Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1214

Archive 1210

←

Archive 1212

Archive 1213

Archive 1214

Archive 1215

Archive 1216

→

Archive 1220

Wikimedia's stance on additional license terms

My apologies if this has been answered before or if this is the wrong place to handle image-related questions.

I'd like to how how Wikimedia/Wikipedia handles images which may be released under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license, but the author has stated that permission is not granted for commercial usage such as here. Is the policy to adhere to the spirit of the license, that this NC restriction would not be applicable? Or is it to adhere to the original artist's intent, which is noncommercial usage? Thank you in advance. Naepic (talk) 14:49, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Naepic Wikipedia Commons doesn't accept images with "NC" restrictions. See c:Commons:Licensing for full details. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:47, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

In that case, would the user's images be removed from Commons then? Naepic (talk) 15:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

As far as I can tell, the uploader whose page you linked is claiming that the images are his own work and has licensed them on Commons without the "NC" restriction, as he is entitled to do. Please direct any concerns to the copyright specialists at the Commons helpdesk c:Commons:Village_pump/Copyright. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Discussion started at c:User talk:Neuroforever#Commercial use (thanks User:DragonflySixtyseven!). DMacks (talk) 18:06, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

• @Naepic: The CCBYSA license, if legitimate, is irrevocable. It lasts from the moment of licensure until the work falls into the public domain and no additional requirements can apply. Commons occasionally does courtesies to people who clearly didn't understand what they were doing, and where the creator asks. But otherwise, no, the license is the license. GMG^talk 16:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Raymond Dawson, Sinologist 1923-2002

My brothers and I had discovered that our father was missing from the Wikipedia list of UK Sinologists so we set too using a couple of obituaries from an ex-colleague who has himself since died and an obituary from the Times. We have completed an article which we hope would be suitable for an entry to the list but now that I have logged into Wikipedia it seems a bit complicated. Would it be possible to send the article to someone to have a look at? With thanks Quartetplayer (talk) 16:55, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Quartetplayer, welcome to the Teahouse. If you create Draft:Raymond Dawson (just follow that link, paste in your content and click publish), then folks here at the Teahouse will be able to look at it and give you some pointers. A warning, just in case: please do not copy content directly from any of those obituaries, lest you wander unwittingly into copyright violation territory. Just include summaries of what they say, followed by citations. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Quartetplayer, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm afraid you have strayed into a difficult area here: while editing Wikipedia in general is not too hard, writing a new article is one of the most challenging tasks, and an article about somebody you know or knew even harder.

My standard advice to new editors is to not even think about create an article until they have spent a few months learning the craft of editing Wikipedia, and in particular learning about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability. I get that you probably don't want to do this, as your concern is getting your father into Wikipedia; but to be honest, if you try it too soon you are likely to have a frustrating time, and it is possible that your purpose is actually contrary to that of Wikipedia - if your father does not in fact meet Wikipedia's criteria for notability, then your effort will all be in vain.

I see that you recognise that sources are important; but an obituary from an ex-colleague is probably not an independent source, and so will not count towards establishing notability. ColinFine (talk) 19:05, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Site now requires login: dead url?

There is a URL in a web reference in an article that now requires a login to view the page. It is not "dead" per se, and so I am wondering if it is appropriate to set |url-status=dead since it is "effectively" dead? This would swap the default displayed link in the ref popup/References section to use the archive url instead of the "dead" url. I am adding the |archive-url= either way. Kimen8 (talk) 13:49, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kimen8 See the template documentation at {{cite web}}, for example. If the URL has become paywalled or requires login, it is not "dead" and that parameter should not be used. You can of course archive the URL anyway, as that is helpful if the archive link gives access to our readers directly without login or payment. For journals cited via their Digital object identifier, there are various parameters that can be used to state the exact conditions for access using |doi-access= (see {{cite journal}}). Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:55, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Kimen8 (talk) 20:17, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

If the reference doesn't have a digital object identifier you can still use the various URL access indicators, as documented at WP:URLACCESS. Reconrabbit 20:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Are external links references?

Do external links count as a general source for the entire article, or are they simply an extra little thing you can check out? For example, on this article, it's tagged as needing additional sources to be verifiable despite the fact it has no references or citations meaning it should have the unreferenced tag instead. However, there is one external link to the official website. I don't know whether it counts as a source or if the person who put the maintenance tag made a mistake. TheWikiToby (talk) 16:57, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@TheWikiToby "an extra little thing you can check out" pretty much hits the nail on the head. However, in this particular case, you can probably use parts of that website as a WP:ABOUTSELF source, adding it as citations.. It doesn't help with WP:N, but it's good for stuff like Ihor Tsependa being rector. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes I use the external links section to list things that may be useful as references later. I do this especially for articles that I create and develop. Eventually I remove these external links after I have incorporated them as citations. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:59, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes those might go as General references, emphasizing that they are refs for the topic and might be cited during future expansion of the article. DMacks (talk) 18:10, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

According to the guideline at WP:General references, a general reference is already a citation that supports content, but is not an inline reference. I put things that could be useful references later in a WP:Further reading section. StarryGrandma (talk) 21:06, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Something Fishy in Camp Wiganishi

I find it interesting that I have submitted for review, twice now (after an edit), an article on musician Scott Nolan following as a template similar already published articles on musicians of a similar stature. Each time, the day before having the article rejected I've been approached by persons telling me that my article was rejected and offering their services to help. I let this sit for a bit but today was contacted by a person offering to help me fix the article and post it directly through his moderator account. Seems to me like WikiPedia has been hijacked. WPGIan (talk) 22:22, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

It's not a hijacking, but it is a scam. More information here. Valereee (talk) 22:36, 24 January 2024 (UTC)

Pray tell us more, WPGIan. Maybe start by choosing the funniest example and quoting it in toto. (A self-styled "moderator" sounds promisingly incompetent.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:33, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

"Declined" (what the Reviewers posted) is less severe the "Rejected". In a second note, I recommend deleteing the Tours and Festivals table. David notMD (talk) 04:06, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Do you really think the tours and festival tables are the root of the issue? There's a website where fans and bands list their shows: https://www.concertarchives.org/bands/scott-nolan?page=1#concert-table WPGIan (talk) 20:15, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

You should remove all citations to concertarchives.org and any content that is solely supported by such references. That site hosts user-generated content and is therefore not reliable. The site is also mentioned here. CodeTalker (talk) 00:18, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@WPGIan, everything you post on Wikipedia can be seen by other people, including dishonest people, and if you give them access to personal information so they can contact you off-site and ask for money this way, they'll do it. Nothing has been hijacked, this is just how Wikipedia - and people - work. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 14:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Fortunately I am cautious by nature and have seen this sort of thing before on other platforms. What was different in this case is that I started receiving these inquiries before my submissions were rejected. It seemed they had inside knowledge. I wasn't surprised then to be offered assistance by a 'moderator' who, for a fee, would approve the article directly through their moderator account. I'm a WikiPedia noob so wonder if that might be a thing. WPGIan (talk) 19:54, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

Not a thing. No ethical administrator would contact you asking for money, and no knowledgeable editor would call administrators "moderators". Valereee (talk) 00:46, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@WPGIan, I am wondering whether the supposed 'moderator' is just going through the Articles For Creation listings and sending spam messages to everyone, knowing that a lot of drafts will be declined. That would explain how they seemed to have inside knowledge; it's just a numbers game, like so many scams, and they're hoping new editors whose drafts do get declined will fall for their scam. I'm very happy you saw through the ruse!

