in, 'cause the IDs are unique.

Secondly, is this vertical menu on OpenStreet Maps or Wikidata? - Alex26337 (talk) 13:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, it seems all I have to do is make a new wikidata page for this information, and I can link the map. Am I correct? (Sorry, all this is happening so fast) - Alex26337 (talk) 13:08, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry I missed your follow up question. I was making breakfast then attending a different thing. I see you've created a Wikidata item for the nature preserve, and linked it on OSM, which is in fact the procedure I would have suggested had I seen these messages in time. To answer unnecessarily the other question, in my skin on Wikipedia (Minerva), the Wikidata item as well as Special:WhatLinksHere, Special:PageInfo etc are within a three vertical dots menu on the top right of the interface. It seems you've located this as well.

Apologies for not getting back to this sooner, but it appears you've figured it out in the time it would have taken me to explain anyway ☺️ Folly Mox (talk) 13:39, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I want to be an editor!

Please help me destroy vandalism on Wikipedia. 2601:98A:A00:DB50:D03F:7377:C578:7742 (talk) 13:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Then stop doing stuff like [5]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:43, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

IP address blocked for one year for two acts of blatant vandalism. David notMD (talk) 15:45, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

AfD page

I was recently part of a discussion about the WP:AFD page and possible changes to it. Where do I go to talk about that? 100.7.34.111 (talk) 16:07, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

IP editor: from your contribution history, that discussion seems to be at WT:Articles_for_deletion#Saying_I_could_have_AFD'd_the_last_article_when_I_couldn't. There haven't been any more comments for a week now. You can still pursue individual deletion requests in a different thread there and/or make a specific proposal for a general change at the Village Pump: WP:VPR or subpages. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

strikethrough of text in the body of an article

i was editing and i clicked on an article that had a whole paragraph of strikethrough text in the lead section of the article. what is this about and should i do anything with that? i've never seen that before. this article Toothlessness Iljhgtn (talk) 18:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Hello! Someone noticed that the text was duplicated but was not bold enough to just remove it, so they put strikethrough. I've just removed this paragraph entirely. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:33, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, I've looked a bit further in the history, so they removed it entirely first, but they just said "Fixed typo" in the summary, then some other editor saw this and decided to revert this edit because they probably thought that it was just another vandalism. Yeah, that's why you always need to write in the summary why you removed something. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I didn't think it looked right for there to be a strikethrough in the main space like that. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Never seen that before.. Iljhgtn (talk) 19:15, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Why was my article not reviewed?

I've been waiting for weeks for my draft, Fabien Vienne, to be reviewed. When will it be reviewed? Bera678 (talk) 15:16, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Maybe never. That's volunteers for you. --Tagishsimon (talk) 15:19, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

It's been reviewed four times and declined four times. Theroadislong (talk) 15:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bera678: you've resubmitted it four times. Does that answer your question? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 15:44, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Now Declined five times. David notMD (talk) 15:47, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Per WP:N, there aren't enough independent secondary sources about the topic. Stoplookin9 (talk) 15:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Is that bad? Bera678 (talk) 15:56, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bera678: It means that if that is all there is to talk about Vienne, then the draft will never make it to mainspace. What irks me when I read it is that it doesn't have a neutral point of view and it comes off as promotional at some points. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:32, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Please help me to improve my draft: Bera678 (talk) 18:43, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

I am not an AfC reviewer and I'm not interested in editing drafts. I would ask reviewers who've declined your draft for help, preferably by presenting to them sources that you think are reliable for Wikipedia's standards. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:29, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Notability criteria for a specific restaurant

Hello. I am planning to write an article about a local restaurant. However, I'm not sure if it's going to be notable. What makes a restaurant notable? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 17:48, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: Hello! See WP:ORGCRIT. A company, corporation, organization, group, product, or service is presumed notable if it has been the subject of significant coverage in multiple reliable secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Also be careful, if you are an owner of this restaurant or you are working there, it would be a conflict of interest. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, TrademarkedTWOrantula. Please pay careful attention to the section of that guideline found at WP:AUD which says Attention solely from local media (e.g., the weekly newspaper for a small town), or media of limited interest and circulation (e.g., a newsletter exclusively for people with a very unusual job), is not an indication of notability. At least one regional, statewide, provincial, national, or international source is necessary. Local newspapers will provide run of the mill reviews of almost every new restaurant that opens in their communities, and this routine coverage does not establish notability. Consider an article I wrote about a small restaurant in a very remote area of California, Whoa Nellie Deli. I used sources published in three major California daily newspapers located hundreds of miles away, plus one in Texas, and three national publications, the New York Times, Gourmet, and The Atlantic. Cullen328 (talk) 19:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

How do I delete my own draft?

I wrote a draft for this restaurant, but after reading WP:AUD, I don't think it's notable. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 20:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula: You can place {{Db-self}} at the top of the page and an admin will delete it. RudolfRed (talk) 20:09, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

No more references for my draft

I literally got the only websites on the intenet for my draft Draft:Quizimaze.

The photo lower down is a reference itself for the section questions. Orastor (talk) 20:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Orastor: Sources don't need to be online. If there are no more sources, then the subject is not notable and doesn't merit an encyclopedia article. RudolfRed (talk) 20:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Specifying childen

I am trying to find editing guidelines for specifying children in a biography box. For example, my edit of Natalie Wood's two children was reverted because one of the children doesn’t have her own distinct Wikipedia article "yet". There appears to be a policy involving citing a number and the word "including", but my multiple attempts to locate the help or template, or guideline for this specification have failed. I have two questions, but answering the "how" will answer the "what". That is, what are the guidelines -- where are they described?

But more importantly is: how should I be able to locate the correct relevant guideline ON MY OWN? There are so many guidelines, I don't understand how to navigate or search the guidelines to find answers to specific issues such as typified by this one.

Lastly I have seen hypertext brackets to pages which don't YET exist, and it is permitted. But when I made a hypertext link to Natalie Wood's 2nd daughter and the page doesn't exist YET, the editor reverted my change due to her article doesn't exist. Where can I read about when making hypertext links to nonexistent pages is okay or not? James Rodriguez 17:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrodor (talk • contribs)

For infoboxes, the best place to start is the infobox template page, so {{Infobox person}} where there is a section explaining the expectations for the child= parameter: "Typically the number of children (e.g., 3); only list names of independently notable or particularly relevant children. Names may be preceded by a number to show total children and avoid implying that named children are the only offspring. For multiple entries, use an inline list. For privacy reasons, consider omitting the names of living children, unless notable." In general, if you type help: and then some word - help:redlinks - into the search box, you'll be taken to the appropriate guideline or policy. --Tagishsimon (talk) 17:14, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Superb. I just tried the tip of searching for "info:infobox" and it took me right where I wanted to go. This may be meta, but how should a new editor have learned that little tip about searching for "help:..."? Obviously there's some basic "how to use Wikipedia help search" stuff i never read from the get-go. James Rodriguez 17:24, 26 December 2023 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jrodor (talk • contribs)

@Jrodor: Most visitors are only readers and we are making an encyclopedia for them so the search box only searches our encyclopedia articles at first and not all the behind the scenes stuff. A search results page has a "Search in" box where you can choose to search other places. In the desktop version of the site ("Desktop" at the bottom of the mobile version), the top right of search results pages have a "Help" link to Help:Searching which explains more. wp: in front of a search is often more useful than help: for editors. wp: (alias for Wikipedia:) searches the Wikipedia namespace which means pages starting with "Wikipedia:". We use those pages for a lot of things. help: searches pages with "Help:" in front. We use that much less. You use the mobile version which omits many interface links and doesn't have the "Help" link. Mobile screens are usually small but I often think the mobile version omits too much. See Wikipedia:Red link for links to non-existing pages. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:01, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Jrodor, good question. If you start at Main page (on a laptop), there is the link "Help" in the meny on the left, where you find a link to "Help:Searching" and there you will learn about namespaces, including the "help namespace". This is not bleeding obvious, but it's there. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:06, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Jrodor: Welcome to the Teahouse! I find searching for a shortcut like "WP:SEARCHTEXT" usually takes me to the right policy, guideline, or essay. For example, I just tried WP:CHILDREN, which is a shortcut to Wikipedia:Protecting children's privacy. GoingBatty (talk) 23:41, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Solar permitting use

Solar permitting use 49.249.83.10 (talk) 08:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello. Do you have a question about using Wikipedia that's related to solar permitting use? 331dot (talk) 08:28, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:European_Seniors%27_Union too promotional?

A few months ago I published an article about the European Seniors' Union, which is active in the European Union to represent the interests of older people. It was previously pointed out to me that this article comes across as promotional and relies too much on primary sources. In the meantime, I have deleted a number of items that could be considered promotional. In addition, I have added several links to press websites and independent organizations. I just received the message that my contribution was placed in the draft space because it was still too promotional. Can anyone explain to me what is missing or too promotional in this article?

(See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:European_Seniors%27_Union)

Luxil (talk) 12:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Luxil: Hello! Phrases like these: played a significant role in..., The organization is dedicated to..., in response to a growing need..., gained recognition..., develop crucial resolutions..., reflect the ESU's commitment to...

They give the promotional tone to the article and that goes against the neutral-style policy. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wait, why does it show that you sent this message at 12:14 UTC? It's still 11:43 UTC. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Luxii, and welcome to the Teahouse. It looks to me (I have only looked quickly) as if most of your references are either to the Union's own publications, or to official publications of the EU or its bodies.

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.

The University of Goettingen paper might be a suitable source - I haven't seen it - but I don't think any of the others are.

Sections - or even sentences - on "goals and values" are almost never appropriate in a Wikipedia article about an organisation, because these almost always come only from the subject. Only if an independent commentator has discussed the organisation's goals and values specifically (and at some length) will it be appropriate to mention them.

The section "Aged people's driving licence discussion" has no relevant citation, as far as I can see: the citation given does not mention the Seniors' Union anywhere, and is therefore of no value whatever for this article. ColinFine (talk) 11:53, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Clarification on sources

This may seem like a stupid question but why are secondary sources more reliable than primary sources in Wikipedia's case? Is it because that they are more factual than them as they are basically just a very thorough analysis (and maybe correction) of the primary sources?

Thanks 2A0A:EF40:1003:E01:B01F:22B6:A0A4:B6FC (talk) 15:52, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Basically you can't trust the primary sources because they will write about themselves with bias (obviously). And you also need to show notability of the subject because for every subject in the internet you can find primary sources, but they are only notable (and deserve an article on Wikipedia) if they are covered in many secondary (independent) sources. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:54, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the (rather speedy) reply! Just wanted to make sure, that's all. 2A0A:EF40:1003:E01:B01F:22B6:A0A4:B6FC (talk) 15:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

IP editor: you might like to read the essay WP:USEPRIMARY. Not all primary sources are "bad" or "biased" and not all secondary sources are "good". The latter may have mis-interpreted the former. The point is that secondary sources show that a topic is likely to be wikinotable because some independent writer has commented on the primary material. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:27, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Because 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) 13:59, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Vial of Life

Hi, just reporting a couple of possible issues with Vial of Life:

1. Punctuation is poor, e.g., the use of hyphens. One example: is no longer able to express their own preferences - due to illness or unconsciousness.

2. The various references to vialoflife.com/vialoflife.org/"Vial of Life.com" seem to border on advertising... though the site seems to be down anyway.

3. Factual errors, e.g., Due to his historical claim to the Vial of Life name, no organization can copyright the name. That's wrong twice over. First, copyright applies to expressions of ideas, not to names. Trademarks do apply to names, but a name that was only in historical use isn't trademarkable, generally speaking—and the particular name may not be defendable as a trademark anyway due to its low distinctiveness. As it happens, the semantics described are actually closest to the semantics of patents.

4. The article is US-centric, e.g., The names of the other more comprehensive physician orders (MOST form or POLST form) will vary by your state. The only states I have are "awake" and "asleep" :P

Would be nice if someone could at least drop an appropriate template ("This article has multiple issues" or whatever) at the top of the article. Thanks. 2A0D:6FC2:6A92:3F00:0:0:0:5F9 (talk) 11:17, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, IP editor! Just be bold and drop the template yourself or even try fixing some of the issues you mentioned here. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:25, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Added the box in https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Vial_of_Life&diff=prev&oldid=1192070680. I'm afraid I don't have time to fix the issues. Cheers 2A0D:6FC2:6A92:3F00:0:0:0:5F9 (talk) 12:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

did a do there, and

• how does "emt" stand for "emergency responder"? i thought it stood for "emergency medical technician". it's what wiktionary says, at the very least
• the state thing is a skill issue, i'm half-asleep roughly 30% of the time

cogsan _{(give me attention) (see my deeds)} 13:42, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to report content issues such as these is the article's talk page: Talk:Vial of Life. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

One-line pages

Hi! Lately I have been adding references to articles that have been marked as unreferenced since many years. I stumbled across several articles regarding municipalities in Barbados:

• Baxters
• Breedy's
• Bruce Vale
• Chalky Mount
• White Hill

(there are probably more of them)

They are all one-line articles which provide no added value to the encyclopedia and have been marked as unreferenced since 2009. While populated places fulfill the requirements of notability, I wonder if such articles should be kept on Wikipedia. Today they would not be accepted as a new page.

I tried reading the guidelines for deletion and merging and I didn't find a "best practice" on how to deal with this kind of content. How would you proceed? The pages could possibly be improved by finding sources and additional information, but nobody has touched them for almost 15 years. Broc (talk) 11:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Broc: Hello! You can try searching for sources, but if you can't find anything, then you can nominate these articles for AfD. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 11:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi @Deltaspace42, thanks for the answer. I thought of looking for references, but I was wondering: does an article whose entire content is "Baxters is a village in the parish of Saint Andrew in Barbados." deserve a page of its own? Broc (talk) 13:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

there may be references, but the author just didn't care enough to use them. otherwise, no. ltbdl (talk) 13:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Ltbdl: then the article should be moved to the draft space, am I right? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:57, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

no. the drafitication process is only for new articles (generally, 1 month old or less). although it can happen as an afd result. ltbdl (talk) 14:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Deltaspace42 @Ltbdl thanks for your input. I added references to one of the pages, see this edit. Would you consider the page of sufficient quality? It still seems extremely barebone and I think today it would not be accepted as a new page. Broc (talk) 15:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Broc: You may find more such articles by looking at these articles created by Dr. Blofeld in 2006. GoingBatty (talk) 15:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Need some help improving my own draft

Hello, I would like some help or advice to improve my draft Draft:Tomb Raider I-III Remastered, which is about an unreleased game that isn't out until February (which may explain why my submission has been declined several times before and I really wanted to submit for review this as a real full article). MinionsFan1998 (talk) 05:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! As the declining reviewers have mentioned, the game being unreleased certainly does affect its likelihood to be approved at AfC. I think you've got a really great start here, and I certainly encourage you to keep working on this draft, as more reliable sources come out. If you haven't already, I'd suggest looking at the WikiProject Video Games list of reliable sources, and see if you can find anything new. Being that it's been over a month since it was last declined and it hasn't been edited very much since then, I'll also say that patience is key here, and you'll want to wait until the article has significantly improved since it was declined. Leading up to its release, more and more reliable sources will become available, and you'll be able to get it up to mainspace quality. Remember, Wikipedia has no deadline, and good luck! sawyer * he/they * talk 06:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

It is an interesting one. It needs to demonstrate notability, and right now that seems to rest on refs 9, 10 & 11, all of which are stories dated 14 Sept 2023 and presumably reflect a press release. Ref 2 appears to be the company producing the remaster (?) and so is not reliable. The wait and/or find better supporting refs seems to be good advice. Presumably there will be reviews in a couple of months, which should help. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@MinionsFan1998: Once reviews are published by reliable sources, you'll be able to add a "Reception" section, which will help with the notability requirements. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

как задать вопрос ?

как задать вопрос ? Виктор Рахман (talk) 16:10, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Виктор Рахман: Привет! Это английская Википедия, и тут лучше говорить на английском. У вас вопрос именно по английской Википедии? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! What question would you like to ask? If you'd prefer to continue in Russian, I'll point you in the direction of Russian Wikipedia. sawyer * he/they * talk 16:15, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sawyer-mcdonell: judging by his user page, he's banned there. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:16, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Нужно сделать текст моего аккаунта сделать доступным любому землянину по гипер-ссылке : ".........".

Нужно сделать текст моего аккаунта - первой единственной страницы - сделать доступным любому землянину по указанной гипер-ссылке : ".........".