Like the other editors who have replied to you, I can confidently agree that any administrator/'moderator' who engaged in this kind of practice would be very swiftly relieved of their duties and banned from en-Wiki. Wikipedia has extremely strict rules about paid editing and the community keeps a very close eye out for it! StartGrammarTime (talk) 07:15, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. WPGIan (talk) 21:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@WPGIan, there is no need to have a 'moderator' account (which doesn't even exist) to approve articles; in fact, if an admin started stepping in to approve iffy drafts which had been previously declined - not to mention rejected - a lot of side-eye would be directed their way very quickly! I agree with StartGrammarTime above, they're probably just watching the queue, spamming anyone they can contact, and hoping the odds bring a few marks their way. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 18:40, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your thoughts on this. Makes me feel better to have been cautious. WPGIan (talk) 21:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Sam Williams (record producer)

hello there, i need to reinstate Sam's page, as he is a client of mine. But very time I make an edit it gets removed and redirected to Mark Gardener's page - why? I am so confused - can anyone help me to add some info on Sam and remove the redirect? Thank you, Laura Laura eley (talk) 08:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Laura eley Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. First, you must formally disclose your relationship with Mr. Williams; please see the paid editing policy for instructions- this is a Terms of Use requirement. Instructions have also been placed on your user talk page.

As the edit summary of the removal indicates(which you may have missed, it's easy to do so), you should create a draft and then submit it for a review, please visit the Article Wizard to do so. It will need to be very different from what you wrote, though. Creating an article is the most difficult thing to do on Wikipedia, even without a conflict of interest as you have. With one it's even harder- you need to set aside everything you know about Mr. Williams and all materials he puts out, and only write summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose to say about him and how he meets the definition of a notable creative professional narrowly, or a notable person more broadly. References need to be in-line with the text, see Referencing for Beginners. 331dot (talk) 08:43, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I have restored an earlier version of an existing article about him: Sam Williams (record producer). Because he is a client of yours, you must first declare your paid connection (see WP:PAID, and you are prohibited from editing the article. Instead, you must propose a series of modest-sized additions or changes on the Talk page, with each request containing properly formatted references. David notMD (talk) 10:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@David notMD, that article is really crappy from the WP:N perspective as currently written. IMO, restoring it as such was not a good idea. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:19, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

There seems to be a coordinated effort to edit about this man, see Wikipedia:Help Desk#Sam Williams ( UK Record Producer/Artist) Page Deletion. 331dot (talk) 10:20, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

He may be notable, but off-Google digging could be necessary. Here's a BBC bare mention:[1]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:27, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

The article was created in 2016. At one point back in 2016 it had a lot more content (dozens of albums produced) - subsequently deleted for lack of references. Laura eley clearly has access to information. If she wants to earn her pay then she must work via the Talk page route, but in my opinion the version I restored can be the starting point. David notMD (talk) 10:33, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

You could have put it draftspace for later submission. Oh well, there's always afd if things don't improve. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:49, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

It's a Stub now, and I agree could be AfD'd if not improved. The Sam Williams website does show he produced more than 20 albums, so it should not be impossible to confirm his notability. David notMD (talk) 10:58, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

He is definitely mentioned here and there, but I can't find anything substantial about him, except perhaps this (assuming it's RS). M.Bitton (talk) 13:55, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I started a thread on sources at Talk:Sam Williams (record producer). The Stephen Budd Music Management is clearly not independent, so it doesn't help with WP:N. The Billboard is the best I've seen so far. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:04, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Nominated for deletion. Refs 3 and 5 are to his website, so not contributing to notability. Ref 4 text mentions him as in a band, not as producer. David notMD (talk) 02:00, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

References

Editing a Page

hello all, I need help with a new page I've been working on. I'm still new with editing. Kadiamakeovers (talk) 01:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Is this about Draft:Tamika Lamison? So far, Declined twice for not adequate referencing. David notMD (talk) 02:06, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Oops

So I forgot to check Wikipedia for any existing pages and turns out I forgot to check for redirects. I ended up creating this draft, which isn't well developed yet. How do I delete it? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 04:45, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula, hello! You can put {{db-g7}} at the top of an article to request its good faith deletion per the G7 criterion for speedy deletion, which is for when the sole author of a page wants to make a request like this! Remsense诉 04:48, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Documentaries as sources

Hello, I'm wondering how good of a source are documentaries about things I want to write about, especially if the link of the source would be a youtube video (of the documentary)? Does it make a difference if the youtube channel is from a verified or non-verified (official) account?

Thanks in advance. --~~~~A flurry of stars A flurry of stars (talk) 23:34, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

A flurry of stars, audiovisual sources like documentaries are themselves equally capable of being reliable as written sources are. I would recommend reading the guideline page I've just linked to learn more about how we judge the reliability of sources in general. An important point is that reliability is judged on a spectrum and depends on context.
Here, if you are using a documentary as a source, it is very possible that it is perfectly reliable. If you are watching an unofficial upload on YouTube—that is not considered relevant for our purposes, as long as it is reasonable to assume that you are watching the documentary in question. However, I would not link an unofficial YouTube upload on Wikipedia—instead, I would leave the citation without a link, or with an official link corresponding to the documentary. Directly linking to an unofficial upload runs the risk of copyright trouble, see this policy for more info. — Remsense诉 23:51, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the quick and detailed explanation. Best of wishes! A flurry of stars (talk) 13:35, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

wikipidia reject

today i submit my page for review it was reject what is the reason User:Hyder1977/sandbox Hyder Ali (talk) 16:08, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Hyder1977: Welcome to the Teahouse! The draft is overly promotional and does not have any independent reliable sources. Please carefully read the boxes at the top of the draft, which explain why the submission was declined and why it has been nominated for deletion. There are many links in those boxes to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

WP:AUTO explains that Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies. Creating a new Wikipedia article can be quite challenging, especially when you have a conflict of interest (COI). To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. When you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple published independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of you, and determine whether they demonstrate that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could create an account and declare your COI on your user page. Then follow the instructions at Help:Your first article and summarize what the sources have published, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting for review, declines, and rewrites, before an article is accepted. If you are successful, then you could never edit the article directly due to your COI, but could submit edit requests on the article talk page. Hope this helps. GoingBatty (talk) 16:14, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

General question!