Виктор Рахман (talk) 16:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, what question are you asking? Nevermind, they've been indef blocked sawyer * he/they * talk 17:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

What is a good question that I should be asking of the Teahouse?

i have asked many questions here, but never asked what i should ask. I once heard from a mentor that one of the best questions to ask is, "What question should I be asking?", so I am applying that now here too. just seeing if there is anything that i could be doing to improve. Iljhgtn (talk) 20:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Some good questions to ask would be, "What makes a topic notable enough to merit an article?" (that one usually causes a lot of problems with newer users, and for that, read WP:GNG), "What can I do to improve Wikipedia?" (see the task center), "Where do I go when I need help from users to do something specific?" (see WP:Noticeboards). You can ask any questions that you have personally here that's related to Wikipedia. Cheers ‍ Relativity 20:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

wikipedia page

I created a page and submitted / "Published" on December 14th 2023 and have not had a response.

What is my next step?

MichaelCousins1 (talk) 21:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@MichaelCousins1: Hello! Did you create an article about yourself in your sandbox? Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

So, first of all, you need to create a page in Draft space, not in your sandbox (see Help:Your_first_article).

Secondly, if this article is about yourself, it constitutes conflict of interest. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @MichaelCousins1, your next step is to wait. Make yourself a cup of tea. Get a good book. The articles for creation process runs on volunteer time, volunteer interest, and volunteer patience, just like the rest of Wikipedia. Cheers, 🎄Cremastra 🎄 (talk) 21:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Cremastra: this user created an article not in draft space, but in their sandbox, and it looks like the article is about themselves, judging by the nickname. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

...and, I note, they haven't actually submitted the draft for review yet (and if they did, it would be immediately declined). Thanks for the info. 🎄Cremastra 🎄 (talk) 21:39, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

(..edit conflict.) I did make the move to Draft while this debate was going on but would fully support the arguments made above. Velella  ^{Velella Talk}   21:43, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@MichaelCousins1: Your next steps would be a) read WP:COI b) find reliable sources to use as references for the article, per WP:RS and add references perhaps per Help:Referencing for beginners. Right now it has none. c) press the 'submit for review' button in the template on the article. As it is, per the comments above, it stands no chance of being promoted as an article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:47, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

The page in question is Draft:Michael Cousins, btw. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, MichaelCousins1, and welcome to the Teahouse. Unfortunately, like many new editors, you have mistaken Wikipedia for a site where it is appropriate to tell the world about something (a.k.a. to promote it).

Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. It follows that, once you have found those independent sources, you will need to forget everything you know about yourself and write an article based solely on what those sources say.

Do you see why it is hard to create an article about yourself? ColinFine (talk) 22:21, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Venting

I just spent several hours trying to finish revisions on an article. When I was ready to publish, I got a message saying there was an edit conflict and I could not post my work, or had to do it manually.

Wikipedia really needs to figure out how to have one editor at a time working on an article. Two hours worth of work is just gone. I am not happy.

ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 13:30, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@ProfessorKaiFlai: Hello! There is a template for this situation: Template:In_use Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 13:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

WOW! Yesssssssssssssssssssss!

What a relief, I will never have this experience again. Thank you!! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 13:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm just going to point out that the template's only to let other editors know someone is working on an article; it doesn't prevent them from editing the article itself. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 13:55, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

ProfessorKaiFlai, I'm not aware of how the Visual Editor handles edit conflicts (it sounds like: not well), but in the source editor you're able to copy the source of the article including your changes, and can close and reopen the editor and paste the source back in, and manually incorporate the edit you conflicted with.

In general, the safest thing to do is save your work often. Two hours is an extremely long time to work on a single edit, and an edit that complicated will be difficult for others to review. If you find yourself working on an edit for more than fifteen or twenty minutes, it's probably a good idea just to publish your progress and then start up again where you left off. Best, Folly Mox (talk) 14:34, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yeah, the Visual Editor does not handle edit conflicts very well unfortunately, and I totally agree about making smaller edits. It's a lot easier to work methodically and in sections, and you're much less likely to run into problems with your work being lost! Perhaps working on an individual section or issue with the article and publishing it, and repeating that process, will be a more effective method. :) sawyer * he/they * talk 14:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@ProfessorKaiFlai: I've enabled the Paragraph-based edit conflict beta feature in my preferences, which sometimes helps to resolve those conflicts when someone else is working on a different section than I am. GoingBatty (talk) 15:20, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you all for these responses. I have found that once you get that edit conflict message there is not a way to get back to visual with your work saved. It has to be done in source, which I found to be too much in the wee hours of the morning.

It seems to me that we the editors are being left to scramble the best we can to address this issue. I have actually had this happen even while making what I think is a minor change that doesn't take a lot of time.

There must be a way to make sure that when you hit the EDIT button, that you are the only person working on that article. All others should be sealed out until your work is completed. Then if people want to change or undo or whatever, they can do so.

This is a technical problem that I'm sure the wikipedia higher ups can solve. I hope they see my rant and are moved to act! ProfessorKaiFlai (talk) 21:05, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

This is not exactly a new problem, ProfessorKaiFlai; only new to you. So for instance you suggest an edit lock on the article once a user hits the EDIT button. Two seconds of thought would lead you to the conclusion that such a feature would be misused, both by users to who hit edit but never subsequently hit submit; and by editors who maliciously want to lock other editors out of an article. You say it's a technical problem which you're sure can be fixed; but here we are, twenty-some years into wikipedia with this unfixed. Does that not give you a clue that there's a fairly fundamental problem? I don't know what the visual editor does when it comes across an edit conflict: I see there's zero documentation on edit conflicts in the visual editor, who does speak to the wretchedly shambolic nature of the wikipmedia foundation. It would be interesting if anyone familiar with that editor could enlighten us. --Tagishsimon (talk) 21:36, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I use the source editor on my smartphone, and I try to remember to copy my edit to my clipboard before I click "Publish changes". If I run into an edit conflict, I just immediately paste it and then publish the changes. Cullen328 (talk) 22:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: Last time I got an edit conflict in VE, it popped up an error message (Your changes could not be saved because of an edit conflict. Would you like to resolve the conflict manually?), along with a button "resolve manually". Clicking the button takes you to the exact same place as if you had used the source editor. Victor Schmidt (talk) 22:32, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

t/y Victor. Good to know it does make provision; obvs, probably unfamiliar territory for a new editor, so easy to see how an edit conflict can still lead to loss of data. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:00, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Uploading from Openstreetmaps

How does one upload a map from OpenStreetMaps with lines drawn. Please and thank you! Cwater1 (talk) 00:57, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Maybe {{Maplink}} --Tagishsimon (talk) 02:59, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. I am still learning about contributing. Cwater1 (talk) 23:18, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Help with editing pages for Russian and eastern European figures

Hi, I have noticed that a lot of the articles of lesser-known Russian and eastern European figures in the English wikipedia contain sparse information and very few sources.

I recently revamped the article for Pavel Blonsky and did some work on the article for Lev Kassil. The problem is, there are very few if any sources on these two in English.

I was wondering if anyone had access to reputable Russian sources that could be translated, or would be willing to directly translate from Russian? Or if I should be asking this somewhere else? MunsterManicotti5092 (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

A better place to ask than this one (though not necessarily the best) would be Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Russia. (Yes, this announces at its head "This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the WikiProject Russia page", but it clearly is not.) A problem you'll face is that a vast number of articles on subjects that don't routinely appear on TV in the US or Britain have poor sourcing or are otherwise feeble, so it might be good to point out very briefly why such-and-such a proposed improvement is particularly important. ("Very briefly", because readers tend to bristle when requests seem to tell them that the requesters' interests/obsessions are more important than whatever happen to be the readers' own.) Incidentally, Blonsky is described as a paedologist but with no link that I notice to the article paedology, which in turn tells us that it's the study of children's behavior and development (as distinct from pedagogy, the art or science of teaching, and pediatrics, the field of medicine relating to children). Pedology is not commonly recognized as a distinct field of study; therefore, many people who would be described as pedologists are instead described as pedagogues, psychologists, pediatricians, etc. Clearly ⟨paedology⟩ and ⟨pedology⟩ are merely two ways of spelling the same word, but it's odd to see them juxtaposed like this. And the article's membership of Category:Pedagogy is even odder. So you see, the list of things that must be improved is endless. -- Hoary (talk) 23:21, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

how cite IUCN website

There is a citation to the IUCN Red List website in the Collared Pika article. I looked at how it was cited, since I wanted to so the same thing in another article. I assumed it would use "cite website" but instead is used "cite iucn". I looked in "Wikipedia:Citation_templates" to get details but it did not appear there. I thought that page had ALL citation templates. Where can I get help details on "cite iucn"? Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 10:31, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sunandshade: Hello! See Template:Cite_IUCN. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll give that a look. Just wondering why it wasn't in "Wikipedia:Citation_templates". For us newbies, it's hard to find. Sunandshade (talk) 10:41, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

There are a lot of bespoke citation templates used in special topic areas. Wikipedia:Citation templates goes over the general ones for the CS1 templates and the sfn / harv family. According to this crude search, there may be nearly 1900 different "cite [something]" templates (although many of them are certainly redirects). Folly Mox (talk) 12:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wow, I had no idea. That explains a lot. Sunandshade (talk) 01:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft of existing mainspace article

Hello, I noticed that article Hwang Hyun-jin already exist but only consist a redirect to Stray Kids article. Meanwhile there is also Draft:Hwang Hyun-jin which is not completed (barely have any information and sources). I'm wondering if I can request to move the draft to mainspace or should I improve the page first before request move article? Please give me a guidance, thank you! Shenaall (talk) 01:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Shenaall Improve then submit for review. He needs to be notable on his own outside of the group he is with. If you can make a decent article on him and his accomplishments alone then the reviewer can make the move happen. McMatter ^(talk)/_(contrib) 01:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Shenaall, the draft must make it clear that reliable sources (for which reliability is as defined by and for Wikipedia) demonstrate that he is notable (for which notability is as defined by and for Wikipedia). -- Hoary (talk) 01:52, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

for PDF citation, which page # to use?

If my citation reference is an online PDF document, which page # do I use? The page # that is printed on each page (could be i, ii, etc.) or the page # that my PDF viewer says I am reading. If the doc has an un-numbered title page & several i, ii pages, then the printed page could be 5 but the PDF page could be 10. I've tried to research this in WP but could not find the answer. Sunandshade (talk) 01:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! In my editing, I generally go with the number printed on the page of the PDF, rather than the page number that the PDF viewer uses. I don't think there's a guideline for this, so it's up to the individual editor. If a certain book or document is available on multiple platforms, e.g. Google Books and Internet Archive, then the printed numbers will likely be the same, whereas the "PDF" page numbers are more likely to be different. If you need any more help, let me know! sawyer * he/they * talk 01:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Too bad there's no guideline. Makes sense to use the printed page #, but wondered what others thought about this. Whichever I use, it would be good to specify in the citation which page # I used. Is there a way to specify that? Sunandshade (talk) 02:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm not aware of any specific way to mark which page numbering, but perhaps you could include it next to the page number, e.g. "pages=52-53 (printed)" or something along those lines. sawyer * he/they * talk 02:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sunandshade, I have a strong preference on this (the same as Sawyer-mcdonell's), and following my preference has never landed me in any trouble -- nobody has "corrected" or even questioned my numbering. But I can't cite any guideline or similar for the preference. If you ask at Help talk:Citation Style 1 you're likely to get expert and policy-citing advice, fast. -- Hoary (talk) 02:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sunandshade, per the other two answerers—you should use the page number printed on the page. The page numbers in a given PDF file are often correct, but can be offset or otherwise wrong depending on the care and provenance of the specific PDF file and the nature of the source. I've had to manually edit many of my PDFs to make the page numbers of the file agree with those of the original source. Remsense留 02:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

SFN fixes for citations written in the same year by the same author

I'm in the process of expanding and improving the article for Mieczysław Weinberg and have hit a bump with sfn referencing. Two of the sources I use are authored by the same person and were written in the same year. This causes an error message to appear. How can I fix this? Thanks! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 02:37, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi CurryTime7-24. See Template:Sfn#More than one work in a year. The short answer is that you label one YEARa and the other YEARb. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:39, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you!! CurryTime7-24 (talk) 02:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Having links to portals, categories etc on your userpage for reference...without accidentally adding yourself to those categories... How to?

I just decided to make my userpage a useful resource for myself, with links to things I find myself coming back to and intend to use. Among those links are ones to wikipedia Categories, Portals.

Once done adding all that, I found I had added myself TO some of these things, when that shouldn't be the case. No matter what I try to call myself, I am not a branch of mycology.

Obviously I need to undo that... but how do you add links to categories to a page without adding the page to the category?? Is it just by posting the plain url link, as in https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mycology_organizations ? I had switched them to internal page links with [[ brackets and maybe that's the problem. I just wanted them to not look as chaotic as plain url links do, and be more readable.

Thank you! MariahKRogers (talk) 04:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Colons in links. diff. Whether all of these are needed, who knows, but they don't harm. --Tagishsimon (talk) 04:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Like this format [[:___|___]]

Nice. MariahKRogers (talk) 04:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Baptismal names?

I'm looking at Felicia Montealegre Bernstein. It gives her name as "née Felicia María Cohn Montealegre". But I found on Geni.com that her baptismal certificate says Felicia María Josefa de Jesús. Do we include or not include baptismal names? --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 02:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello,

It seems to me that this is a changed name, so use both in the title, then choose the most recent one for the rest of the article.

For example: Jack Benny (born Benjamin Kubelsky, February 14, 1894 – December 26, 1974)

(from here)

Happy editing!

Geardona (talk) 02:41, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Why is it a "changed name"? I don't know how baptismal names work in Latin cultures - or how we usually deal with them in Wikipedia articles. --jpgordon^{𝄢𝄆𝄐𝄇} 04:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There is no specific policy for those types of names, so that seemed to me to be the closest analog in wikipedia policies, am I misunderstanding the concept? Geardona (talk) 04:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Prose table needed

To make a point at a Talk page discussion (here) I need an example of an article which contains a Table where much of the content is prose, and not just a bunch of cells with figures or short strings. Can you think of a good example of a prose-full table? Mathglot (talk) 08:21, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mathglot: I think pretty much all pages about episodes of TV series contain such table: for example, Doctor_Who_(series_4)#Episodes Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:38, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

Deltaspace42, very much appreciated! Mathglot (talk) 04:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Where references can be added in discussions about creating an article with different sources in various places outside of the lead section

How can references be added during discussions about whether or not to keep an article in different places? Are only admins allowed to do this or else regular editors get blocked? I’m new so I don’t understand how alot of policies get made on Wikipedia yet but I will learn soon? Thellosnellow (talk) 06:02, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

References can be added to articles at any time, including when the article is being discussed in a deletion discussion. References can be added by anyone. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Copyright and sister projects

I am writing an article on the Denver attorney W.W. Anderson. I found a photograph of Anderson on a Wikisource page, but I’m unsure of it’s copyright status. I can’t find the photo on Wikimedia Commons. Do Wikipedia sister projects also follow the same copyright rules that Wikipedia does, and can the images on a sister project be transferred between projects? Roasted (talk) 02:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Roastedbeanz1: Each project has their own rules. If you click the photo it should say what the licensing is. RudolfRed (talk) 02:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Roastedbeanz1: Yes, Wikisource does follow copyright rules - see Wikisource:Wikisource:Image guidelines. What is the link of the photo on Wikisource? GoingBatty (talk) 02:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Is it this one? c:File:Bench_and_bar_of_Colorado_-_W._W._ANDERSON.png? It is on commons and is public domain. RudolfRed (talk) 02:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Roastedbeanz1:, copyright has expired on all photos published over 95 years ago, and such photos can be re-used by anyone for any purpose without restriction. On Wikimedia projects, best practice is to provide information about the photographer, date and provenance, but this is not a legal requirement. Cullen328 (talk) 09:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

IndusInd Bank Partnership Section

Hi, I have added content with reliable source to expand the IndusInd Bank Article referring to Partnership section. Would like to understand whether it was promotional content or can this be added again? VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 09:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

If this removed content - diff - is the content in question, it should not be re-added since it is entirely promotional in tone & content. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:50, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the revert & addressing it. Next time will make sure to add appropriate content rather than promotional. VKG1985 (Talk | E-Mail | Contrib) 10:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Request for promotional links removable

I have seen an article link that promotes their articles so I don't assess to remove as I am new, I am requesting for removable https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uczenie_g%C5%82%C4%99bokie Drakeshrao42 (talk) 10:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I think that might be Polish wikipedia? If so, you'd need to raise it there, not here, which is Englih wikipedia. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Should I register for that language and i don't how to remove the link Drakeshrao42 (talk) 10:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

You can probably just start a thread on https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Tablica_og%C5%82osze%C5%84 in English; someone will pick it up. It's not clear to me what the issue is - "an article link that promotes their articles" - so please try to be as clear as possible when raising it there. --Tagishsimon (talk) 10:28, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

New article

How can I create a new translated from uk:Територіальний центр комплектування та соціальної підтримки article with no registration? 46.211.78.23 (talk) 10:26, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

First, get plenty of practice improving existing articles. When you are improving them successfully, decide if your proposed subject is notable (as notability is defined by and for Wikipedia). If so, then create a draft, basing this on reliable sources (as reliability is defined by and for Wikipedia). In the summary of your very first edit, say that it's a translation of the Ukrainian-language article. Reference your draft, scrupulously. Then submit your draft for promotion to article. -- Hoary (talk) 12:18, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thankyou for descrihing a process! But where (what namespace) exactly have I writfe a draft at? Because now it mostly say: You can't create pages as unregistered editor. 46.211.84.183 (talk) 16:58, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1210. I would suggest following along with Your first article, which includes an Article wizard button. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you.  Draft:Territorial center for recruitment and social support 46.211.98.60 (talk) 17:17, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

See also WP:TRANSLATETOHERE. Note that notability defined by the English Wikipedia may be stricter than other language Wikipedias. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 15:04, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

i don't see there anything about more strict notabiity. Can you please write where exactly I can read about such notability difference? 46.211.84.183 (talk) 17:00, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

For more information about what is considered wikinotable on the English Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:Notability. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:57, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

Hope it has enough of notability already. 46.211.98.60 (talk) 17:18, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

And how to connect it to d:Q56356604? It tells draft can't be connected. 46.211.98.60 (talk) 17:22, 26 December 2023 (UTC)

That's correct, IP user. Only once it has been accepted into the encyclopaedia can it be linked to other language articles. ColinFine (talk) 11:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

thank you in advance. 46.211.84.183 (talk) 17:01, 25 December 2023 (UTC)

2023 Israel–Hamas war

The content in the above subjected line is shows false report of Israeli military's casualties, can you please correct this. Since the casualties count also reduced after few days again.. it's false and seems israeli propaganda 2409:40F2:1015:EA9D:8000:0:0:0 (talk) 09:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Please discuss on the talk page of the article, not here. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Tagishsimon, Talk:2023 Israel–Hamas war is indefinitely ECP protected. I think unregistered editors need to make edit requests at Wikipedia:Edit requests. Folly Mox (talk) 12:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Please also note that since this pertains to WP:ARBECR, Non-extended-confirmed editors may use the "Talk:" namespace only to make edit requests related to articles within the topic area, provided they are not disruptive. (my emphasis). Polyamorph (talk) 12:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I would add (since the IP editor is here, now, asking their question) that despite the apparent conflict of interest which can exist with only one side reporting their numbers, for better or for worse the Israeli Military is the only official source for information on Israeli soldier casualties, just as the Gaza-based Ministry of Health is the only official source for their casualty numbers. It's a question of accepting (for now) whatever numbers they publish, with a keen understanding that as time goes by, additional sources may revise those numbers. But for now, that's the best we've got. And Folly Mox is right, requests should be able to be made at WP:ERW while requests for information (such as how casualties are tallied) may be asked at WP:RD. Regards,  Spintendo  13:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

how to list examples of videos/tv ads in an article

hello! i am currently trying to work on the article Partnership to End Addiction . it is written majorly in an editorial/ad type way, but there are a lot of examples of descriptions of ads im not sure how to write in the wikipedia manual of style, keep, or remove. an excerpt from the current version of the article:

In one television commercial, a camera zooms in and out on two adolescents, one of whom is trying to get the other to try marijuana. The tagline then reads: "A friend who offers you drugs is not your friend." It was a "strikingly different tack" from the milder Just Say No campaign.

it doesnt look "right" for wikipedia, but im stuck trying to think of how a description of a video should be written out. should i leave this as is? should i change the formatting (if so, how) or clear it completely. there are plenty of these in the article, how many specific examples of descriptions of ads does an ad company article need? (0? 3? 5?) ive been having difficulty finding similar articles to reference. any other tips or notes regarding this article are highly appreciated, thanks :) Sydpresscott (talk) 23:06, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

It seems to be reasonable handling for the subject matter. I'd be inclined to leave it alone. --Tagishsimon (talk) 23:14, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Sydpresscott, you ask for other comments. If the article is written in "an editorial/ad type way", then something is very wrong. It shouldn't read like newspaper articles, if that's what you mean. And it should definitely neither be, or read like, an advertisement. A sample:

The ad had varyingly impactful effects on viewers. Student Taia Lubitz felt the "brain on drugs" commercial was not accurate, since she saw fellow students smoking marijuana whose brains were clearly not frying. She claimed that the ad "stirred her curiosity" and that the scare tactic was really more of a "dare" tactic.[9] Student Sepideh Modrek said that "The fried egg commercial really scared me when I was in high school. I remember picturing that egg in the frying pan and thinking that it wasn't worth it."[9]

Does "varyingly impactful effects" mean anything other than "various impacts"? Our idiolects may differ, but to me, "student Taia Lubitz", "student Syd Presscott", etc sound very strange. But, more importantly, why pick just these two students out of (I imagine) hundreds of thousands, if not millions? (Maybe "One student felt ... Another student said ..."?) -- Hoary (talk) 23:35, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

i agree! it has a warning template about it, and it is largely written/edited by someone who works there. I am having a hard time finding specific examples like that, so thank you!

also general question (to anyone,) how much cultural context from the outside of the subject of the article is necessary? how much (if any) information about "cultural attitudes" about drug use have a place in the partnership for a drug free america article Sydpresscott (talk) 23:40, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

this is my rewrite

The ad had various impacts on viewers. One student felt the "brain on drugs" commercial was not accurate, since she saw fellow students smoking marijuana whose brains were clearly not frying. She claimed that the ad "stirred her curiosity" and was really more of a "dare" tactic.[9] Another said that "...the fried egg commercial really scared me when I was in high school. I remember picturing that egg in the frying pan and thinking that it wasn't worth it."[9] Sydpresscott (talk) 23:44, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

My view (which is perhaps a bit purist) is that the ad should be described in the way that the independent reliable source cited for it describes it. If there is not an independent reliable source discussing the ad, what is it doing in the article? ColinFine (talk) 13:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Sydpresscott: Look at other articles about ad campaigns for examples of how to describe the ads without writing like an ad. Foe example, You Will about AT&T's ad series, or Got Milk RudolfRed (talk) 00:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

thats exactly what i was looking for, thank you! Sydpresscott (talk) 15:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sydpresscott, in this edit, I made the prose of one section slightly less ponderous. I'm sure that other editors could find more flab there that could easily be cut. (Within the section, I also fixed misuse of the Cite templates' "last" attribute.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Sydpresscott, I went through another section, but I didn't fix a stunning mistake in a cite template within the section, because I would have had to look at the web page in question in order to know exactly how to fix it, and in order to do that I'd have to disable ad blocking, and I couldn't be bothered. But really, I start to wonder whether taking "Famous fried eggs: Erika Alexander" to be an author's last name might indicate a brain on drugs. -- Hoary (talk) 02:56, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

LOL. Yeah it has the same article cited like 38 times, it seems like it was written all by one person in one sitting (maybe the PDFA executive that is extremely active on the talk page hmmm) but there is a lot of filler/weird citations. thanks so much for looking! i will try to fix that. Sydpresscott (talk) 16:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Formatting a list

I created a page in my sandbox for a record producer that includes a discography as a list, with returns after each entry. When I hit Publish, the version shows up with the llst as a single text block. How do I fix it? OrcaThatWrites64 (talk) 19:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@OrcaThatWrites64: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can add a bullet in front of each entry (with an asterisk) or put the information in a table. GoingBatty (talk) 19:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Need Help Getting Started on Wikipedia

Hello, Thank you in advance for helping me. ‪CAPTAIN RAJU suggested that I come here for help. I just created a user name and password. My name is Demetrius. I created my account in order to create a Wikipedia for a Musical Artist. I was experimenting with building her infobox within the Sandbox to see what it looked like to test my coding. It was deleted. Obviously, I need to be setup up properly before creating this Wikipedia. I also need to declare a COI. I took all of the photos on her album covers and except 2 albums. I thought I would upload all of the images, album covers (high resolution) first and then work on the article to connect to them. I need help with how to get started in the right direction. Any feedback you have, I am willing to learn.

Thank you,

Demetrius

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 06:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

If you have a conflict of interest, then probably the best you can do is not to write the artice. The images on Commons would be very welcome. But you are fundamentally compromised when it comes to the article. --Tagishsimon (talk) 06:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Someone told me that declaring COI does not disqualify me from writing the article. So look as the article is written according to Wiki standard, I should be okay. What I can trying to accomplish is getting started. For example, I want to build the article in the Sandbox. I have written all of the code. However, I may use the Wizard to actually do this because I understand it is easier. The way I would like to start is first upload all of my images so I can refer to them in the article. What I would like to know is how to start. From reading the information, it looks like log into my account and starting building my article on the Musical Artist. I am trying to understand what I did that cause the Speedy Deletion. The only thing that was on the page was an infobox with information and a photo.

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 07:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Wiki-Wiki-2028, please note the following:

(1) You may own the copyright to the photos, but do you own the copyright to the album covers, which presumably also include typography? Even if so . . .

(2) Do you realise that by uploading images to Commons, you are irrevocably giving permission to everyone in the World to re-use them for any purposes, including commercial ones, provided that they include attribution? Are you sure you want to do this?

A more usual course for album covers is to upload a low-resolution image to this (English-language) Wikipedia (not Commons) for the single purpose of illustrating an article about that album only (not one about the artist) under the 'fair use' criterion. This can only be done with an already-existing article – such 'fair-use' images must not be uploaded into Drafts, and will be deleted if they are. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 07:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I not only own the photos, I created the album cover as well. It just that I did not fully understand the process and the best choices to make. As I have said before, I am learning about this maze of content and the process. It would be nice if if people would tell me what I need to do and point me in the right direction like you have done by explaining where and how to upload images under 'fair use.' If I have many album covers that correpond with the aritlce, how can I submit a draft for review with a reference or connection from the article with the album cover. I thought that if the artlcie is about a Musical Artist and they released an album that is mentioned in the artilce, the draft will have [[name of album here]] that will say no image is found. many red letter becasue there of not havomg the artwork that is mentioned. Then my article would be flagged and taken down artilce would be flagged for takedown for not having proof of of the album shown?

Demetrius

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 11:48, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

A reason COI editors are not okay, Wiki-Wiki-2028, is that they write complete nonsense such as "This album cover for 'He Loves You' by Angel Sessions is a visual symphony that encapsulates the essence of love and spirituality" when the photo just looks like someone miserable leaning against a wall. So, look, start your COI infested article at Draft:Angel Sessions and submit it to Articles for Creation, and we'll take it from there. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Wiki-Wiki-2028 T is being overly blunt, and perhaps promising too much. Yes, a person with a COI can create and then submit a draft to AfC as long as the COI is declared. (If paid or in any way compensated, then the situation is paid and WP:PAID applies. Teahouse hosts usually limit contributions to advice - not co-authoring, so no "We'll take it from there." The Speedy deletion was because you were creating content at your User page. See WP:UP for what goes there. Create and submit the draft using WP:YFA without album cover images, as images do not figure into deciding notability. Ditto for Infobox. WP:NMUSIC applies. David notMD (talk) 08:53, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I now understand that I do not need to declare COI. The term was mention as part of the deletion because I created an article on my User page. I thought I need to declare in order to have it put back up. I did not fully understand the process. This is what I trying the learn. I read the information, however the only way I can really understand is to try, fail, and learn, and try again. I am not being paid at all. I may not understand this process. I am only a volunteer. I am simple looking for people you can genuinely help me.

Demetrius

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 10:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, WikiWiki2028, and welcome to the Teahouse. I created my account in order to create a Wikipedia for a Musical Artist is great, but it's a bit like "I bought a violin in order to perform the Beethoven violin concerto". Please learn the craft, and get lots of practice, before you take on a challenging work - creating a new article. I advise you to put aside the idea of creating this article for a few months, while you learn how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles: I predict that this will save you a lot of frustration and disappointment. In particular, learning about reliable sources, verifiability, and notability. (Once you have learnt about these, you may discover that your artist does not at present meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability: if they don't, then you'll know not to spend any more time on writing about them). ColinFine (talk) 14:26, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. I only plan to create one article for now before editing anyone other articles. Is the difference between creating an article and publishing it on the user page as apposed to creating an article and submitting it to Articles for Creation? From what I am reading about Wikipedia, it seems as though sending it to Articles for Creation is a more helpful way to learn about what of how to learn the standards of Wikipedia.

98.35.33.243 (talk) 17:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay. To see if I understand how to do this correctly, I am going to write the full article.  I have to add

{{subst:submit|Wiki-Wiki-2028}} at the top of the article? 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Template:AfC_submission/draft

How would I upload all the album covers and other images for the article so they come to you?  This weekend, I am going to closely review my article, and put all of the code with citations and references that I have and send it to Articles for Creation.  Whatever you decide to use or not, I leave that up to you. Please help me with the steps to do this in the way you are requesting.  Thank you for your feedback.

Wiki-Wiki-2028 (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Please don't upload ANY photographs they are of no interest unless the draft is accepted. Theroadislong (talk) 17:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Wiki-Wiki-2028, non-free images are not permitted in drafts or sandbox pages, so do not even try. The time to add low resolution images of copyrighted album covers is after the article is in the encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 19:06, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Theroadislong: That's really really bad advice. Whilst Cullen is correct that non-free images are problematic until they have an article home, Wiki-Wiki-2028 represents themself as a photographer who presumably owns the IP on their own images. The scope of Commons is much wider than merely furnishing images for EN wikipedia articles; it is most likely that whatever WW2028 uploads to commons wold be within its scope and therefore most welcome. --Tagishsimon (talk) 19:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

What an interesting dilemma to navigate. I am interested in learning what other Wikipedian’s have to say about uploading images to the English Wikipedia as opposed to uploading them to Wiki Commons. And, then there is the subject of whether to upload low-resolution images while others say it is better to upload high-resolution images because it is a better way to prove that you own the image.

98.35.33.243 (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Okay... I will take this a good advise. Thank you.

98.35.33.243 (talk) 20:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Understood. Thank you. 98.35.33.243 (talk) 20:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

[Edit Conflicts] Wiki-Wiki-2028, please do not start this process by uploading images. Drafts of articles are Accepted, Declined (= "not good enough yet, please improve and try again") or Rejected (= "subject will never qualify, please stop trying") only on the basis of their written text. Images can be added after initial Acceptance (no article on Wikipedia is ever "finished"), and 'fair use' images may only be added to articles, not to Drafts and certainly not to user pages.

Please also do not create drafts on your User page. This is only intended for the optional purpose of saying something about yourself as a Wikipedia Editor (and many users never create it; you haven't created yours yet, which is why your signature name appears in red. You do already have a Talk page, at User talk:Wiki-Wiki-2028).

An "article under construction" on your User page is not permitted – it will be deemed a "fake article" and be deleted. Drafts should be created as a draft (on a page "Draft:Subject" – see Wikipedia:Drafts) or in your User sandbox(es) (which you can create one or several of, for working on different drafts).

My understanding is that an article about a musician should not contain any images of album covers, even in a section about that album (unless the cover is out of copyright, which in practice is unlikely to apply for a living musician). A low-res album cover image should only be used in a standalone article about that album.

These rules may seem arbitrary, but Wikipedia has arrived at them after long experience with protecting subjects' interests, smooth running of the project, and complying with copyright laws.

Because of how Wikipedia has grown and evolved, by mutual consensus rather than being led from above, it can seem very complicated. Unfortunately, this means that it is well-nigh impossible for someone without prior experience to 'drop in' in order to create one or a few articles and immediately succeed, any more than someone can take up a new sport and successfully play without first learning any of the rules. In both cases one will get yelled at, though hopefully in a friendly way intended to bring one up to speed. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 19:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your feedback. Duly noted. What I am learning from all of these comments is that many Wikipedians have a slightly different opinion about how to go about a task within this platform. It can be challenging to navigate one way or the other. However, I enjoy and value people's opinions. Aside from reading all of the information about writing articles that ais available on Wikipedia, these comments are another valuable way to learn. Please keep the comments coming!

98.35.33.243 (talk) 19:47, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Daniela Pes

Hello, I would like to translate this page : https://it.wikipedia.org/wiki/Daniela_Pes . Her first record was voted as one of the best in 2023 in Italy from the majority of the magazines. Above all, she won the Tenco Award (Club Tenco, probably the most important award for songwriters in Italy) as best new artist in 2023 . Waiting for your opinion. Thank you in advance. Kimbamy (talk) 20:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

sorry I forgot to put the right link to the award :Targa Tenco#Best Debut Album Kimbamy (talk) 20:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Kimbamy: See Help:Translation and Wikipedia:Translation. Cheers ‍ Relativity 20:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you. 2001:B07:6475:9F6B:75F9:3EB9:A81C:F1B4 (talk) 20:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

sorry I was not logged in. thanks again! Kimbamy (talk) 20:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Help getting started

Hello, I am a bit confused because from some time, I have been looking forward to again start contributing to wikipedia, but, I am unable to find any article to improve easily and from my previoys experiences, I fear doing some considerable edits as till now, I have seen my edits being reverted and nearly all the times being said "useless", "inneccessary" and even I once tried to raise some concerns and wsa replied back with some very rude tone. Wherever I tried to edit, or even resolve a conflict in talk page, I saw a policy of wikipedia just coming above against me even if I went through many of them. Can you suggest what and how can I contribute, till date, only this place is where I have got some oositive replies.