Hey, my question is Padma Shri, Padma Bhushan and Padma Vibhushan awardee are eligible for a biographical article on Wikipedia? According to WP:ANYBIO these peoples are eligible! please guide me. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 12:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

As that guideline states, "People are likely to be notable if they meet any of the following standards. ... meeting one or more does not guarantee that a subject should be included." Having any of these awards will most probably help, but it's not necessarily the final word. Personally, I always aim for WP:GNG when I start an article. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:50, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

From looking at the lists of recent awardees of Padma Vibhushan and Padma Bushan, most (all?) of the recipients are subjects of existing articles. For Padma Shri, not all. To me, this suggests that award recipients are potentially worthy of creating and submitting a draft, with referenced descriptions of their accomplishments - including the medals. For any new medal awardee, it is possible that an article already exists. My guess is that you are asking because the 2024 awards were just announced. David notMD (talk) 14:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks you @Gråbergs Gråa Sång and @David notMD, Have a good day. Youknowwhoistheman (talk) 18:25, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Roman Rostokin

Hello! I am trying to create a Wikipedia page about a professional football player from Odessa, Ukraine. He is the top goal-scorer of Moldovan Cup 2021/2022 and it is wrong that it shows that he is Moldovan player. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cupa_Moldovei https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Roman_Rostokin&action=edit&redlink=1 It's appreciated a lot you will help me to create this page about him. P.s. I also wrote the same article but in Russian language Роман Ростокин https://ru.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D0%A0%D0%BE%D1%81%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%BA%D0%B8%D0%BD,_%D0%A0%D0%BE%D0%BC%D0%B0%D0%BD Also you can use a picture like that from the public domain for his profile: https://www.instagram.com/p/BET9eBgh_tQ/?igsh=MXB4OW5jOHl6MWhkdw== Thank you. Kawasaki00 (talk) 17:43, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kawasaki00 the image is not public domain in the copyright sense, but let's focus on the Encyclopedia article part for now. Generally everyone here has different artists, so if you think an article is missing, then write it! I am not sure if he meets notability guidelines for Football players...see WP:NFOOTBALL, but if you think he does, I would recommend making more edits first. Creating a new article from scratch is extremely challenging, and new editors are strongly recommended to spend a few months learning how Wikipedia works, by making improvements to some of our existing six million articles before trying it. When you do decide to have a go at a new article, you are highly encouraged to read WP:Your first article. If you haven't already also check out WP:TUTORIAL; it's a lot of fun! Happy editing! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:30, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Curious about IMDb

Nothing directly to do with Wikipedia, but I've been curious about IMDb. I don't have an account there, and I wonder, if you did have an account, are you able to see the provenance of additions to that database? (On Wikipedia, I sometimes cross-check between different articles; e.g. OK, John Doe article *does* say he attended Lorem Ipsum University... how long has that been the case... Oh, four minutes before the suss article was changed. A couple of times, I've been able to see this happen at IMDb because I periodically checked the page.) So can a registered user there see more than the rest of us, regarding when items were added? _signed, Willondon (talk) 18:57, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Willondon welcome to Teahouse! Questions unrelated to English Wikipedia should not be asked here. That said, I looked it up and doesn't seem possible, but I am not certain. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:07, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

How do I show additional significant coverage in my film article

I apologize as this is my first time creating an article, specifically about films. Earlier, my article Draft:Head Burst was rejected because it didn't show significant coverage that are published from reliable, secondary sources.

I tried to make sure I added reliable sources for my article, even adding an IMDB link below it. Obviously I didn't add enough sources which is why it probably got rejected which is why I'm asking for help. How do I find more reliable sources, is there any mistakes in my article I should fix? Any help is appreciated as I want to contribute to Wikipedia's growth Virp2022 (talk) 03:58, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Virp2022: Welcome to the Teahouse! You could provide sources where you read the information that I have tagged with {{citation needed}}. You could also try asking at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Film/German cinema task force. GoingBatty (talk) 07:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

The problem is that you wrote the article WP:BACKWARD. You should have written it forward, and then you wouldn't be having this problem. Start by collecting reliable sources first, and then write your article based on what the sources say, not based on what you know. IMDB is user-generated content and not considered a reliable source. See WP:Golden Rule to get an idea of what's required. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:48, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

It would be nice to see BC and AD dates everywhere on Wikipedia.

So full disclaimer, I'm a Christian. And I realize that not everybody is a Christian. But it would be nice if there was an option on Wikipedia, to change the preference in settings in your account, to format all dates to the dating format you prefer, and doing so would update the way dates appear on every page throughout Wikipedia.

Currently in account settings, under preferences, you can set the format of dates, but it does not give the option to control if it shows BC and AD, instead of BCE and CE, or vice versa. NeedHymn (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Awesome idea, I’m a Muslim and I want to see Hijri dates. Cometkeiko (talk) 18:31, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I've heard worse ideas, though whatever gadget is installed needs to see stuff like "ad hoc", people named "ad-din" etc. Consider asking someone to make you a WP:JAVASCRIPT, Wikipedia:Village pump (idea lab) maybe the place to ask first. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:38, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I guess that wouldn't hurt. And yes, you can probably get a fairly simple JavaScript program to do it for you. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 22:36, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

...and I think I've figured out how to do it! @NeedHymn and Gråbergs Gråa Sång: the code here, based off the examples at W3 schools, replaces all instances of the string "CE" with "AD". It could hopefully be expanded to turn "C.E." to "A.D.", and so on. Doing Hijri dates is harder, because you have to actually convert the numbers (thus somehow converting the string into a numerical value and then back into a string) but someone who actually understands JS should be able to do it. NeedHymn, you can copy the code into your common.js and it should work. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

I haven't tested this, but it seems to me that that code is going to change every "CE" to "AD", regardless of whether it's part of another word. So "CENTER" would be changed to "ADNTER", "ANNOUNCE" would be changed to "ANNOUNAD", etc. At the least you'd want to make the regular expression be "/\bCE\b/g", but as Gråbergs Gråa Sång noted above, it will be tricky to make this work correctly in every case. CodeTalker (talk) 01:56, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Darn, you're probably right. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 12:57, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

NeedHymn, for some historical context: while this wasn't precisely the change, it was attempted to have some aspects of dates or other data pages localized automatically, and it was undone due to complexity and complications with users without accounts. While a personal solution per above seems reasonable, it feels worthwhile to note this class of functionality has been explored for the whole site before. — Remsense诉 13:28, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

It is technically quite similar to {{Convert}} (unrelated to religious conversion) and the debate about localised reading experience. Since we're here, I recommend this essay Wikipedia:Systemic bias. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:10, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

That's about as impractical as an option to switch between varieties of English spelling based on preference. Logically, Wikipedia is a secular project so we should be using BCE and CE everywhere, eliminating BC and AD entirely, for consistency. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:53, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

I agree, but I don't think accommodating a single user's preference that doesn't affect others is that harmful. I would fervently oppose a proposal to actually use BC and AD in articles as the norm, but this seems OK. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 20:04, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

how can i verify my page as a musician?