My sincere apologies if I said something wrong or something out of myself.

Yamantakks (talk) 18:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Yamantakks: Hello! If you are afraid to edit the content itself, you can try doing categorization, first go to Preferences - Gadgets and enable HotCat - very useful tool to categorize pages. Then go to random pages and see if you can add more categories, or remove redundant (if the page is both in category and its parent category, then almost always you need to remove the parent category).

Or you can go to the list of common misspelling found on Wikipedia and use it to find typos and fix them.

In any case, if someone reverts your edit, don't panic, read this: Wikipedia:BOLD,_revert,_discuss_cycle. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Many/most Indian articles on villages, small temples & so on are weak on grammar and referencing. Small improvements there should not be reverted. It's best to start with less popular articles to get experience. Johnbod (talk) 19:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello and welcome! The advice put forth by Deltaspace42 and Johnbod are great. I'll also suggest you look at the Task Center, which has a nice list of tasks which you can choose from, based on what seems the most fun and easy to you. Personally, I found fixing typos and replacing images to be the best way to get started in my editing. You can also look at the Contributing to Wikipedia page for some more helpful advice. Hope that helps, and happy editing! sawyer * he/they * talk 20:46, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Ebsco access number

Searching for an article to add as an external link "https://search.ebscohost.com › login ebsco The History of Messianic Jews and the State of Israel, 1948 ..." appeared after I'd scrolled through snippets and clicked "repeat the search with the omitted results included". When I clicked "Publish changes" an error notice mentioning ebsco appeared which included "You can link to https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?AN=<access number> (the ebsco 'permanent link' to the record), the access number is sometimes visible in other ebsco links (the number after 'AN='), or available from the ebsco page that you are visiting.". Where is the relevant access number which will make the URL acceptable? Where do I add it? Do I need to change the URL in any other way? Mcljlm (talk) 23:46, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! I've found the access number for the article in question via The Wikipedia Library. Here it is: 158043326
I've also found a DOI for this article, which may be helpful for you: doi:10.2979/israelstudies.27.3.06.
If you need more help, or PDF access, let me know. Happy editing! sawyer * he/they * talk 01:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Sawyer-mcdonell. Where and how did you find it in The Wikipedia Library? Do I add it to the end of the URL or do I delete part of that and then add the number?

Does the PDF include the article's references? Does it have unrestricted access? Mcljlm (talk) 17:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

You should be able to add the number directly to the URL after "AN=", and that should create a functional link.
As for how I found it, The Wikipedia Library grants access to a number of academic databases, including EBSCO, which is what hosts the article you're talking about. I searched the title in TWL, and found it that way. I have access to TWL because I qualified for it, which you can read about in the link in my original reply. It does include the full article PDF, including its references. Hope that helps! sawyer * he/they * talk 20:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I have access to the TWL and only posted here after searching there there following a search box result mentioned it in connection with EBSCO. I don't see AN in the URL I referenced here. Mcljlm (talk) 21:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I'm not sure what you're asking. sawyer * he/they * talk 21:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I don't see AN in https://eds.p.ebscohost.com/eds/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=0&sid=2c5e7f43-4ca2-4354-8b1a-57d335cc6738%40redis and don't understand how you found the number via TWL. Mcljlm (talk) 21:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I searched the title "The History of Messianic Jews and the State of Israel", found the article in question, clicked the permalink button, and found the number in the URL listed after "AN=" and copied it. Sorry for confusion! sawyer * he/they * talk 21:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mcljlm: Hey! I searched for the article myself using the main search box on the TWL homepage and it took me to a link that looks like this: https://eds.p.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?[.......]#AN=158043326&db=a9h
Looks to me like that's where the number came from. It also shows up when you click "Detailed Record" on the left side, then listed under "Accession Number". Hope that helps! Bsoyka (talk) 21:14, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

After reading both of your replies Sawyer-mcdonell and Bsoyka I found https://eds.p.ebscohost.com/eds/detail/detail?vid=1&sid=27743a76-6285-4cf3-aa12-99d470f8bd08%40redis&bdata=JnNpdGU9ZWRzLWxpdmUmc2NvcGU9c2l0ZQ%3d%3d#AN=158043326&db=a9h but still don't understand where to add the number or how doing so will make the article accessible to all WP users. Mcljlm (talk) 21:45, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

You can add the number at the end of https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?AN= to create the URL. However, because EBSCO is not a free service, there's no good way (to my knowledge) to make it accessible to all WP users, unfortunately. sawyer * he/they * talk 21:50, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

If it's not accessible to everyone at EBESCO that means it's similar to including the URL to the article at Project MUSE, ProQuest, ResearchGate or Academia.edu which means that it makes more sense to wait for it to become available with references {I found a version without references} at JSTOR. According to https://www.jstor.org/journal/israelstudies the journal has a Moving Wall of 3 years. Since the article was published in "Fall 2022" presumably that means it'll be accessible there in just under 2 years time. Mcljlm (talk) 22:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

References

hello need help to improve my article draft

i tried to create an article, but it declined due to its looks advertisment for the system, but it isnt, i just added corporation information, please help me to improve and fix it so i can publish it =]

thanks so much, Rea H. Rikoshar (talk) 10:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Rikoshar Hello. I see that you declared a COI; if you work for RS Royal Services INC, the Terms of Use require you to make the stricter paid editing disclosure.

Wikipedia is not a place to merely provide information or to merely tell of the existence of a company and what it does. A Wikipedia article about a company must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company and what makes it important/significant/influential, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Please read Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

thanks for the first article guide,

can i get some more help regard this? Rikoshar (talk) 10:07, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Rikoshar You should first make the paid editing disclosure. It's strongly advised that people not attempt to edit about their companies at all due to the conflict of interest- company employees are usually too close to their companies or too much into marketing to be able to write as Wikipedia requires. Please read WP:BOSS and have your superiors read it too(if you've been asked to be here). However, if you still wish to proceed, you should first gather independent reliable sources that give your company significant coverage so you can summarize what they say in an article. These sources should not include staff interviews, press releases, brief mentions, announcements of routine business activities and the like. The sources should give extensive discussion as to what they see as important/significant/influential about your company- not what your company sees as important about itself. 331dot (talk) 10:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

thank you for you answers and information,

ok i will look now for reliable sources,

and about the paid discloser, im not getting paid for it. nobody getting paid for this Rikoshar (talk) 10:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

WP:PAID is required if you work for the company even if not specifically being paid to edit the Wikipedia article. David notMD (talk) 11:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:RS Royal Services INC was Speedy deleted. You can try again, but all content must be neutral point of view and varified by independent (non-corporate) references. David notMD (talk) 11:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

This is a blatantly promotional account. I've requested a block at AIV. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 22:33, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

on it. -- Deepfriedokra (talk) 22:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Mediawiki question

Do all wiki websites that run on the MediaWiki software have the same basic commands like Wikipedia, like for example searching "Special:ListUser" etc Bzik2324 (talk) 20:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bzik2324, there's some variation based on how the site is set up, but generally so. I'd look at the MediaWiki documentation for your specific question. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 21:11, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bzik2324: Some things including many of the special pages depends on the installed extensions. See mw:Manual:Extensions, and Special:Version#mw-version-ext for a long list of extensions installed here at the English Wikipedia. Some things depend on the MediaWiki version number. It tries to be backwards compatible but an old version doesn't have all current features. Your example Special:Listusers is from MediaWiki Core so it doesn't rely on an extension. It has been there for at least 15 years, maybe always, but details of the functionality may have changed. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:31, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

My topic is considered not notable

Hi, thank you in advance for your time and any thoughtful help you may be able to lend. There is an actor of whom I am a fan, Bourke Floyd and I tried to write a n article with him as the subject. My submission was reviewed and declined because he was found to be “not notable”. It stated the sources I included made only “passing references” to him. He has been mentioned in deadline Hollywood, interviewed on ABC News, on 20/20 Downtown and a few other places. I recognize that he isn’t a house hold name but he’s on a bunch of tv shows and movies. If that isn’t enough to warrant an article I understand and accept that but I guess I’m just hoping there’s something else I can do to resubmit.

thank you again for all of your help,

Alex AlexandraWade (talk) 22:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Bourke Floyd --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse, @AlexandraWade. Interviews do not count towards notability. They are considered primary sources. Per our notability guidlines for actors, actors need to either star in multipule notable films or make lasting contributions towards their field. This person does not appear to meet either of those criteria. My advice would be to go edit something else for a few months and come back to this topic once you have more experience editing Wikipedia. Happy editing, NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 22:21, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello amd welcome. If there are no independent reliable sources with significant coverage of him, that discuss him in depth, he would not merit an article at this time. That's not forever, just until he receives the coverage in independent sources. Interviews would not count as those are not independent. He doesn't have to give a single interview, but sources need to choose to write about him.

You should read conflict of interest as you seem to know Mr. Floyd and took a picture of him. 331dot (talk) 22:22, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I don’t know him personally, I was in attendance as a fan at the event where those photos were taken. I have photos of lots of the other celebrities that were there too. Having said that, I do see how he’s not really “notable” in terms of the Wikipedia standard he’s just a “working actor”. That definitely helped clear it up for me. Thank you for your time and assistance. AlexandraWade (talk) 22:29, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, AlexandraWade, and welcome to the Teahouse. "Notable" is a slightly unfortunate word, because what we mean by it in Wikipedia is not famous, or popular, or significant, or influential, or important, but rather "there is enough independent material published about the subject to base an article on" - remembering 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) 22:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

This makes a lot of sense. I appreciate the time and help here. I look forward to becoming more affluent on Wikipedia and being a valued contributor once I’m ready. AlexandraWade (talk) 22:30, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

That's lovely to hear! I hope you have fun editing, and if you need any more help, don't be afraid to show up here again. If you're looking for ways to contribute, you can check out the Task Center and the Contributing to Wikipedia pages, which have helpful information for newcomers. Happy editing! sawyer * he/they * talk 01:01, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Does anyone know what happened?

When I looked at 2023 Israel–Hamas war this morning, there were 29,000 deaths listed for the Gaza Strip. Now it's gone down to 21,000 deaths. I can't comment on the talk page because my account isn't extended-confirmed, so what happened, and which numbers are accurate? Kk.urban (talk) 04:55, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

If you look at the page's edit history, the edit summaries that changed the figures will likely be informative. Remsense留 04:57, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

It may have something to do with this discussion on the articles talk page. Esolo5002 (talk) 06:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Esolo5002 Thank you. Kk.urban (talk) 06:06, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Unable to publish my article

Kindly provide some tips for publish article Drpaturiramarao (talk) 10:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Drpaturiramarao: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Please read Help:Your_first_article. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Major Wikipedia Mobile version problem

No matter what I do, even logging in on another Android phone, when I access en.m.wikipedia.org, the mobile version, none of the buttons on the left side of the screen work, when I push any of them the left side list simply hides back. Bzik2324 (talk) 12:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

User:Bzik2324, I'm unable to duplicate in Firefox, DuckDuckGo, or Chrome, on Android 11 build RPMS31.Q1-54-13.3-10. You could report the bug at WP:VPT, letting them know your OS version, browser, and browser version. Folly Mox (talk) 13:28, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

What do you mean by duplicate? What's that mean? Bzik2324 (talk) 13:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

It means that Folly Mox cannot get wikipedia to error in the way you assert that it is erroring. --Tagishsimon (talk) 13:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Making little notes

Howdy, there's been a little update on: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sharksploitation Someone has made notes similar to the one about Open Water 2, at the bottom of the first box. For a couple of the movies. How do I get them to display correctly, like the one about Open Water 2? I am not sure on the right terminology to search for on the tutorial pages. Simdude1990 (talk) 14:10, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Simdude1990:  Fixed - the {{efn}} templates were missing the ending }}. GoingBatty (talk) 14:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Questionable peacock in Johor Bahru

Seeking more outside opinions for the sentence Johor Bahru was also the second largest GDP contributor among the first tier cities in Malaysia in 2010. The reference used ("Urban Regeneration :The Case of Penang, Malaysia. Putting Policy into Practice" (PDF). Khazanah Nasional: 10. 2012. Archived from the original (PDF) on 4 January 2016 – via The chart of the GDP contributor is in Page 10.), seemed like a Powerpoint slide of questionable reliability. It was never mentioned where the data for city GDP came from. Official GDP data in Malaysia are available down to state-level only, not smaller-level divisions like cities (https://www.dosm.gov.my/portal-main/release-content/gross-domestic-product-gdp-by-state-). Could this count as peacock or synthetic claim? Slothades (talk) 01:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Slothades That article was assessed as a good article in 2016, which may be when that citation was added. There are still nearly 90 watchers, so the best place to discuss your concerns would be on its Talk Page at Talk:Johor Bahru. If you wanted to be bold you could revert that particular claim, with an edit summary saying that you are going to discuss your concerns on the Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Mean, rude, trivial, or otherwise odd comments on talk pages

I sometimes see comments that could be described as "mean", "rude", or "trivial" on talk pages of a wide variety of topics. Sometimes these comments are days old, months old, or even years old. One example is on this talk page that I looked at now Talk:North East (Nigeria). There is a comment that just says "i hate u" made by an anonymous ip user.

What is the rule? Am I supposed to leave those be. Should i cut them and make a note of removing it in my edit summary? I would appreciate what the guidance is on this. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:32, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Hello! Yeah, that was unconstructive edit by that IP user, feel free to undo it. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:35, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

But don't just remove all comments which you consider rude, I mean you can remove it just in this specific case, because it is without any context. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 16:36, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. I mean if someone is just being rude in their tone or something, or is responding to a comment. I would not remove those. I mean just the comments that seem out of nowhere like that. I will do that then. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:42, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

is "cut random spam comment" a fine edit summary for that? I just did remove the comment now. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd generally say "rmv unconstructive comment" or, if the comment leans in this direction, "WP:NOTFORUM". 🎄Cremastra 🎄 (talk) 17:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

i usually say "cut", is "rmv" "removed"? Iljhgtn (talk) 17:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

'tis. It's a rather common shorthand for the word. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

We actually have a page with wiki-specific abbreviations used: Wikipedia:Wikipedia abbreviations; you may find some Wikipedia slang useful. Lectonar (talk) 11:19, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Lectonar: Thank you for the link! I've been here for quite a long time and have never heard about that page. Fun fact: although it has its own abbreviation WP:ABC, it is not mentioned there. CiaPan (talk) 11:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

All one need do is ask the question. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

photos of newish public art in the US

Hi! I'm trying to understand the rules about uploading photos of public art in the United States, specifically photos I've taken of 3D public artworks that are not mine, of artworks that are not very old.

The rules I read here (Wikipedia:Image use policy) seem to say that if I take my own photo of someone else's 3D public art, the photo is considered a derivative work, but I'm unclear about whether that means I can upload it to wikimedia commons or wikipedia.

This page here seems to say I *cannot* use photos of 3D artwork: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Buildings_and_sculptures_as_works_of_art

But I'm confused because there is this entire public art project on wikipedia, in which all of the examples I've looked at include photos (by people other than the artist). Wikipedia:WikiProject Visual arts/Public art/Showcase#Lists of public art and there are a lot of other examples.

The goal is to add it to a wikipedia page, so if it's allowed on wikipedia but not wikimedia commons, that would be good to know too. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Krhettn (talk • contribs) 18:19, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Is there an exception I am missing? I want to make sure I don't break the rules, but the rules seem to contradict what I see. Thank you!

Krhettn (talk) 17:58, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn: Hello! Looks like there are different rules for different countries. For US, see https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Copyright_rules_by_territory/United_States#Freedom_of_panorama

And this is a table with shortcuts for other countries: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Freedom_of_panorama#Shortcuts Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:03, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you also @Deltaspace42 (sorry I didn't realize yours was a separate reply at first)! Krhettn (talk) 18:38, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

In the US, the page on Commons you linked to shows that photos of buildings are OK but photos of sculpture are not, even if the sculpture is permanently located in a public space. That contrasts with the UK, where both are OK. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:08, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes thank you @Michael D. Turnbull - I saw that, and that's the reason for my question because it seems opposite to what I see on wikipedia pages about public art in the United States. Are all of these other entries about public art just violating the image rules?

Krhettn (talk) 18:24, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I think I'm mainly confused about how these get approved or persist if they're violating the rules, so I'm trying to figure out if there is some exception here or what I am missing. Krhettn (talk) 18:27, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes thank you @Michael D. Turnbull - I saw that, and that's the reason for my question because it seems opposite to what I see on wikipedia pages about public art in the United States.