i am a musician and i want to very my page Ex-boy france (talk) 15:19, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. You will have to inquire with various social media and search engines to see what their verification requirements are. Some of them permit the presence of a Wikipedia article as one possible means of verification. However, that is not a concern of Wikipedia. If you meet the definition of a notable musician, as shown with significant coverage in independent reliable aources, someone will eventually write about you. You should not do this yourself, see WP:AUTO. 331dot (talk) 15:24, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

The content you created on your User page has been Speedy deleted with no record of it having existed except to Administrators. User pages are not the place to create articles (Wikipedia does not have profiles, is not social media). Furthermore, articles that succeed in being created are not 'owned' by the creator or the subject. The proper path for an attempt is explained at WP:YFA. Attempts at autobiography almost always fail. Absolute requirments include references that are indepedent from the subject, and all content in a submitted draft must be verified by said referencs. David notMD (talk) 20:12, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

See entry below this for more detailed guidance. David notMD (talk) 20:13, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

creating a page

I want to make a page about football player he is 6 years old and I have made an article about him but it have been speedily Deletion , how can i make one for him please help me DilovanAli (talk) 21:15, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@DilovanAli Welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia of 'notable things'. So, does this 6 year old meet Wikipedia's NOTABILITY CRITERIA FOR PEOPLE? In other words, can you supply three or more links or citations to nationally recognised newspapers, books or magazines that have talked about this person in detail and in depth? If so, then it may be possible. But, if not, then Wikipedia is not here to promote every young person who loves football and who has simply been mentioned in a local newspaper or local TV news programme once or twice. By the same token, you must stop trying to create an article about yourself, too. These have been speedily deleted as there was no evidence that you meet our notability criteria, either. You might try using Facebook or some other social media platform to create a profile about yourself - this encyclopaedia is not here for that purpose! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:22, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Help with notability & adjusting tone

Hi, I would like some feedback on this draft page - Draft:Don Samarasinghe. In particular, how to improve the tone and meet the notability criteria for an academic. Any suggestions? Thanks in advance. Nzkaioshin (talk) 09:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

As he is only a Senior Lecturer, this is probably too soon (WP:TOOSOON) for him to have a notable career. At a list of academic staff of Massey University, the great majority of people who are subjects of articles reached full professor there or elsewhere. Some of your refs are to his achievements, but few (none?) are about him, at length. The refs to capable.nz are to articles not written by him. Rather, he was interviewed and used for quotes. David notMD (talk) 10:50, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Create an article that was created by a new user and was deleted

Hi, i would like to ask that a article which i was about to create about an Famous youtuber named Ducky bhai (Saad ur rehman) the template told that it had been created and deleted by a user stating it had no significance or importance.

now that i went to the talk page to discuss it with the user who deleted it, i found out unfortunately the user is no more in this world and his account is inactive.

Now in this case should i create the article directly or within draft, also to the addition that the Guy Saad ur rehman has joined politics and people are Searching about him, making his page feels necessary as this news is attracting alot of people and makes him an important figure. Rahim231 (talk) 07:37, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Rahim231, on 12 September '20, the article Ducky bhai was deleted by Ritchie333. I'm surprised by your comment "the user is no more in this world and his account is inactive". As recently as the 26th, Ritchie333 made so many edits that I can't be bothered to count them. -- Hoary (talk) 09:01, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I see there that you got confused for another user here is the article [2]

and the user [3]. Rahim231 (talk) 09:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Coverage exists, I'll say that much.[4][5] Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:30, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

So i should refrain from making his article or so ? Rahim231 (talk) 09:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rahim231 Since it has been deleted at least a couple of times, my advice is, if you have the WP:GNG sources and want to try again, write a DRAFT, take your time, and when you're ready, submit it for review. You can start a draft here. WP:BLP is very important, and there's good advice at WP:BACKWARD and WP:FLOWERY. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 10:27, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for guiding me. Rahim231 (talk) 10:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Please advise me on how to reduce the weight of draft.

Hi, I am a Japanese Wikipedian. I am currently translating an article I wrote for the Japanese version of Wikipedia, "チュアベトナム", into English at "Draft:Chua_Vietnam_(Japan)" and am in the finishing stages before submission.

I recently received very valuable advice about this draft from@GreenMeansGo at teahouse.

"you veer off into other subjects that are related, but not directly the subject of the article."

I think this advice is probably absolutely right. I intentionally included quite a bit more peripheral information on this subject because there are not that many sources, but I do think the focus should still be on the subject.

I have researched all the online sources on this subject, so I cannot add any more sources or significantly more information on this subject. Therefore, the only thing I can do now to improve the quality of the article is to shave off the extra fat.

In the draft space, it seems that the lead author is the only one who can do the heavy slash. Being a subject without so many sources, it must be done carefully so as not to damage its notability. This requires courage.

I have made a rough draft of my own ideas on how to reduce the weight of the articles. Can anyone compare these two articles and give me thoughts and advice?

Draft:Chua_Vietnam_(Japan)

User:狄の用務員/Chua Vietnam (Japan)

The modifications are as follows

About the "Religion in Vietnam" block.

In the Japanese Wikipedia, this paragraph was added because there is no article on Buddhism in Vietnam, but in the English Wikipedia, there is a full article on Buddhism in Vietnam, so I removed the entire block. There is a link to "Vietnamese Buddhism" in the Infobox of the article template, should there be a link in the article as well?

About the explanation of "Tam Quan" in the "Architecture" block

Since there is a separate entry for "Tam Quan" in the English Wikipedia, I substituted a link to "Tam Quan" in the photo caption.

About the photo captions in the "Annual Events" block

I removed the ancillary explanations and reduced the captions to the bare minimum.

about the "Geography" block

This is the most difficult part. For the time being, I reduced the amount of text to less than half and removed the pie chart. Some may think that this entire block is unnecessary, but I personally think it is better to have it. The high percentage of foreigners in Aikawa is one of the reasons why the town was chosen as the location for the temple setup. and the acceptance of Indochinese refugees has increased the number of Vietnamese residents and provided an economic base for temple operations, and the concentration of Indochinese temples, including Vietnamese, in this small town is very rare. I would appreciate any comments on the publication of this block. The first and third paragraphs of this block seems could be compressed a little more without changing the amount of information, but it is difficult with my English skills.

About the "Related articles" Block

I removed the description.