Also sorry I missed this reply until I edited my question slightly then it appeared. - I clicked "subscribe" but I am not getting notified of replies here. How do I see updates here? Sorry I haven't used this before. Krhettn (talk) 18:22, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Are all of these other entries about public art just violating the image rules? Krhettn (talk) 18:23, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Can you link to an article where you believe the rules may have been broken? Incidentally, if you are subscribed to this thread, you'll get notifications when others reply: they should be top right of the page near your username. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:29, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I was looking at examples here List of public art in Indianapolis.

The link about Non-free content guidelines posted below might have answered the question of why these are allowed to have images.

I'm not getting notifications (no idea why!) but reloading seems to be working. Krhettn (talk) 18:48, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn, a few may be violations. Articles about a particular piece of 3D art can use a low-resolution image of that art under the Wikipedia:Non-free content guidelines. Those images have to be uploaded here, not on Commons, and must meet all the requirements of use. StarryGrandma (talk) 18:33, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

I was looking at examples here. List of public art in Indianapolis

Thank you for the link. The Non-free content guidelines says "a photo of a copyrighted statue (assuming there is no freedom of panorama in the country where the statue was when the photo was taken) can only be used to discuss the statue itself, not the subject of it." so that seems to mean that I can use a photo I've taken of public statues. Is that correct? Krhettn (talk) 18:45, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, but carefully. Follow the instructions in the document I linked and take a look at File:Imploding Cube by John Simms.jpg's description to see what the result will look like. StarryGrandma (talk) 19:11, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn The list of public art in Indianapolis has the images it does in a way that is valid for Wikipedia. All those on that page are of sculptures that were created before 1928 or in some cases before 1978 (see this explanation). Images of sculptures more recent than 1978 can only be used under the fair use provisions within the article about the sculpture itself and hence not in a list article. Assuming you refer to your draft about the Igor Fokin Memorial, note that you can't place your image there until the article is accepted into the encyclopaedia, as fair use doesn't apply to drafts. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:38, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you @StarryGrandma and @Michael D. Turnbull ! Yes I'm asking about things that are mostly more recent than 1978, but the Exploding Cube you mention is also an example of that (several in the chart for Indianapolis show dates in the 2000s, and these are the examples I was referring to). I see that I have to use specific resolution requirements to do that.

Thanks also for the info on including a picture after it is a regular article instead of a draft! I was wondering what order to do that in. Krhettn (talk) 19:54, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh, and it also depends on how long ago the artist died. DS (talk) 21:13, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

@Krhettn: Images uploaded locally to (English) Wikipedia or globally to Wikimedia Commons aren't officially vetted or otherwise examined before being uploaded; in other words, there's no formal approval process and it's mostly assumed that those uploading images either know enough about image copyright and relevant Wikipedia and Commons policies to either know what they're doing or know to ask for assistance if they don't. Unfortunately, not many people bother to do their due diligence when uploading their images and just assume that (1) it's automatically OK to do so and (2) someone else will fix things if it's not. In addition, many people misunderstand the meaning of "public domain" and "free license" and just are assuming that anything that can be downloaded for "free" online must be OK for Wikipedia from a copyright standpoint. Furthermore, many images of 3D works that people upload to their social media accounts or other websites that have absolutely nothing to do with Wikipedia are also incorrectly licensed, either unintentionally or intentionally, but Wikipedia users often just take these people at their word and assume they know what they're doing. This means that lots of images are uploaded to both are ones uploaded with incorrect or at least questionable licensing requiring further examination. In many cases, these images can simply fly under the radar until someone like yourself asks about them or otherwise indirectly makes their existence known to others via a question that mentions them. So, yes it's quite possible that some of the images being used in Wikipedia articles (even ones uploaded to Commons) that you've seen are copyright violations that will need to be further discussed to determine whether they need to be deleted.

Under US copyright law, creative works with a known author and a known date of first publication are, in general, eligible for copyright protection for up to the greater of 95 years after their date of first publication or date of creation, or 70 years after the death of the creator depending on when the work was created. There are also lots of conditions and other caveats that apply, and most of these are explained pretty well here. As for 3D publicly installed artworks in the United States, there is no automatic freedom of panorama for such works and whether they're eligible for copyright protection depends upon when they were installed, whether they were published with a copyright notices, whether they were formally registered for copyright protection and several other things. So, before you upload anything under a free or public domain license, I strongly suggest that you ask about it at either WP:MCQ or c:COM:VPC to let others help you sort out whether it would actually be OK to do so. Please note that under various versions of US copyright law, "publication" didn't necessarily mean "publicly displayed" when it came to 3D works of art.

As for non-free content, you're correct in that Wikipedia does allow such content to be uploaded locally (Commons doesn't allow any non-free content at all), but there are lots of restrictions placed on it. Wikipedia's non-free content use policy is much more restrictive by design than US copyright law and there are ten criteria that need to be met for each use of non-free content. Wikipedia policy generally allows non-free content to be used as long as freely licensed or public domain content that is capable of serving essentially the same encyclopedic purposes of any non-free content can neither be found or reasonably created. It also prefers alternatives to non-free content such as WP:WIKILINKs or text be used whenever possible. So, a non-free image of copyright protected 3D work of art publicly displayed in the US can sometimes be uploaded and used, but usually only when the image is used for primary identification purposes in the main infobox or at the top of a stand-alone article about the work itself and usually only when it's an image you've taken yourself. Trying to use such images in other types of articles or in other types of ways (for example, to illustrate individual entries in an article like "List of public art in Indianapolis" is almost always considered WP:DECORATIVE and not allowed per WP:NFLISTS. All of the images currently used in that article appear to be ones uploaded under some sort of free license to Commons, and are not non-free images. Whether they're OK for Commons is something that might need to be further examined, but that's a separate discussion that will need to take place on Commons. -- Marchjuly (talk) 22:56, 27 December 2023 (UTC)

Wow thank you @Marchjuly for this super thorough answer! I am trying to fill in more information for public art / monuments near me, in general. Luckily, images would only be on a page about the monument/sculpture itself, not a different page as you said is prohibited, but I'm not sure how to be sure no other image can be found. I will just not add any images for newer works for now, to will err on the side of caution (for ones that aren't super old anyway), until I can figure out how to check if other images exist. (This is kind of a bummer since I was hoping to upload some really nice photos I took.) It looks pretty straightforward that I can add photos of the super old monuments at least (that part seemed pretty clear - that's why it wasn't part of my question). Anyway, thank you again! Krhettn (talk) 03:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

By the way, do these get deleted, or can I save these answers and links here? This is my first teahouse question. Thanks again! Krhettn (talk) 03:05, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

After a few days of inactivity this question will be archived. If you click on the icon in the top-right corner of this section, you can get links that you can save somewhere. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:09, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! Krhettn (talk) 05:43, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm sorry i don't see an icon that looks like that. When you say "this section", what do you mean exactly? Thank you!

If I need to, i can just copy the whole thing too. Krhettn (talk) 05:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Crap, that might be from a script I installed.

You should be subscribed to this section (everything here between the heading above and the heading below); there should be a Unsubscribe displayed in the top-right corner. When you get a notification in your saying that your topic has been removed or archived, go to the box near the top of this page titled "Most recent archives" and click the largest number. This question will be somewhere in that archive. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 07:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh ok, thank you so much! : ) @Tenryuu Krhettn (talk) 16:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Links to sections and subsections

I have drafted an article with a section called Examples and another section having a subsection also called Examples. How do I link to the subsection?

For instance, if I am inserting a link within the article, #Examples takes me to the section, not to the subsection. How do I link to the subsection? I tried a couple of obvious things but they didn't work. Johsebb (talk) 21:18, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello @Johsebb, what is the article? I'd probably suggest just renaming one of the sections, but it might help if we could see the article itself. sawyer * he/they * talk 21:23, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I'd assume we're looking at Draft:Aliasing (factorial experiments). Bsoyka (talk) 21:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

In that case, I think the other, more pressing issues about the draft (raised in the AfC review) should be taken care of before worrying too much about how to link to a subsection. However, Template:Anchor may be useful for that task. sawyer * he/they * talk 21:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Johsebb: A number can be added like User talk:PrimeHunter/Archive 1#Thanks 2, but Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings says section headings should be unique within a page, so that section links lead to the right place. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

The draft article is indeed the one Bsoyka pointed to. The question I raised is in the "finishing touches" department. Over the past few months I've massively rewritten the article to respond to the AfC review. I can't tell from your comment whether you actually had a chance to look over the current draft, but if you have and you think it doesn't adequately respond to the review, I would be grateful to hear your thoughts. Johsebb (talk) 03:31, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, that was intended as a reply to Sawyer.

Thanks for pointing me to the MoS. It appears that I need to use unique headings, even for sections at different levels. Johsebb (talk) 03:33, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I only looked at it briefly, so I apologize. I don't edit in the field of mathematics, so I don't know the norms surrounding articles in that topic. However, I do think the citations of the article are pretty good. I'd suggest posting a message at the talk page of WikiProject Mathematics to get feedback from editors who would know the "lay of the land" of math articles. Hope that helps! sawyer * he/they * talk 05:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, thanks! Johsebb (talk) 17:18, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Disambiguation on subject name in my first contribution?

Newbie here still on the learning curve. My subject has the same first and last name as a number of other pages, one who has a very similar career as my subject. Guidance appreciated. OrcaThatWrites64 (talk) 17:52, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@OrcaThatWrites64: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! Please read Help:Your_first_article thoroughly, after you've done reading it and have any questions left, feel free to ask them here. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 17:57, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, OrcaThatWrites64, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The answer to your question is: don't worry about the title. When/if your draft is submitted for review and accepted, the accepting reviewer will worry about how to disambiguate the title.

Of far more importance is the fact that you appear to have written User:OrcaThatWrites64/sandbox BACKWARDS.

First find independent, reliably published, sources with significant coverage of Stewart. Then forget everything you know about him, and write an article based only on what those independent sources say. Wikipedia is not interested in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is only interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources.

In addition, I would point out that anybody who tries to create a new article as their first task in editing Wikipedia is asking for a lot of frustration and disappointment. Would you make building a car from scratch your first engineering task? Or giving a public recital your first go at playing a musical instrument? I always advise new editors to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by improving some of our six million existing articles, before ever trying the challenging task of creating a new article. And if you have a connection with the subject, the task is even more challenging. ColinFine (talk) 18:03, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Hypra Page

Hi, I had made a draft for Hypra and it was declined for WP:SYNTHspam

I had left a comment on the declining reviewer but something tells me I wont get a response. So i'll re: the comment here so maybe I can get some help and direction to what I should do to get the artcle passing

The citations dont reference Hypra directly, but as Hypra is a branch off Ethereum the citations about the technology is still valid, as they are inherited from the underlaying project. I beleive it is incorrect to classify it as a "full-on WP:SYNTHspam" and "bullshit-citing"

Thanks to anyone who will help.

TagKnife (talk) 14:38, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

The phrase was "replete with huge roster of bullshit-baffles-brains cites.". And the issue - as you state - is that none of the citations reference the subject. Quite how you expect to get an article with no citations is beyond me, but good luck. --Tagishsimon (talk) 14:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@TagKnife: Hello! If the sources don't reference Hypra directly, then the subject is not notable and doesn't deserve an article on Wikipedia. See WP:SIGCOV. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 14:42, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Even when the underlaying technology used by Hypra is built upon Ethereum. So most of the citations which reference ethereum I beleive are valid for Hypra.

They are both simular in technologies, but going down different paths. TagKnife (talk) 15:03, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@TagKnife: Yeah, since the Hypra is built upon Ethereum, then the technical details might use Ethereum articles as a source, but only if you cite a source which directly states that Hypra is built upon Ethereum. And even that is not enough, you need secondary (independent) sources (see Wikipedia:Reliable_sources) which directly talk about Hypra to establish notability of the subject. Notability is very very important, without it you can't have an article on Wikipedia. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:11, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok thank you for clearifying that up for me. TagKnife (talk) 15:14, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm afraid this just looks very like WP:PROMOTION for your own newly-launched project. Without evidence that the world at large has taken notice of Hypra (= reliable, independent citations), there is absolutely no chance of having an article about it here on Wikipedia.

I also note that, when visiting your official website with Chrome as my browser, my AVG anti-virus programme warns me that "We've safely aborted connection with www.hypra.network because it was infected with URL:Phishing". That's not a good look. If you think it's an AVG issue, you might wish to report it here. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Nick Moyes That is news to me, I just checked through Threat Detector and looks like the initial report was made by Sophos Security with a reported reason "unknown". I will be contacting Sophos about this. There is also a secondary report by Forcepoint with the reason "new website". I stopped used AV's long ago because of this type of stuff. Too many false positives for asanine reasons. TagKnife (talk) 18:16, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Adding wars/Conflicts to list of wars involving countries

Hi, there i was confused that, if you could add rebbellions, uprisings and large scale operations, battles/skrimishes to the page (involving any country of course) :-

(List of wars involving Pakistan)

A user (with many edits) reverted my edit in which i had added a uprising giving the reason it was not a war, where as in other countries lists the same rebbellions, uprisings, Large scale operations/battles and skrimishes and other small scale conflicts are also added to lists of wars involving other countries by why were they not removed just like in the ones which i added ? like in (List of wars involving the United States), (List of wars involving India), (List of wars involving Afghanistan)

Also majority of these conflicts are added in other pages are without even a citation ! If it dosent matter then why does the user remove it ? Rahim231 (talk) 18:45, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Rahim231: Hello! I think it would be a good idea to directly ask the user who reverted your edit that question and invite them to the Talk:List_of_wars_involving_Pakistan to discuss the edits. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:49, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice. Rahim231 (talk) 18:58, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

How to change content assessment grade

I see in an article talk page "This article has been rated as C-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale." However, in my opinion, the article can be rated as B-class. How can I 1) find out when the last time the article was graded, and 2) change the content assessment grade? Pinkslimo (talk) 20:07, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

You should look into the edit history of the talk page. If you want to change the class of the article, you can do it yourself except for GA, FA, FL and A-classes. But read first the Article assessment guideline. Ruslik_Zero 20:18, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Pinkslimo: And if you don't want to rate it yourself (like how I don't rate my own articles or ones I've substantially improved because I don't trust myself to in an unbiased manner), you should check Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia/Assessment#Requesting an assessment. Cheers ‍ Relativity 20:50, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

How to link Wiki Commons account

Hello, guys. Sorry if this question is too basic. I want to upload a picture on Wikipedia. I'm logged into English and Turkish versions of it. When I go to Wikimedia Commons I can't find any way to sign up with my existing Wiki account, but only to create a new account. Please refer me to a place where I can learn to use my existing account to use Commons. Thanks in advance! HamzatCan (talk) 21:09, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry! I just used my Wiki credentials and it works. Question closed :-).HamzatCan (talk) 21:12, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Gabriel Baer

The article on Gabriel Baer implies that he is still alive, but I couldn't see how to edit this. Thanks 94.174.138.132 (talk) 22:27, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello! Where does it imply that he is still alive? The page isn't protected, so you can edit it yourself if you want. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 22:29, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

The infobox said "age 104" because it used a wrong template. Fixed by [6]. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:36, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

The search hastemplate:"birth date and age" hastemplate:"death date" currently gives 92 articles. Most of them have the same error if somebody wants to fix it (not me today). PrimeHunter (talk) 22:40, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: Looks like I've found what I'll be doing tonight. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 22:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Template to Fandom

I run a Fandom wiki and I was wondering how can I transfer/copy a template from Wikipedia, for example Template:Year article header over to my Wiki so it works correctly when typed in into any article on that wiki, and since I know both Fandom and Wikipedia run on the same MediaWiki wiki software, I was wondering if this is possible, and how? Bzik2324 (talk) 15:37, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

This is not a support forum for MediaWiki, there is documentation for MediaWiki on their own site. Remsense留 15:41, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Bzik2324. If you preview {{Year article header|2023}} on a blank page in the desktop version ("Desktop" at the bottom of the mobile version) then "Templates used in this preview" at the bottom shows a long list of templates and modules you may need. Sometimes a template is only used when certain parameters are present. Sometimes it also relies on other things, e.g. an installed extension listed at Special:Version, or code in MediaWiki:Common.css to format the output as intended. I haven't examined this example. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Want to publish.

I would like to publish an article about a man in India named Dr. Jitendra Sharma. Who is renowned and is doing tremendous work in the filed of Medical Technology. I have all associated links and citation to support the facts I am trying to publish. Rimithapa (talk) 02:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

what, this? it's written solely to promote him. we need neutrality here. ltbdl (talk) 03:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Modern space race

For months now, I've been working independently on a draft on the modern space race and would like to humbly ask for users to help review, fact-check, and improve the draft before an eventual move into the article space. I'd like to point out, first and foremost, that the article is still a work-in-a-progress and is not, by any means, complete yet. This topic is very broad and has over-qualified itself for a separate, stand-alone article in accordance with WP:GNG and WP:N.

Thanks, --WellThisIsTheReaper ^Grim 01:32, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@WellThisIsTheReaper: Hello! I've just taken a look at your draft and to me it feels like original research. From Wikipedia:No_original_research: This includes any analysis or synthesis of published material that reaches or implies a conclusion not stated by the sources. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 01:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Would you be able to clarify specifically where you find that you feel I've used original research, please? I feel as though I've linked sources to a lot of the claims I'm making in my draft.

Thanks, --WellThisIsTheReaper ^Grim 01:53, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@WellThisIsTheReaper: Well, I don't see any direct unsourced claims, but I'm concerned with the term itself "new space race". I see that you provided three sources which talk about "new space race" and then began writing long history of both countries' space programs where each sentence is well sourced. However, I'm not sure if this (modern space race or new space race) is widely accepted term like "Cold War", so that it merits an article, or it's just newspapers doing their thing with the titles. I could be wrong though, any experienced editor can feel free to correct me, now I am going to sleep. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 02:30, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok, thank you! --WellThisIsTheReaper ^Grim 02:39, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I'm not sure it can be called a space race even. It seems quite one sided. — THORNFIELD HALL ^(Talk) 06:42, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Self-styled editor moving pages illicitly and issuing threats

A registered Wikipedia user Alirezadubai said they had the ability to get a page I was editing [Sue Williams (writer)] published for a modest payment. I thought they were going to research some missing citations. I then realised all they were doing was moving the page past the CfC process (against the rules) and I refused to pay. Now they are threatening to block the page and my topic's name. At no time did I give this person our logins or permission to do anything except edit the draft. I now see the page is being deleted section by section because the citations it required are not there. So, firstly, here's a warning to avoid these conmen. Secondly, how can I get the material back so I can continue working on it. JimmyT1967 (talk) 07:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi! This is a documented scam that has happened to other editors before. Please see the page Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning for more information. sawyer * he/they * talk 07:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There seem to be a couple of versions of the draft; you can see all of the versions of each at their histories - 1, 2. You'll understand we have limited sympathy (which is to say none at all) for someone who has paid to get an article onto WP and got their fingers burned. WP is not a platform for your promotional activities. --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:50, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967 "refused to pay" once they realized it was a scam and not legitimate editing work. sawyer * he/they * talk 07:58, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

And your point is? --Tagishsimon (talk) 07:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

That they did not go through with any kind of payment and that we, as welcomers of new editors, should assume good faith. sawyer * he/they * talk 08:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There's no good faith to assume when an individual rocks up to tell us they're tried to subvert the system to get their article published. --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:08, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

There is plenty of good faith to assume, they've recognised they were a victim of a scam and that it was not legitimate editing work. Paid editing is not prohibited, provided it is declared and falls within policy, per the terms of use. Polyamorph (talk) 11:44, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Someone needs to tell your colleague Tagishsimon to pull his/her/their head in. Jumping on anyone who has made an honest mistake and then tried to correct it - and in such an abusive way - is that what Wikipedia is really about? JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:55, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

But judging by your other comments, it does seem to be a platform for you to pay out on lesser mortals with your snide comments. Personally, I think someone who has written a number of books that have helped to highlight the plight of street kids, African women suffering from serious birth injuries, the victims of discrimination and heroic doctors who are changing people's lives, and still has time to win awards for her true crime and travel writing does deserve recognition. I have seen the effect she has on young women writers - especially as a lecturer at Boston University - inspiring them to achieve their own potential. Her only fault was to ask a newbie like me to get it on Wikipedia. Thanks for the advice, but cool your jets, man. It'll make you a nicer person to be around. JimmyT1967 (talk) 08:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Last comment was directed at Tagishsimon JimmyT1967 (talk) 08:03, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967, User: Alirezadubai is an account set up two weeks ago that has 28 edits in total. In contrast, I have been editing Wikipedia for over 14 years and have made over 100,000 edits. This is what we call a "throwaway account", set up for deception and theft. We call them "undisclosed paid editors" and they are blocked when detected. The draft I took a look at, Draft:Sue Williams (Writer), has no less than 31 references, plus 11 external links and seven "Critical studies and reviews". That may look impressive but experienced editors can quickly see that all of that is hogwash and padding, and that none of it establishes the notability of this author. I will block the scammer, but it will have little effect, because these crooks just open another account and start fresh. I highly recommend that you cease all communication with this person and similar people. Cullen328 (talk) 08:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I can just about, through the tears, recommend you read WP:AUTHOR, WP:GNG and WP:COI, Jimmy. Meanwhile, perhaps your subject could write a promotional article on James Dunbar? --Tagishsimon (talk) 08:25, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

So you know how to access Google? Wow, you must be a genius. What's your point? You do know that writers who are successful in one field, use another name in a different genre? Again, I don't get your point - except to show how clever you think you are (which seems to be the foundation of all your contributions here). And I'm guess Tagishsmon isn't your real name either. So tell me, o wise one, are you a flamer or a troll - I can never tell the difference. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:27, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Hogwash and padding? Wow, you must all feel so smug and self-satisfied passing judgement on real writers who make a living in the real world, and make a difference to other people's lives. I have made an honest attempt to satisfy your arcane rules on what is acceptable and what isn't by providing genuine information about a real person who has published 25 real books with real publishers. If there is "padding" it's because I was adding more information because I thought that was what was being demanded but the "editors". And it turns out what she should have been doing, it seems, is getting people to write about her and not her books. Shame, because she isn't seeking publicity but some validation as a working class girl who has achieved a remarkable level of success. I declared a COI right at the start - big mistake - but I have tripped over another hidden rule and not done it on this page. It seems I have wandered into a world where you can't make an honest mistake without being ridiculed and belittled. It is your collective process of only offering criticism rather than meaningful and helpful advice that leave the door open to the scammers. Pedestrians! JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

The meaningful advice was to read WP:AUTHOR, WP:GNG and WP:COI, Jimmy. I hope you've done that. We can haggle about whether pay to play is an 'honest mistake'. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:34, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

When the wise ones of Wikipedia decline to offer specific advice and somebody turns up in your email saying they know what's wrong with your submission and they know how to fix it, that's not subverting the system, anymore than, say paying a lawyer to write an official letter. He told us he was part of the system and as soon as we realised he wasn't, we canned him and reported it. I know this is probably wasted on you but then I don't have your monstrous intellect and impeccable and unfailing sense of right and wrong to guide me. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:43, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I’m sorry that you’ve received some comments that come across as unpleasant. Wikipedia rules and requirements can be confusing, especially if you haven’t done a lot of editing of older articles before attempting to get a new article published. For several decades I was a “hobby” freelance writer – I never got much published, but I read through a lot of writers’ guidelines, and learned that print publishers tended to be pretty specific in what they wanted. When I started thinking about writing my first online encyclopedia article (Meg Duncan) I read through Help:Your first article and Help:Referencing for beginners so many times I practically had them memorized! I considered them to be Wikipedia’s “writers’ guidelines” and, though I didn’t always agree with everything they required, I understood that the publisher decides what they accept and reject, and writers need to follow the guidelines. I also read through about a dozen articles similar to what I was attempting to write to see what is generally included in articles about children’s book series, and what is used as reliable references.

It may help you to read numerous contemporary author Wikipedia articles to get a feel for what is needed to be notable by Wikipedia requirements. (Standards were lower in the early 2000s, so there may be some articles out there that wouldn’t be accepted today.) A deceased writer friend had dozens of novels published, but I never considered her to be “Wikipedia notable” because her books weren’t best sellers, and she wasn’t written about, except by her local newspaper, so I doubt there would be enough good references. She was a dear lady who wrote wonderful books, but she’ll probably never get an encyclopedia article.

When I was writing my first Wikipedia article no one emailed me about improving the article for a fee, so I don’t know if I would have believed the emailer or not. It was a mistake to initially believe the email, but Wikipedia editors (which is everyone working on Wikipedia) do make mistakes, and they should be allowed to move on from an ill-advised decision. Best wishes on improving your draft article. Karenthewriter (talk) 19:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

STATUS: Draft:Sue Williams (writer) exists and User:Alirezadubai has been indef blocked. David notMD (talk) 09:10, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Sue Williams (Writer) also exists. --Tagishsimon (talk) 09:12, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967 The great majority of refs (5-23) confirm that she is the author of the listed books. None of that contributes to confirming her notability. What is essential is refs to published content about her. David notMD (talk) 09:16, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, back in January your declared a COI on your User page. The nature of your COI should be mentioned on your Talk page. David notMD (talk) 09:19, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your reasoned response. For the record, I am Sue Williams partner and I also function as her tech help, for want of a better description. That's how I got involved in thois schemozzle in the first place. My full name is James Dunbar Thomson. I too am a published author and I write a newspaper column about apartment living under the name Jimmy Thomson and crime novels under the name James Dunbar. I only say this to satisfy the genius who is Tagishsimon who seems to think he has discovered something of note. My singular failure here, in trying to get Sue's page published, is to misunderstand the definition or parameters of "notability". In my world, having 25 or more published works - every one by long-standing established publishers - would make you "notable". Ironically, Sue has always eschewed self-promotion - hence the lack of published material about her, rather than her books - and only wanted a Wikipedia entry to establish that she's had a long and successful career as a writer and to bring together her myriad publications under one researchable umbrella. This is my failure, not hers. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Your other failure was entering into an agreement to pay someone to get your article published. I feel we should not overlook that bit. --Tagishsimon (talk) 11:40, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

See my previous comments about the difference between paying for professional assistance and trying to "subvert" the system. And I didn't pay anything, even though the page appeared as a published item. I realised the person was an imposter when I noticed that there had been no changes. By the way, what's your real name and maybe you could list your achievements, especially those you have made without outside help? No? Hmmm, I thought not. JimmyT1967 (talk) 11:49, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Tagishsimon: this is the teahouse. It is for welcoming new users and not a battleground / drama board. As I mentioned above, paid editing is not prohibited provided it is undertaken in accordance with the terms of use. Please assume good faith. They have recognised they made a mistake, and their comments indicate they want to do the right thing. It is our job to advise them politely how to navigate the associated COI and paid editing policies, not to chastise them. If you can't behave accordingly then please let others deal with it. Polyamorph (talk) 11:54, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

I think you have to be very naive indeed, @Polyamorph:, to think that they had the ability to get a page I was editing published for a modest payment was a legitimate offer; and even then, assuming good faith does not prohibit discussion and criticism of, in this instance, promotional editing and paid editing falling way outside policy. Jimmy has abreacted to the idea that his unsuccessful paid editing attempt might be met with criticism, which is his privilege; and he has done so with a torrent of most enjoyable Australian style abuse, for which I commend him. I have given good advice to the OP, on where to find his drafts, and on which policies apply; I decline to buy into any of his faux outrage. --Tagishsimon (talk) 12:57, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

People fall victim to scams all the time. I don't think victim blaming is helpful. As an experienced editor you are fully aware that we assume good faith here. I implore you to do so. Polyamorph (talk) 13:04, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

For the record, you accused me several times, in unnecessarily snide and sarcastic comments, of trying to subvert the system. That's what I was reacting to, not that the page was rejected. The evidence is there for any reasonable person to see. It does seem that I was right in thinking that Wikipedia allowed people to be paid for editing submissions and getting them into shape suitable for publication (albeit, it turns out, with restrictions and COI protocols). I was duped into thinking that was what was on offer when it wasn't. As soon as I realised that was not what was happening - when it looked as if the page had been published but nothing had changed and therefor it must be a scam rather than a legitimate edit - the alarm bells rang and I withdrew from the agreement (subjecting myself to abuse on a par with your unwarranted comments). I did not pull the plug because of anything you or the other editors had done - although I was alarmed to see material disappear from the page at the same time as the fake editor was threatening to return the page to draft status - not a problem for me - and then saying he was going to block Sue's name (very much so). I had no idea if that was even possible which is why I posted my initial message. If you see that as trying to subvert the system, and if you want to assign malicious motives to what I was doing, all I can say is honi soit qui mal y pense. JimmyT1967 (talk) 01:56, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

JimmyT1967, Sue Williams' purpose here, as you describe it, sounds very reasonable. It's just not what Wikipedia is for. (This is not to say that Wikipedia doesn't have plenty of articles just like that. It does have them. Improving some of these and deleting the rest is a major chore.) If she really wants that, it's what suewilliams.com.au is for, or could be for. I see that she has written a lot of books. What substantive reviews of them have there been in what Wikipedia classes as "reliable sources"? Try summarizing and citing those. Doing this would likely add up to demonstrating what Wikipedia classes as "notability". NB not blurbs; instead, reviews in newspapers and the like. (And not interviews, either.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:59, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@JimmyT1967 It is perfectly possible that one or more of Williams' books could be wikinotable, without her being so owing to lack of suitable sources. Please read the page I have linked regarding the notability of books. One drawback of Wikipedia's policy on the biographies of living people is that every factual statement has to be backed up with an inline citation: that's because verifiability is the key. I would expect that reviews of some of her books in sources meeting these criteria should exist and would be a good place for you to start drafting suitable articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:00, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for this. I will try to do the above but I am having trouble wrestling with what exactly is a reliable source (and will probably get it wrong). The guidelines seem to suggest the subject's own web pages, but then that also seems to be off the mark. Trial and error, I suppose will get us there. JimmyT1967 (talk) 01:59, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Some sources can support facts in the article, but do not build the case for notability. For notability, you need sources that are reliable, independent, and contain significant coverage, all at the same time. The subject's own website (or biographies posted by her publisher, book jacket bios, etc.) are examples of sources that might be reliable for some uses but are not independent. MrOllie (talk) 02:23, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I've done some cleanup at the draft page. Not everything flagged as a primary source was one, and primary sources cited for trivial personal facts (what town someone grew up in, etc.) are actually valid per WP:ABOUTSELF, but of course contribute nothing toward notability. What the page lacks is in-depth (non-trivial) coverage of the author as a biography subject (not reviews of the works of the author) in multiple, actually independent (not interviews with the author, not publisher marketing materials), reliable, secondary sources. It seems increasingly likely that such coverage exists and can be found, and there's already one in there, but "multiple" is one of the requirements. There are also some unsourced claims (though I doubt any of them are wrong, they still need sources). Finding secondary sources that a particular publication by the author exists is not necessary (though not harmful); published works are already sources that they themselves exist (ABOUTSELF again). So, JimmyT1967 has some work to do yet, though the AfC reviewers also need to be more careful in what claims they are tagging as needing what kind of sourcing; I fixed several errors in that regard.

In closing, I have to warn JimmyT1967 that his participation in this entire thread has been a stream of increasingly asinine and combative interaction, and it is not going to inspire anyone to help him source this article. Check your attitude, JimmyT1967. Yes, the "articles for creation" process (or any other article creation here that doesn't end in rapid deletion) can be frustrating, especially for someone not yet familiar with Wikipedia's notability and sourcing policies, and how to write encyclopedic instead of promotional or magazine-style prose. But WP:Civility is also a policy, and personal frustrations must not be taken out by being habitually rude to other editors. There is not a single person here who thinks that insults and sarcasm are clever or interesting. It's also important to review WP:NOT, in particular the principle that Wikipedia is not a web host or blog (nor a soapbox for promotion). The fact that you think a writer is "important" and the fact that you can write material about them and their books does not automagically make it an encyclopedic topic (or encyclopedic writing about that topic). There is no requirement that Wikipedia cover a topic you are interested in, or publish what you want to say about the subject. We have stringent standards and they must be met whether or not you agree with them or want to do that work. (And it is often tedious and thankless.)  — SMcCandlish ☏ ¢ 😼  09:55, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Is it appropriate to revert these edits for NPOV?

Hello! I watch recent changes for vandalism. This IP, 2601:243:202:7450:31E4:F387:732D:A09C, (see any of their contributions so far). Their edits are just adding "insurrectionist" to a bunch of American Civil War articles. Is this an appropriate time to revert these edits for WP:DUE or WP:NPOV? Normally I wouldn't be concerned, but this is on a pretty large scale. Thanks! Schrödinger's jellyfish (talk) 04:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I may not be well-versed with Wiki rules. Here's what I think: if no existing RS call a figure "insurrectionist", it would be SYNTH or OR to call them so. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 08:55, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

UPDATE: An editor has reverted all of the edits by that IP. David notMD (talk) 10:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, On page Ravidassia I did editing and now someone revert it and i am unable to rectify it as this page is locked for me. Can anyone help me to reedit the page.