That's all for the proposed revision. If there is any advice, even if unrelated to weight loss, I would love to hear it. 狄の用務員 (talk) 02:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

狄の用務員様, as I'm rather tired today, I'm sidestepping your request; but perhaps if you look at some changes I made, you will find them of use. Other tips: Remove the address and opening hours: en:Wikipedia articles normally skip these, which can more reliably be obtained from the institution (here, temple) itself. 頑張ってね！ -- Hoary (talk) 05:14, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Meanwhile, 狄の用務員様, a couple of points:

1. Different versions of the same title should not be concatenated after "title=". For this source (as an example), you have: title=国際色豊かな神奈川県愛川町の魅力は？グルメに異国文化体験 地球の歩き方コラボシリーズ（2）/What is the charm of the cosmopolitan town of Aikawa in Kanagawa Prefecture? Gourmet food and exotic culture experience Chikyū no Arukikata Collaboration Series (2). Sorry, but that's wrong. As stated in Template:Cite_web/doc#Title, it should instead be title=Kokusai-shoku yutaka na Kanagawa-ken Aikawa-chō no miryoku wa? Gurume ni ikokubunka taiken: Chikyū no Arukikata korabo shirīzu (2) | script-title=ja:国際色豊かな神奈川県愛川町の魅力は？グルメに異国文化体験 地球の歩き方コラボシリーズ（2）| trans-title=What is the charm of the cosmopolitan town of Aikawa in Kanagawa Prefecture? Gourmet food and exotic culture experience: Chikyū no Arukikata Collaboration Series (2)
2. "author=" must never be followed by two or more people's names. The recommended method for two people is first1= | last1= | first2= | last2=; see Template:Cite_web#Authors. Offhand I don't how to deal with Vietnamese names. (I thought I might be able to infer this from the references supplied for Vietnam-related featured articles, but disappointingly few of their authors appear to be Vietnamese. The best place to ask is probably Help talk:Citation Style 1.)

-- Hoary (talk) 06:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: Thank you very much for your corrections and advice.

I have removed the address, opening hours and transportation.

I probably understand how to title the source and how to fill in the author. I have only corrected about a third of it, but I will revise all of it soon.

Since I do not understand Vietnamese at all, cannot identify Vietnamese first, last, or middle names, and have no knowlage about Vietnamese sounds, I will expect someone else to correct the Vietnamese source.

If you have any idea on the inclusion of descriptions such as "Religion in Vietnam," "Tam Quan," "Annual Events," "Geography," etc., please let me know. 狄の用務員 (talk) 08:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

狄の用務員, let's take Võ Nguyên Giáp (ヴォー・グエン・ザップ) as an example. The article starts: "In this Vietnamese name, the surname is Võ. In accordance with Vietnamese custom, this person should be referred to by the given name, Nguyên Giáp." (Incidentally, though this isn't the same as the correct practice for most Icelandic names, it has similarities.) I think that all Vietnamese names are given in this order, so we know which part is the surname. The question is of the meaning of "first" and "last" in the context of citation templates. So, Võ was the man's first name (you'd write and say it first), and Nguyên Giáp was his last name, but do these correspond to "first" and "last" for use in citation templates? If so, any work by him would be indexed first by "Nguyên Giáp" (good), but might give the impression that Nguyên Giáp was his surname (wrong). ¶ Although Wikipedia calls 谷崎潤一郎 "Jun'ichirō Tanizaki", not "Tanizaki Jun'ichirō"), it presents the first name of Tsubouchi Shōyō (坪内逍遥) as Tsubouchi, but if a citation template were to describe a book by him, I'm pretty sure that it would do so "last=Tsubouchi | first=Shōyō". -- Hoary (talk) 08:48, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: Thank you very much for your kind explanation with examples. I have rewritten the sources for the two papers by Vietnamese. I am not sure if this is the correct answer, I hope this bet is correct.

I can't find the Vietnamese language code on the help page, should I not write "VI"? 狄の用務員 (talk) 09:18, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, List of ISO 639 language codes says that it's "vi" (which perhaps should be lowercase [小文字] for this purpose). -- Hoary (talk) 10:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I am so sorry, I have tried both lower case vi and vie for the source of the temple website, but they all give me an error. If you don't mind, could you please fill in one successful example? 狄の用務員 (talk) 10:59, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your numerous corrections and suggestions. Although I am Japanese, I do not have an accurate understanding of Hepburn, but I will revise it all to Hepburn on my own soon. 狄の用務員 (talk) 11:47, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Broken link

Hi everyone. I found a broken link. When I click on it, it says page not found. I found another relevant source that I can include instead. How can I change the citation? Kamila376 (talk) 14:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kamila376 I can help you, but it would be much easier if you can tell us the source you found and the article you're looking at. References with dead urls are generally not removed. Have you tried looking in The Wayback Machine for an archived copy of the website?

If you found a second, useful, source, then you can add it in to the article after the sentence which it verifies following the instructions at WP:REFVE. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 14:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

change user name

I want to change my user name from Sedlescombe46 (it's been compromised) to Runagood (a name I have trademarked) but I'm being blocked (on 27 Jan 24) because someone took that name on 24 Jan 24 (it was me!) So what now? Sedlescombe46 (talk) 17:59, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sedlescombe46 you can request a new password for User:Runagood but if you cannot access it, there is nothing you can do about it. You have only made 3 edits with your current account, two of them about changing usernames. I would gently suggest you focus on improving Wikipedia. The usernames do not matter otherwise. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:22, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Dedlescombe46: If you have associated an email account with that name, you ca request a password reset. Otherwise, there may be a possibility at Wikipedia:Changing username/Usurpations. You'd basically be usurping your own username that you cannot access. Bear in mind that it would be blocked as a violation of Wikipedia:Username policy if it's the name of a product or company. In that case, you're better off without that trademarked name. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

looks like at least one product or company. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 14:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

my user page

someone who doesn't have their own user page has thanked me for the creation of mine.... I find that a little weird. can someone explain what that would be about? WikiTikiTavi63 (talk) 17:22, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@WikiTikiTavi63 welcome to Teahouse. I agree with you it is confusing. From a technical point of view, it is possible to have an account without a User page, or a User talk page. For such users, you can search Special:Contributions/Example and ping them {{reply to|Example}}.

User Experience wise, I personally would support every new User account creation also automatically including a User page, to make it easier for newbies to communicate. You can boldly create their User talk page for them. But they can request to delete it as well. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:37, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

WikiTikiTavi63, I have no idea why anyone (A) would thank any other person (B) for the creation of that person's (B's) user page; and so I don't know why anyone else would thank you for having created "WikiTikiTavi63". As for Shushugah's comment, creating a user talk page for somebody else isn't at all bold; it's how user talk pages are normally created. But in almost all circumstances creating a user page for somebody else isn't merely "bold", it's presumptuous and arrogant. And I for one would oppose the automatic creation of user pages. -- Hoary (talk) 22:23, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

No idea. User has 17 edits since 2018. Just strange randomness, I guess. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 14:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Flagicon of the world

Hi! I need to indicate that a virtual event happened worldwide and so I would like to include a flag of the world in the flagicon format, but I cannot find it. I tried {{flagicon|World}} {{flag|World}} {{flagicon|world}} {{flag|world}} but nothing worked... any suggestion? Thanks --Larry.europe (talk) 19:27, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Larry.europe: There is no such flag. It isn't needed. Even if there was such a flag, its meaning in any usage I can imagine would be ambiguous, and therefore unnecessary. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:39, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your friendly welcome User:WillKomen. I can't wait to start editing! Walkerabroad (talk) 20:21, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Larry.europe: Are you referring to the article International Conference on Computational Intelligence Methods for Bioinformatics and Biostatistics? It seems to me that the flags shown there are MOS:FLAGCRUFT. GoingBatty (talk) 15:43, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Dispute resolution and Javascript