Hi, On page Ravidassia I did editing and now someone revert it and i am unable to rectify it as this page is locked for me. Can anyone help me to reedit the page. Dev Mahey (talk) 09:58, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Ravidassia Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 10:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

You added named of people to the lists of Notable people. All that was reverted by User:Jeraxmoira and comments left on your Talk page. Often, names are added but the people are not the subject of existing Wikipedia articles, and reverted for that reason. This is not the case in what you added. Usually, lists of Notable people do not have references for each person. That was true for what was there and for what you added. The assumption is that the articles about the people confirm the information - either that the person lived at a location, or attended or taught at the university, or is of that religious faith that the article is about. For the names you added, do the existing articles state their Ravidassia faith? In my opinion that should be enough to justify the additions that were reverted. I do nt see any indication that you are blocked from editihg. David notMD (talk) 10:30, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I did a simple word search in some of the articles, and they do not state their religion. That is why I reverted his additions. If the BLP's article explicitly states they are from that particular religion, feel free to add it back. Jeraxmoira (talk) 10:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Courtesy ping: Dev Mahey Jeraxmoira (talk) 11:01, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft name

Hi. Im new here (although I already edit since June under my IP). My draft just got moved to the main space, but sadly I made a typo in the name of the person the draft is about, and instead of Amaru Topa Inca, the draft is now titled Amara Topa Inca. Could someone move the draft please? Cheers. Encyclopédisme (talk) 13:12, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

 Done Remsense留 13:13, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Encyclopédisme (talk) 13:14, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

No problem! Best of luck with the article! Remsense留 13:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I am new to this!

Hi, I am Rishika currently in India, I would like to know whether i could edit articles and how is the work like? could anyone explain is it daily or whenever i could edit? Authorrishika (talk) 13:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Authorrishika, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikiepdia. You can edit wherever and whenever you like, as long as you follow Wikipedia's policies (but don't worry about making mistakes: as long as you are editing in good faith, the worst that can happen is that somebody will undo your edit, if they think it is not an improvement - and then you can have a discussion with them about it, if you choose.)

I suggest starting with Help:Introduction ColinFine (talk) 13:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

requirements for farm sims articles

When I say farm sim, I mean the likes of Stardew Valley and My Time at Portia, both of which have articles.

Any idea if farm sims like Coral Island, Sun Haven and My Time at Sandrock could justify having its own article given that they are quite popular for those that already play farm sims? or least be included somewhere in an article Breathinkeeps32 (talk) 20:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Breathinkeeps32: Hello! See Wikipedia:Notability_(video_games), if they satisfy the notability criteria, then they deserve an article on Wikipedia. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 20:02, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

While idk how to create articles, would this example (for MTaS) along with this work? Not sure if https://www.pixelsproutstudios.com/ (who made Sun Haven) is allowed for references but may be allowed for external links (WP:EXTERNAL) Breathinkeeps32 (talk) 22:02, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Breathinkeeps32: I think these two are fine as references but if it's all you've got, then it's not enough. Not sure what you mean by "along with", these two references are for different games and the article can be only about one game. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 23:15, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Actually, after doing some digging, I found that My Time at Sandrock and Coral Island (video game) (its not red link) alreadyhave their own articles and were created within the last two months, so Sun Haven seems like it could have an article of its own. Roots of Pacha also has one even though its less popular than Sun Haven.

Sun Haven currently redirects to List of New Rochelle neighborhoods but I feel like the title should just be 'Sun Haven' and not Sun Haven (video game). Only reason why Coral Island needs additional infp is because there are many topics with Coral Island (disambiguation) and that there is nothing more with Sun Haven other than the game and the neibourhood (and could redirects be deleted?)

A note at the top of the video game article could say 'For the neighbourhood of the same name, see List of New Rochelle neighborhoods' Breathinkeeps32 (talk) 13:51, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Breathinkeeps32: You can create a draft with the article on Sun Haven and then submit it, then the reviewer will turn the redirect into the article about Sun Haven game. But first I recommend reading Help:Your_first_article thoroughly. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 15:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

There's little coverage of Sun Haven in reliable sources. There are no professional reviews catalogued at Metacritic, for example. You need coverage from websites such as IGN, GameSpot, and Rock Paper Shotgun, usually in the form of full-length reviews. When determining notability, blog posts from online stores don't count, and neither does the developer's or publisher's website. These are promotional websites designed to sell copies of the product. You might squeak an article through articles for creation, but it seems a bit unlikely that Sun Haven would survive a deletion nomination. It'd probably be best to wait until there's at least one full-length review from a green-colored source on this page. Preferably two or three. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 17:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

I have created a draft on (Draft:Sun Haven) and have no plans to submit it until I can find a proper review. Since I am a new editor (only started editing again this month even though I made this on 2020, 50 edits), I am not sure how it should be laid out but I tried my best looking at the examples from MTAS.

Would something like this be acceptable for a review which might explain whyu Roots of Pacha has an article ? Breathinkeeps32 (talk) 23:02, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

It's best to look at the guidelines themselves rather than individual articles. Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Video games will help. Some articles aren't so great. My Time at Sandrock is one that I started, actually. I was trying to work through a list of newish releases so the games at least got short, well-sourced overviews on Wikipedia. But, yeah, PC Gamer reviews are definitely helpful. It's one of the green-colored sources (in other words, considered a good source by the video games WikiProject. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 04:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Great. Thank you for the help and suggestions! Breathinkeeps32 (talk) 14:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Artist notability requirements

my draft article for an artist who’s work I encountered publicly displayed in London was rejected for lack of notability evidence.

I’ve added several references to articles dedicated to the artist in print publications. I’ve also linked to several museums who list her work in their permanent collections.

is more needed? Draft:Rebecca Ackroyd Resing (talk) 23:04, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, I see you've submitted the draft for re-review already. you'll know it when the draft gets reviewed. The most important thing to make sure there are sufficient, reliably-sourced information about the artist. This helps to maintain verifiability and that the resulting biography be well-fledged. Ca ^{talk to me!} 01:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks. Hopefully it goes through! I have some more time to work on it this weekend, so I was hoping to know more. I might be busy weeks from now. Resing (talk) 02:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Resing The backorder is not a queue based on when submitted. Rather, Reviewers can select whatever they wish to review. If you see a way to improve the draft, work fast. David notMD (talk) 04:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@Resing: in the future, please complete your work before resubmitting. However, even if the draft is declined again, it would not be up for deletion unless no one edited it for six months. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 06:17, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I think it’s done. It’s my first and the directions were to ask questions here, so I did! Resing (talk) 15:20, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

How do I put WikiProjects with more than one word in their subjects into the Article Suggestion Bot?

Hello. So I saw the Teahouse article suggestion bot and decided to add it to my talk page. One of the WikiProjects I put in seems to work fine, but the other (WikiProject The Beatles) goes nowhere. Did I mess up the syntax for it or is something else needed for it to work? blueskiesdry… (cloudy contribs…) 16:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, Blueskiesdry, welcome to the Teahouse! "WikiProject" should be IntraCapitalised in every appearance. Some WikiProjects may have set up redirects at "Wikiproject Whatever", but many will require the specific "WikiProject" casing. Folly Mox (talk) 16:24, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for replying. The bot seems to be recommending Beatles-related articles and I can’t find a way to edit the WikiProjects I put in, so problem solved? blueskiesdry… (cloudy contribs…) 16:47, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Editor falsely pressing charges for block evasion

Moved to WP:ANI

References

Previous discussion : Wikipedia:Teahouse#Why was my article not reviewed?

My draft, Fabien Vienne, I have some problems about references. Please someone help me. Bera678 (talk) 16:13, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bera678, the notes left on the draft, and the page Help:Referencing for beginners, should be able to help. Let us know if you have any more specific questions. Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 17:01, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

Before, i tried to improve the references. But it didn't work. I am not good at the adding references and in the internet, we have not many sources for Fabien Vienne. Please help me. Bera678 (talk) 18:24, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

@Bera678: If the subject doesn't have many sources, probably he's just not notable and doesn't deserve an article on Wikipedia. Not every person in the world should have an article about them. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 19:38, 28 December 2023 (UTC)

OK, but how can i delete my draft? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Bera678 (talk • contribs) 04:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

There's a template for that, but I'm surprised that being a subject (one of two) of a biography in a PhD thesis and having one's work made the subject of a similar published monograph by the same author doesn't contribute sufficiently to notability. I wouldn't have declined this draft on notability (although I'm not an AfC reviewer).

Theroadislong, as the most recent declining reviewer at AfC, how is it that these two full length treatments on the subject are inadequate to establish notability? I'm asking in good faith out of genuine confusion. Folly Mox (talk) 13:17, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

@Folly Mox Please help me to adding references.Bera678 (talk) 16:21, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Bera678, acknowledging that I've seen this request, but I'm at work and my phone is almost dead and I can't read French. My position is that the two references I've linked above (already present in the draft) suffice to establish notability, but I'd also like to hear if Theroadislong has any specific input about them. I'll try to remember to look for sources this evening (UTC -9). Folly Mox (talk) 17:14, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Bera678, in addition to being the subject of a PhD thesis by Manon Scotto (Université Grenoble Alpes, 2022, already cited in the article), and a published monograph by the same author (isbn 979-10-94352-15-1, 87 pages, also already cited), which I feel substantiate "significant critical attention" (WP:NARTIST criterion 4c), I was able to find another few source's about Vienne's contributions to mathematical art.

Apparently he was responsible for the structural design of a permanent holographic exhibition at a shopping mall in Paris (which I'm not sure meets NARTIST 4b, but there's a whole conference paper about it: Christakis, Anne-Marie (1994). "Large holograms in traveling exhibitions". In Tung H. Jeong (ed.). Holographic Imaging and Materials. Optics Quebec, 16–20 August 1993, Quebec City, Canada. Proceedings of SPIE, vol. 2043. pp. 112–122. doi:10.1117/12.165568.; TWL link alt URL). Also Vienne seems to have pioneered some theoretical underpinnings of construction of large mathematical artistic structures, and a tribute to his contributions was held at a related conference, including a paper memorialising them: Verbiese, Samuel (2017). Zometool Tribute to Fabien Vienne at Bridges Finland 2016 (PDF). BRIDGES WATERLOO 2017: Mathematics, Art, Music, Architecture, Education, Culture. University of Waterloo, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada. 27–31 July, 2017. pp. 277–282.. I'm not sure if this satisfies NARTIST criterion 2 or 3.

Noting also that Vienne had artwork exhibited previously at the same conference (for example 2011, mentioned in Bier, Carol (2012). "Bridges Coimbra 2011: Art Exhibition". Journal of Mathematics and the Arts. 6 (1): 43–52. doi:10.1080/17513472.2011.628616., doesn't contribute to notability); and that his submission in an artistic contest related to the Marshall Plan and European Unity has been mentioned and reoroduced in a much later academic article: Stephan Leibfried; Susan M. Gaines; Lorraine Frisina (2009). "Das Schiff Europa — Europe's Ship of States: Über eine Kippfigur der Integration". Leviathan (in German). 37 (3): 389–427. doi:10.1007/s11578-009-0055-0. JSTOR 23984658. (p. 409; doesn't contribute to notability). There are also a few google scholar hits for conference papers by the author of the PhD thesis and the monograph, none of which I followed up on.

There were almost no TWL matches for search string "fabien vienne", but many of the publishers we can access will only search metadata rather than full text, so will return false negatives unless the search string appears in a metadata field. I still personally feel like the subject meets notability thresholds, but the English language literature appears scant.

The draft seems to have fallen down by not beginning with the reliable sourcing, instead starting out unsourced or from non-independent sources, based on the prose currently present at Draft:Fabien Vienne. Cutting out the material sourced to poor sources, and adding material from Manon Scotto's works and from the papers cited in this comment, is probably the route towards establishing notability to the satisfaction of AfC reviewers. Unfortunately I don't have access to the Scotto material and can't read French anyway, so I'm unable to help with that part, but hope some of this is useful, and can lead to a published article. Folly Mox (talk) 18:14, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks.Bera678 (talk) 18:35, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Oh right I forgot to mention Vienne coauthored or copresented a paper at the 2011 Bridges conference: Hausman, James F.; Fabien Vienne. "Cubic Fuzzy Precision: Tau-scaled Fractals from Plain-Vanilla Pentagrids". In Reza Sarhangi; Carlo Séquin (eds.). Proceedings of Bridges 2011: Mathematics, Music, Art, Architecture, Culture. Bridges Coimbra 2011. Coimbra, Portugal. 27–31 July 2011. pp. 589–592. Folly Mox (talk) 18:45, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks again.Bera678 (talk) 18:55, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft:Take Good Care of My Baby (Bobby Vee album) album review

i was looking for Review for bobby vee Take Good Care of My Baby album, nothing there. i need newspaper sources please. Samchristie05 (talk) 21:48, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

Samchristie05 Teahouse hosts are here to advise on how to edit, not to be your researchers. Yes, your Reception section is blank. From looking art your contributions you have had success in getting articles about studio albums referenced and accepted. What is so different this time? David notMD (talk) 22:05, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

You can ask someone who has access to Newspapers.com to help you. Ca ^{talk to me!} 01:44, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

i just got, hope if one review works Draft:Take Good Care of My Baby (Bobby Vee album) Samchristie05 (talk) 01:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:Reference desk/Entertainment page is probably the best place to ask this. blueskiesdry… (cloudy contribs…) 20:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Request for access to Finding Nemo page or way for fact listed below to be included

During research done by me, by inflating worldwide gross totals via Box Office Mojo, it turns out the 2003 Pixar film Finding Nemo is the highest grossing film Pixar made, however due to vandalism I can't edit the page, so can anyone put the information on the page? Link is here. JrStudios The Wikipedian (talk) 18:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@JrStudios The Wikipedian: Hello and welcome to the Teahouse! You need to make an edit request on the talk page of the article, and it's not like someone provides the access for you to make the change. You need to mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source to support the change you want to be made. Then someone else will make that edit for you. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@JrStudios The Wikipedian: Wait, you should be able to edit the page yourself, since it's only semi-protected. I don't see any indications that you've been blocked. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 18:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, JrStudios. In addition to what Deltaspace says: you say "During research done by me". If your research consists of finding a single reliable published source which says that Finding Nemo is the highest grossing film Pixar made, then you can make an edit request, citing that source.

But if your research involves taking information from multiple sources and drawing your own conclusion that Finding Nemo is the highest grossing film Pixar made, that would be synthesis, and not permitted in a Wikipedia article. ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

ok, big mistake, call off plans. JrStudios The Wikipedian (talk) 21:29, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

John Harding, Jr. first around the world flight

I have been trying to add John Harding, Jr. to wikipedia for the last few weeks. My fourth attempt failed a few days ago. Can someone help me get this published? Here is my latest revision:

[Added at 20:48, 30 December 2023 by Belmontguy]

Try not to post an entire article on here, just link to the draft page. blueskiesdry… (cloudy contribs…) 20:50, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Cullen328 very rightly removed the copy of the draft, the original of which can be found at Draft:John Richard Harding IV. -- Hoary (talk) 21:34, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, Belmontguy. I notice that the majority of the sources in your reference list are attributed to John Harding. Please note 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. We require nearly all sources to be wholly independent of the subject of the article.

More generally, I always advise new editors to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works by working on existing articles before they try the challenging task of creating a new article. (I know you've been around for quite a few years, but you had only made one small edit before starting this, so I regard you as a new editor). --ColinFine (talk) 21:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Belmontguy, your draft has many references, but most appear (at first glance) to have been written by Harding himself. Here's just one of them, as you describe it:

Harding, John (1 September 1964). "First Round The World Fliers to be Honored". Los Angeles Evening Citizen News. Retrieved 22 December 2023.

I clicked on it. The actual title turned out to be "First Round-World Fliers To Be Honored Sept. 23" (my emphases). Unsurprisingly for this kind of article in this period of US newspaper publishing, no author is specified: neither Harding nor anyone else. "last1" means "surname of the first named author"; "first1" means "forename of the first named author". As for the title, we can and perhaps should regularize capitalization one way or another, and I find The US Custom Of Capitalizing Absolutely Everything particularly ugly and would render it as "First round-world fliers to be honored Sept. 23"; however, we do not reword. You should go through all the references to your draft, checking their veracity. -- Hoary (talk) 21:46, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Also, Los Angeles Evening Citizen News is not "publisher"; it's "title". -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

There are also Draft:John Harding IV and Draft:John Richard Harding. There should be only one draft per topic. Cullen328 (talk) 21:49, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes, excellent point. Which one draft do you hope to improve and have turned into an article, Belmontguy? -- Hoary (talk) 22:09, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

No

Why do people think I can be a good one — Preceding unsigned comment added by Acting mail (talk • contribs) 23:33, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

What? blueskiesdry… (cloudy contribs…) 23:36, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Fargo (season 1)

On my web browser (Firefox) the text is running into the images on the right side of the page. Images are a mystery to me. Can someone here take a look and fix it. Thanks. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 05:41, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Also using Firefox, and not seeing a problem. Might be at your end: try rebooting? {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.111.170 (talk) 08:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Also using Firefox, and intermittently seeing a problem. When I let Firefox -- 121.0 (64-bit), for Debian -- use the whole (not-so-high-rez) screen, the text runs into Billy Bob Thornton's face. If I then tell Firefox to reduce the size of its window, it obediently wraps the text where it should (thus no problem of overlap). If I then tell it to use the whole screen, it does so, still wrapping the text where it should. But whether Firefox is using the whole screen or only part thereof, if the text is wrapping where it should and I refresh the page (using Ctrl-R), the text again runs into Thornton's face. Intriguing! -- Hoary (talk) 08:51, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Also using Firefox 120.0.1 on Mint. When I adjust the size using ctrl+ and ctrl- the "coffee" sometimes disappears completely. With most magnifications all is well. It looks more probable that Firefox is the problem by not getting its calculation done correctly for some adjustments. BlueWren0123 (talk) 09:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Tried Google Chrome Version 118.0.5993.117 (Official Build) (64-bit) which always wrapped the text correctly at different magnifications ctrl+ ctrl-.