I don't have a dispute right now, but this is for future potential disputes:

For some reason, I cannot request a dispute resolution in the dispute resolution noticeboard. A message pops up and says that this page requires javascript to use the form tool. I don't know what javascript is required. Please help? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 17:52, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping welcome to Teahouse. Technical questions are better suited for WP:VPT. You don't need to download any Javascript (every modern web browser is able to run it), but sometimes web-browsers disabled allowing any javascript to run for security reasons. I would google "enable javascript [name of your browser]" to find instructions. Happy editing and resolving disputes! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 18:26, 27 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! Unfortunately, when I tried disabling and re-enabling Javascript for Safari, and pressing the "Request dispute resolution" again, nothing happened. I also tried this on Chrome browser to no avail. I'll continue to request help at WP:VPT. In the meantime, if, and when, a dispute happens, and I want to use the DRN noticeboard, how can I submit a dispute resolution request? Any alternatives? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 15:44, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Fair Use under Wikimedia Commons

Hello,

I created an infobox for this page where I used an image from Wikimedia Commons. What else do I need to do to ensure it does not get taken down? BajaChikn (talk) 04:00, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@BajaChikn: Commons does not allow fair use. But the image in the article is marked as being under a CC license. Please clarify what you are asking. RudolfRed (talk) 04:03, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Is there anything else I need to do to make sure it does not get taken down for copyright infringement BajaChikn (talk) 04:06, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@BajaChikn: Please clarify what image you are referring to, I think we might be talking past each other. File:2022,_20,_Brady_Oliveira.jpg was uploaded in 2022 and does not seem to be in danger of being deleted. I wonder if you are referring to a different image. RudolfRed (talk) 04:11, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@RudolfRed That's the right image, I was just confused on how properly adding images on Wikipedia worked and wanted to make sure I wasn't violating any rules as far as CC and licensing goes. BajaChikn (talk) 04:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@BajaChikn: That image says it was uploaded by another user, Cmm3, who also says they created the image themselves and chose to release it under the right licence. It is in no danger of being deleted from Commons. I ran a TinEye search and it is very unlikely to be a copyright violation. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 14:40, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Awesome! Thank you so much! BajaChikn (talk) 17:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

No worries. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 18:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I wrote something and can't find it>

I guess it didn't post, I guess I don't know how to post. Is it gone? Cookei1002 (talk) 18:28, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Cookei1002, welcome to the Teahouse. This post is the only saved edit by your account. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:58, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Cookei1002 Welcome to Teahouse. Either it didn't publish correctly, or you posted it while logged out, in which case your it would publish an edit with your IP address. Sometimes your local browser has saved the draft edit, but I would simply edit and publish more regularly. See WP:TUTORIAL to get started! ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 19:27, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikilinks to articles in non-English Wikipedias

I an looking at an article (Toast Hawaii) that contains a small number of wikilinks to German language wikipedia articles, within the main body of the article. I have not verified this yet, but I am guessing that the contributor did this because there was no English language equivalent article. My question is whether there are guidelines related to this? Ike9898 (talk) 19:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Ike9898, yes, there is H:FOREIGNLINK, which offers a number of alternatives, chief of which is using Template:Interlanguage link. The article should not link directly to German Wikipedia via a piped link, but use {{ill|Hans Karl Adam|de}} instead. Mathglot (talk) 19:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I am putting your guidance to use! Ike9898 (talk) 20:12, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello everyone. I have a question about notability criteria for swimming sportsmen.

I have two draft articles about Ukrainian swimmers, which are declined some times. I kindly accepted the notability criteria for them, but they are being declined. What sources can be considered as notable for swimmers? Thanks!! Ілля Криворучко (talk) 20:15, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Note: Related discussion can be found here. --Finngall ^talk 20:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Ілля Криворучко: the policy is WP:NATHLETE. Don John McLongdong (talk) 00:22, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, but there is no criteria for swimmers, so I asked that question. Ілля Криворучко (talk) 00:24, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Ілля Криворучко, there is no specific notability guideline for swimmers. The notability guideline for athletes in general is at Wikipedia:Notability (sports). A swimmer who has received significant coverage in multiple reliable sources that are entirely independent of the swimmer is considered notable and eligible for a Wikipedia article. Cullen328 (talk) 00:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks!!! Ілля Криворучко (talk) 00:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Voices from Ukraine

Hello, is it possible for someone to check the page and publish it? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Voices_from_Ukraine Den22890 (talk) 22:21, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Den22890. Your only reference is a primary non-independent source, written by the organization itself. That is not adequate. Wikipedia articles must summarize the significant coverage that reliable sources completely independent of Voices for Ukraine devote to the group. Your draft has vast swathes of unreferenced content, which does not comply with the core content policy Verifiability. It cannot be accepted in its current form. Please study Your first article. Cullen328 (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Den22890, and welcome to the Teahouse. I have added a header to your draft allowing you to submit it for review. But do not do this yet, as it will certainly not be accepted. It has only one reference, and that is to the organisation's own website.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

You need to find several such sources, and cite them. ColinFine (talk) 22:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I quote from the draft: "On September 17, in collaboration with Flixbus, we were invited to the Ukrainian festival "Family Day for Ukraine" in the Dutch town of Veenendaal, where we brought Ukrainian singer Serafyn" (my emphases). I quote from the template atop the draft: "It is strongly discouraged to write about yourself, your business or employer. If you do so, you must declare it." The latter has links that show you how and where you should make the declaration(s). Please do it, now. -- Hoary (talk) 22:42, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Den22890, thank you for your candor on your user page. -- Hoary (talk) 22:56, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Den22890, which one of Draft:Fundacja "Voices from Ukraine" and Draft:Voices from Ukraine do you want to work on? Whichever it is, somebody here (perhaps me) will turn the other into a redirect. -- Hoary (talk) 22:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Voices from Ukraine Den22890 (talk) 22:55, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Den22890. I've turned the other into a redirect. If you go here you'll find a link to the history of the now-redirected page, and will be able to look at earlier versions. -- Hoary (talk) 23:02, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

thank you, does it possible to delete from name (Draft:) Draft:Voices from Ukraine

and link to Ukrainian version? https://uk.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voices_from_Ukraine Den22890 (talk) 23:10, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