When I Hid the Contents panel in Firefox, overlap of the text may have been worse. BlueWren0123 (talk) 10:15, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for all the replies and tests! I don't know enough to understand how or why this happens, although I've only noticed it on this page. I'll report back if I see similar effects on other pages. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.14.122.5 (talk) 16:22, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi there! WP:VPT may be the best place to report this issue so that technical folks can make any necessary fixes. GoingBatty (talk) 18:14, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Done. Thanks for the suggestion. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 20:33, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I have "fixed" it by removing the fixed-width columns in the cast list. The adoption of the Vector 2022 skin has made the content window very narrow for almost all readers, so specifying multiple columns to the left of a large box containing images is not really workable. – Jonesey95 (talk) 00:26, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Yes. Works for me in Firefox over all useful ctrl- ctrl+ range. BlueWren0123 (talk) 00:35, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Thank you! 76.14.122.5 (talk) 00:51, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

(and not in a million years would I have known to try that fix) 76.14.122.5 (talk) 00:52, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Editing

How do you reference something to its own article such as prime ministers of the uk and it will come up as rishi Sunak and his own Wikipedia article Mauveman2123 (talk) 00:48, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi Mauveman. Per WP:CIRCULAR you can’t use Wikipedia articles as sources for other Wikipedia articles (go read what I just linked, it can probably explain better than I could). blueskiesdry… (cloudy contribs…) 00:54, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Mauveman2123 (talk) 00:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

@Mauveman2123: Hello! If you mean internal link, then it's like this (in the source editor): [[the article|the text]] Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 00:55, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks Mauveman2123 (talk) 00:59, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Hello, Mauveman2123. To create a wikilink in the source code, simply add a pair of square brackets before and after the article title. So, [[Rishi Sunak]] displays as Rishi Sunak. Cullen328 (talk) 01:00, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft declined: seeking clarification about feedback

I created a Draft:Erin Williams page for an American cartoonist, Erin Williams], which was declined. Jamiebuba’s feedback was that the references do not show significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources independent of the subject.

I want to follow up about this feedback. I'm concerned that this feedback is not actually accurate given the references that I used. The 12 references I used are from independent reliable sources. Three of the twelve references are in-depth review articles of Erin Williams’ books, which I would believe meets the definition for significant coverage. An additional 3 of the 12 references focus on awards Erin Williams’ works have received. Five of the 12 references cited refer to Erin Williams’ artist and written works, which are in published reliable sources such as The Believer magazine, The Museum of Modern Art (MoMA) Magazine, and Abrams Books, among others. One citation is from a university website, a reliable secondary source that offers significant coverage about Erin Williams’ role as a lecturer at that university.

I’m concerned that very few notable women cartoonists’ accomplishments are featured on Wikipedia. I notice that Brian Fies, an American male cartoonist of a similar notability as Erin Williams, has a Wikipedia page. Williams’ work tackles huge issues we face as a society: sexual violence and how that shapes women’s lives; body shame; and chronic pain, which impacts 20 million Americans. I appreciate any clarification about the feedback I received. Thank you. Unicornnerd (talk) 14:16, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

 Courtesy link: Draft:Erin Williams Remsense留 14:23, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing my link. Hmm, none of the reviews--Publisher's Weekly, Kirkus Review, and The Kenyon--are interviews. I'll be sure to remember about interviews. I appreciate your explanation about the notability of her books, versus her as a human--so it sounds like I should focus on finding sources that focus on her notability as an author. That helps a lot, thank you. Unicornnerd (talk) 02:08, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Unicornnerd Hello and welcome. I fixed your link so it doesn't open up the edit window- the whole url is not needed. At least one of your reviews involves an interview, which is not an independent source. Reviews of her books might demonstrate the notability of her books, but not her personally. Several of your sources are her own works. One is a simple profile of her from the school where she lectures. Most of the others are not significant coverage of her. It's great that you want to work on this underserved area and I hope you can locate sources that describe Williams' importance to show she is either a notable author or more broadly a notable person. 331dot (talk) 14:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Unicornnerd, you are here at the Teahouse arguing that this person is a notable cartoonist and yet your draft does not say that she is a cartoonist. Why is that? Cullen328 (talk) 23:21, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, Cullen328, that's a good catch. I describe her as an author and illustrator in the profile, and I should use the word "cartoonist" in the profile, since her work is the genre of graphic memoir/comics. I'll update it. Unicornnerd (talk) 02:10, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

It's a comparably minor point but a concept worth emphasizing: generally, one should look to the sources cited for the nomenclature used to describe a subject, as to ensure a neutral point of view that proportionately represents all the relevant coverage, as well as preventing accidental original research. Cheers, and good luck! Remsense留 02:14, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Citations

I skimmed WP:CITE after looking at the article for Center Embedding, but I want to be 100% sure of something. The references section looked weird, and the citations were also weird. It appears as if someone wrote the article using an MLA-esqe citation style. Those citations aren't set up correctly, right? I can do stuff! (talk) 18:57, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Wikipedia accepts different ways of handling references. While a given article should ideally use only one method consistently, it is not considered good practice to change the formatting style without a good reason. However, that article does seem to use a mixture of two different styles, so it might be worth making it consistent. ColinFine (talk) 19:06, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, User:Icandostuff, welcome to the Teahouse! What's going on at that article is not a different citation style (like MLA): it's general references. It looks like the article was originally written using eight references, none of them cited inline. Eventually one of those sources was cited using an inline citation (with the full citation information duplicated), and two more sources added, both cited inline in the modern fashion. If you have access to any of the general references (the ones with bullet points underneath {{reflist}}, without any little blue clicky numbers) please feel free to cite any language in the article using inline citations as appropriate. If you don't have access to any of those sources, there's really not much to do other than maybe partition them away into a General references subheading (and maybe remove the duplicate; the rest shouldn't be removed, to preserve verifiability). Folly Mox (talk) 03:04, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Is this figure copy-righted?

User579987 (talk) 04:26, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

I wanted to ask about this article, published under the CC BY 4.0 license

I wanted to upload ( Figure : 2 ) from it to a Wikipedia article I'm working on, but this figure ( Figure : 2 ) says, " Reprinted by permission from Copyright Clearance Center: Springer Nature: Whittam D, Wilson M, Hamid S et al. What's new in neuromyelitis optica? A short review for the clinical neurologist. J Neurol 2017; 264:2330–44. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00415-017-8445-8. ".

Does this mean that this exact figure is copyrighted and isn't included by the CC BY license? — Preceding unsigned comment added by User579987 (talk • contribs) 04:28, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

it Most likely is copyrighted. It's unlikely that a major publisher would just give out material for a free license and there is no note stating otherwise. Thanks for asking first! Ca ^{talk to me!} 04:35, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

A useful reference is [7], emphasizing that just because a CC-licensed work incorporates a non-free work (and provides specific cite or alt license for it), that incorporated work does not automatically become CC. Only the original license-holder can make that more-liberal release on their own work. DMacks (talk) 03:20, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Larry Allen Dallas Cowboys

I was recently reading about Larry Allen and under his awards it did not mention he was inducted in the Pro Football Hall of Fame. It did have a line at the end of his page about it but it was not in the awards section. That's a pretty big award.

Thanks Gerald Palmer 71.76.175.78 (talk) 04:53, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! When I look at the Larry Allen, I see that his induction into the Pro Football Hall of Fame is mentioned in two places:

• At the end of the second paragraph
• At the bottom of the infobox highlighted in orange.

If you would like to improve the article, you may do so, or post a detailed suggestion on the article's talk page: Talk:Larry Allen. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 06:10, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

His membership on the Hall of Fame is also mentioned a third time in the section called "Career summary". Cullen328 (talk) 03:26, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Asking for feedback

Hello everyone !

I'm a new user trying to understand how to use Wikipedia to diffuse my knowledge on green finance. Unfortunately my draft has been rejected for sounding like an essay. I might be biased on this one by my academic background as I try to keep a neutral pov and of course show the two sides of the story...

I'm definitely working on the format standard of wikipedia for now but feel free to check it and teach me what is problematic as I see this style everyday on wikipedia :(

Thank you in advance and happy New Year !

Draft:Regulation of ESG rating in the European Union yasszz 20:25, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@Yasszz: Hello! I'll try to explain it in easy way:

• First, when you create an article, you come up with the subject you want to write about.
• Second, you establish the notability of the subject - you find reliable sources (in short, they satisfy three criteria: independent, reliable and with significant coverage of the subject) that directly speak about your subject.
• Do not start writing in depth about the subject until you establish the notability of the subject itself.

Otherwise you can just take any research paper and look at its references and turn it into an entire Wikipedia article using those references.

OK, now let's apply the steps I've provided to your draft.

The most important paragraph in the draft is this:

Following the ordinary legislative procedure with the Council of the European Union and its preparatory bodies, an amended version of the proposal was published on July 14, 2023. This revised proposal was subsequently presented to the European Parliament for the first reading . Its adoption, in its current form or with minimal amendments, is anticipated to be a crucial step in sustainable finance regulations in the EU and worldwide.

It's the most important because it tells what you are actually writing about: the proposal.

Then you started writing about the details of this proposal and providing good sources to support the technical details, but I don't think you've done the most important thing - establishing the notability of the subject.

You need to find multiple reliable sources which directly talk about the proposal and only then start writing about it.

I'm concerned that the "Regulation of ESG rating in the European Union" section – the first section in the article and the most important one – lacks inline citations.

I hope my explanation is easy to understand, and if you have any questions, feel free to ask them here. If I missed something, an experienced editor can feel free to correct me or add to my explanation. Deltaspace⁴² (talk • contribs) 21:03, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Hi, User:Yasszz, welcome to the Teahouse! It looks like the major issue with your draft is not POV, but that it's written... like an essay. I tried to think of better wording, and failed, so I'll explain.

An encyclopaedia article is supposed to describe a topic. Your draft starts out talking about a proposal to regulate some kind of commercial or financial or environmental activity, then goes in depth about the "market characteristics" of "ESG ratings providers", greenwashing, the proposed legislation again, ESMA, and then talks about why regulation is important (this part feels particularly like a persuasive essay). It's like you've combined a half dozen topics together with a thread of your own devise. This would make a pretty good academic essay, but encyclopaedic writing is a different style.

On your sources, you've cited a lot of primary sources (EU governing body documents, legal actions) and seem to have created your own table and graph (called "exhibits" for an unexplained reason). This seems like original research: your academic background may actually be hurting you here, because you're doing your own analysis of available material, rather than summarising analyses already published in the secondary literature. Additionally, a few of your sources don't appear to make sense: reference 6 is attributed to "Provided, Adam Fleck Published 10 months ago About a 4 minute read Image: Tesla Brand." What does that mean? Reference 8 is ""Home". www.oecd-ilibrary.org". There's no way that can support a claim in the prose. Reference 10 is a link titled "#LIVE COP28 | Global Climate Action Through Fostering Sustainable Finance | #LIVE COP28 | Global Climate Action Through Fostering Sustainable Finance Global Action to Foster Sustainable Finance showcases a panel of global... | By COP28 UAE | Facebook". Whatever this is supposed to have said, Facebook and other social media are not reliable sources.

Some of your sources look really good: the references sourced to Journal of Business Ethics, the Grantham Institute, European Business Organization Law Review, Journal of European Public Policy, and Review of Finance are almost certainly appropriate for an encyclopaedia article about some topic or another, although not necessarily the same one. Some of the journal sources look speculative (specifically, the ones where the title ends in a question mark, which tends to signal a hypothesis rather than descriptive facts).

The tone of the draft is not always encyclopaedic: phrases like The EU has a leading position in the sustainable funds market, commanding 84% of global assets in this sector. Additionally, it stands as the most advanced and diversified market for ESG investments. In comparison, the US, following at a distance, accounted for 11% of these global sustainable fund assets, the Netherlands launched a “green lending scheme” in 1995 and held that subject at heart since, the engagement of EU in matter of a greener world blossomed through a flow of regulations, directives and proposals, This highlights the need for more effective capital allocation in ESG funds that integrate impactful initiatives to achieve real sustainability of the economy, or (as an entire paragraph) This challenging role is granted to ESMA.: none of these feels like it belongs in an encyclopaedia article.

There's also some speculation: It is expected that the regulation obligations will have an impact on small providers with some administrative burden and costs of organizational changes, The shift from voluntary to mandatory reporting, coupled with the increasing demands for data availability, accuracy, reliability, and understandability, is likely to result in higher administrative and training costs, potentially affecting the financial performance of SMEs, etc. Also, the final sentence of the draft is problematic: In addition to these, the independence of ESG rating is set to an unseen level before, and measure for hindering potential conflict of interests are setting the bar high as none of the rating agency can undergo consulting, investments, Audit, Banking, reinsurance, credit rating activities nor elaborations of green benchmarks. What does that mean?

Stylistically, you've chosen to boldface all of your wikilinks, which isn't a thing we do. As a minor issue, almost all of your inline citations precede punctuation, which is also improper style, but easily addressed and would never stop an article from being accepted. Some of the other punctuation and fornatting is also incorrect (hyphens instead of dashes, {{blockquote}}s set in oblique), but again these are minor issues, and not nearly as jarring to experienced Wikipedia editors as uniformly bolded links (which I note the most recent AfC reviewer has also mentioned).

All that said, I really do sympathise with your position: this is an important thing, and your arguments appear sound. With your expertise in the subject, I wonder if you might be able to submit a version of what you've written here for publication somewhere. If you don't think it would stand up to review, v:Wikiversity might accept it. That project publishes original research and I think your draft might be appropriate there, although I'm not very familiar with their policies.

However, it doesn't really make for an encyclopaedia article. You could split up the material, and add some of it to Sustainable Finance Disclosure Regulation, some of it to Greenwashing, some to European Securities and Markets Authority, etc. I imagine that wouldn't be a particularly satisfying outcome, but the problem of an article topic not really being the topic of an encyclopaedia article is one that's very difficult to overcome here. Folly Mox (talk) 04:47, 31 December 2023 (UTC)

Draft

Hello. This might sound naive, but is there anywhere I can request a draft be looked over again? I know that I will be told what’s wrong if the draft gets declined, but I’m talking more about the writing style. My English isn’t too bad, and this isn’t the first time I’ve edited, but it is the first time I’ve written a draft. It’s a translation of a french article, and I fear the vocabulary isn’t very comprehensible. There should be some place to request that, right? If not it’s fine too. Cheers. Encyclopédisme (talk) 14:28, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@Encyclopédisme Assuming this is about Draft:Amaru Topa Inca, I can't see any obvious problems. The whole idea of using articles for creation is to get feedback from experienced reviewers who will either accept the draft into mainspace or comment about any shortcomings. There can be backlogs in AfC so patience is required now you have submitted the draft. You can continue to work on it while it awaits review. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:52, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks. Encyclopédisme (talk) 14:56, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@Encyclopédisme: Welcome to the Teahouse! One suggestion is to not use contractions (see MOS:CONTRACTIONS) in an article (or draft article). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:54, 30 December 2023 (UTC)

@Encyclopédisme: It's unclear what you mean by translation of a french article. Is your draft a translation of a French Wikipedia article? If it is, then I strongly suggest you take a close look at Wikipedia:Translation and Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia#Translating from other language Wikimedia projects for reference. It's OK to translate articles from non-English Wikipedias into English for English Wikipedia, but the original source article needs to be properly attributed for the translation to be in compliance with Wikipedia:Copyrights. I also suggest you take a look at WP:OTHERLANGS as well because each of the Wikipedia's are separate projects with their own policies and guidelines. Many of the non-English Wikipedias have policies and guidelines similar to English Wikipedia's, but there are also sometimes some big differences. In additions, even when the policies and guidelines are the same as English Wikipedia's, they might not be being as rigorously applied and enforced. So, just because an article exists on another language Wikipedia doesn't mean it should also exist on English Wikipedia. Please keep in mind that your draft will be assessed in accordance with English Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and not those of another language's Wikipedia. -- Marchjuly (talk) 06:11, 31 December 2023 (UTC)