No, Den22890, it is not possible to delete "Draft:" until Draft:Voices from Ukraine is good enough to be an article. If you read what's written above, and think about it, you will realize that no it is not good enough to be an article. It's not even close. One major problem is that there's no indication in the draft that the organization is notable (as this is understood by and for en:Wikipedia). (This has nothing to do with the worthiness of the organization itself.) No, there will be no link from the draft to any Wikipedia article (e.g. in Ukrainian) on the same subject. First, you need to improve the draft, very radically. You have to base it on what reliable sources unrelated to Voices from Ukraine have said about Voices from Ukraine. These sources don't have to be in English; they may be in Polish, Ukrainian, Russian, German, Romanian, Slovakian, Hungarian, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 23:20, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Den22890, I note that uk:Voices from Ukraine cites just three sources: Voices from Ukraine, a tweet, and something posted to Instagram by Voices from Ukraine. Perhaps uk:Wikipedia permits this kind of article; en:Wikipedia does not. Please look for solid material, for example articles within the websites of reputable newspapers. -- Hoary (talk) 23:32, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I have many of them, but it not gives me permission to edit references( Den22890 (talk) 23:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't understand you. If Zeit Online, for example, has usable material, then you may summarize what the material says, of course attributing it to the particular page within Zeit Online. In order to do this, you don't need permission from either Zeit Online or Wikipedia. (Of course you must not simply copy material from Zeit Online -- doing so would both be plagiarism and also violate copyright. I'm talking about summarizing in your own words.) -- Hoary (talk) 23:43, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

thanks Den22890 (talk) 00:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Active voice or passive voice

Should I write articles in active voice or passive voice? Abigbagel (talk) 23:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Whichever. (Did some silly book or teacher condemn the passive? If so, and if you'd like to spend ten to twenty minutes to understand the matter, I warmly recommend "Fear and Loathing of the English Passive".) -- Hoary (talk) 23:36, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Abigbagel, hello! Above all else, you should accurately represent what the reliable sources say. There are no firm guidelines in the Manual of Style regarding grammatical voice. My personal advice applies to use of the passive voice in general:

• All else being equal, active voice is the most natural form in English, and should be used most of the time, as is the case across most English language writing.
• A primary purpose of passive voice is to avoid asserting a strong causality or intentionality regarding an event. This can be used accurately and intentionally, but often results purposelessly in unclear writing, or serves the above function in a way that is considered empirically inaccurate or dishonest.

If one took the philosophy of David Hume to its extreme, one should never use the active voice because strict causality cannot ever be proven in the real world. But to write like that would be misleading and unpleasant in almost all circumstances. Hume wouldn't do that, and neither should you or I. Much scientific literature uses the passive voice much more often—this is the area where you should pay special attention, and represent what the sources say accurately, as previously stated.
Cheers! — Remsense诉 23:49, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I also largely agree with @Hoary—it's not that big of a deal. But it is a deal. — Remsense诉 23:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Note that in order to express what they wanted to say, Remsense used four instances of the passive ("be used", "is considered", "be proven", and "stated"), and the result is none the worse for it. "People can use it accurately and intentionally", "that people consider empirically inaccurate or dishonest" and so forth would have merely bulked up the prose. The passive voice is just a handy way to change the valency of a verb, best used when the agent is of no concern (or unknown). -- Hoary (talk) 00:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hoary, agreed. — Remsense诉 00:10, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

The Manual of Style does mention the topic briefly at MOS:PASSIVE: "The passive voice is inappropriate for some forms of writing, but it is widely used in encyclopedia articles, because the passive voice avoids inappropriate first- and second-person constructions as well as tone problems." CodeTalker (talk) 00:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Link articles into "languages"

Hi, I want to add an article, Ilya Oberyshyn, with the Russian, Ukrainian, and Estonian "other language". This could be seen when you press languages in the Ukrainian or Russian version of the article linked in the page above. How do I do it? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 03:03, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping: When you view the article, in the top right corner you should see a drop down menu titled "Add languages". ~Anachronist (talk) 03:25, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't see it, unfortunately. I am trying to add the page into Wikidata items. Otherwise the other languages do not show when a user presses "view this page in other languages". Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 17:26, 25 January 2024 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping I can diagnose the problem but as I'm not an expert with Wikidata, someone else will have to fix it. The article Ilya Oberyshyn links to Q124303574 on Wikidata. However, the other-language articles all link to Q4329162. The solution will be to merge Q124303574 into Q4329162. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:12, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

@Wikiexplorationandhelping @Michael D. Turnbull: I've merged the two items so now the interlanguage links should work properly. --bjh21 (talk) 17:13, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

Ok, appreciate your help! Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 19:29, 26 January 2024 (UTC)

How about a general answer for those of us who do not see the drop-down menu. Years ago, it was easy to link to other languages. Now, I can't figure it out. At the moment, I'm trying to link the English article on Heinrich Steinhöwel to the existing articles in other languages, but I'd like to know for the future as well. Kdammers (talk) 21:34, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: In the "Tools" menu, you can click "Add interlanguage links". There is more info at Help:Interlanguage links. GoingBatty (talk) 21:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Where is the "Tools" menu?Kdammers (talk) 21:45, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: At the top right of every page to the right of to "View History". GoingBatty (talk) 21:51, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I am on a laptop. I don't see a "View History" tab. On the top right, I see "log out."Kdammers (talk) 21:57, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: I'm on a laptop too. On this page, the "Tools" menu is to the right of "Read", "Edit source", and "View history". You can see the "Tools" menu on this screenshot if you zoom in and look to the right of "Read", "View source", and "View history". GoingBatty (talk) 22:23, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

What is going on? Even on the screen shot, I don't see what you're talking about. I see "Read," "Edit" [not "Edit source"], "History" [without "Edit"] and a star that doesn't yield anything that I can interpret at as adding language links. Kdammers (talk) 22:33, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

I've circled the "Tools" menu.

@Kdammers: Check out the cropped version of the screenshot I've added to the right here. I've circled the "Tools" menu for you.

Maybe we're using different skins. On Preferences > Appearance, what skin are you using? (I'm using Vector (2022).) On what page do you see "Read", "Edit", "History" and the star? GoingBatty (talk) 22:53, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

MonoBook Kdammers (talk) 23:29, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Okeh, I've changed to Vector (2000). I now see "Tools," but I don't see anything about adding links to other languages. Where should it be? Kdammers (talk) 23:35, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: In MonoBook, go to the bottom left corner of the screen under "languages" and click the pencil icon that states "Add links". In Vector (2022), click on the word "Tools" and then scroll down the menu and click on "Add interlanguage links". GoingBatty (talk) 23:46, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

NOW (maybe a refreshing issue?), I see stuff about adding language links. At the bottom left, there is "Language links are at the top of the page." When I went up there, under "Add languages," I clicked on "Open language settings," I got something with only "Display language

Change the language of menus. Content language will not be affected." and the original page. Kdammers (talk) 00:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: Now that you're using Vector (2022), do you see the Tools menu? If so, do you see "Add interlanguage links". If so, how does that work for you? GoingBatty (talk) 00:34, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Not very well! I typed in "German"in the language box, but how do I type the page name in the page box?Kdammers (talk) 00:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: "German" isn't a valid value. Try typing "dewiki" instead, and then you'll be able to type in the "Page" field. GoingBatty (talk) 01:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. (How is an editor supposed to know that the English word "Language" calls for a non-English entry?) I appreciate your patience. This was ridiculously complicated, with all sorts of stumbling blocks that were not present ten or so years ago. I hope any easier set-up can be put in place. Kdammers (talk) 02:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kdammers: By typing slowly in the "Language" field and seeing the suggestions pop up? GoingBatty (talk) 02:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Need Help

With Makeing a wikipedia With sources 985thelou (talk) 00:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@985thelou: If you are trying to create an article, read WP:YFA and WP:REFB for help on how to create an article and cite your sources. RudolfRed (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Okay Can You Make It For Me? For i Will Not conflict Wikipedia 985thelou (talk) 01:01, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

no. we won't make articles for you. ltbdl (talk) 01:08, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, but not author or co-author. There is a place to propose article topics, but the reality is a huge backlog and minimal success. There is a way to proceed with drafting and submittal of a draft despite haveing a conflict of interest. David notMD (talk) 02:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Arab Wikipedia Financial exploitation

There are many problems in the Arab Wikipedia, including financial exploitation in creating biographical articles Mohamed Alsananni (talk) 03:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Mohamed Alsananni: Welcome to the Teahouse! Each Wikipedia site operates independently, so the volunteers here at the English Wikipedia have no more sway at the Arabic Wikipedia than you do. It seems the Arabic Wikipedia have their own version of the Teahouse at ar:ويكيبيديا:بوابة المشاركة, where you can provide details about your concerns and request assistance. GoingBatty (talk) 03:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Page move

Hello, I just wanted to state that I moved a page from Save the Kids Token to Save the Kids. I did not provide a rationale, but this was entirely accidental (I forgot to write in there -- silly me). Does this need to be reverted? I am asking because I do not want this to appear like I was being malicious or acting unilaterally against consensus. I try to be bold, but I really should have been more careful here. I apologize for any inconvenience, I will open a requested move if it needs to be reverted back. Thank you. JeffSpaceman (talk) 03:22, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@JeffSpaceman: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you like, you may post your rationale at Talk:Save the Kids, where you'll see a previous discussion about moving the article. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you for this. I was really worried that people would be upset with me. As much as I try to be bold, I actively try to avoid editing against consensus, and I wasn't sure how this would be taken. I will leave a rationale on the page, and if anyone feels the need to revert, I will let them. I appreciate your swift response. JeffSpaceman (talk) 03:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

copyrights for historical photos

Can I upload a commercial photograph from the 1940s whose photographer is unknown?

Draft: Anna Istomina 57.140.16 1 Boat Scherzo (talk) 02:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Boat Scherzo, unfortunately photos taken after 1927 whose creators are unknown are assumed to be under copyright. However, there are certain cases where non-free content can be acceptably used—these guidelines are stricter than "fair use", though. See this page for Wikipedia's acceptable use guidelines for images. Cheers! — Remsense诉 02:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

That depends, Boat Scherzo. c:File:Portrait of Teikō Shiotani.jpg is a photo taken in 1934 or 1935, yet in the public domain and legitimately at Commons (of course with no claim of "fair use"). So where was this "commercial photograph" taken? -- Hoary (talk) 03:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Vandalising Robert E. Forsythe's wikpedia

Jfrser123 vandalised the Robert E. Forsythe Wikipedia page at https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_E._Forsythe please fix this and ban the user. Jinjoioihjnuhjobhub (talk) 09:21, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

It's been undone by another editor, but there was nothing stopping you from undoing it yourself. Meters (talk) 09:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

And the editor is now on a level 4 warning. Meters (talk) 09:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

And OP indef'ed Meters (talk) 09:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

And now both editors are indef'ed. Meters (talk) 09:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

seeking help, my article was declined.

good day, i am having challenges with an article and got a referral to Teahouse. can i talk to someone please?

i need to fix the errors or at least know what can be done Or Mbajor (talk) 08:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Or Mbajor, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

Unfortunately, like hundreds of other people who come here, you have joined Wikipedia and almost immediately started the most difficult task there is - creating a new article - without having spent the time to learn about how Wikipedia works. I see you have made a few small edits first, which is great, but you did not advance from those to more meaty work before plunging straight into the depths. Would you start learning engineering, do a couple of little bench jobs, and then start building a car from scratch?

My advice is to put your draft aside for a few months, while you learn about important matters such as verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view and notability. Then study your first article.

Your draft has no inline citation in the way that Wikipedia does them - please see WP:REFB for how to do this.

But more seriously, your draft has no sources that count towards establishing notability. The first five merely mention Ugbor with no detail, and the last is mostly quoting him.

Writing a Wikipedia article begins with finding sources that meet the triple criterion in the golden rule: they are published in reliable places, they are wholly independent of the subject, and they contain significant coverage of the subject. Then you write the article almost 100% based on those independent sources - which means that if you cannot find such sources, then you cannot write an article: this is what our criteria of notability are about. ColinFine (talk) 11:48, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Need help with sourcing

Hi. I recently made edits to a personality page - Sanjay Jain (advocate) - Wikipedia. My edits were reverted to original by @Tenryuu citing a lot of unsourced content. Please help me understand how to fix the issue. Gazalsancheti (talk) 04:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Gazalsancheti: Verifiability is a core Wikipedia principle. See WP:V for more info on that. You need to cite your sources when you information into an article. See WP:REFB for some tips on how to do that. RudolfRed (talk) 04:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

All throughout your reverted content you made non-neutral descriptions: "In the new millennium, Sanjay Jain further expanded his horizons... during which his meticulous preparation and exceptional delivery in the court earned him enormous respect and admiration of the Bench and the colleagues at the Bar.... His appointment... consolidated his growing reputation as a dependable lawyer who could be trusted with sensitive and confidential matters. In recognition of his proficiency as a lawyer... marking a significant milestone in his illustrious career.... established an outstanding practice profile... This position marked his exemplary tenure... a role he served with distinction... achieved the rare distinction of being appointed... made invaluable contributions" and so on, and so on. NONE OF THIS IS ALLOWED. Neutral point of view is a requirement. David notMD (talk) 12:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

How to delete duplicate Commons category?

Hello, I just noticed that the category Garou (singer) has a duplicate on Commons, and I would like to remove one of them (one contains fewer images). You can see both here: [6]. Please help me sort this out, thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC) Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 11:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

That's a matter for Commons, Revirvlkodlaku. Better ask there, specifically at commons:Commons:Help_desk. -- Hoary (talk) 12:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Supermoon

Hi, I am not an expert, but I like doing research in various different fields. One subject that specifically interest me is how different things in nature affects us, for ex the moon. Coming to read about Supermoons on Wikipedia I am now wondering if the September 8 Morocco Earthquake shouldn't also be on the list of quakes happening close to a Supermoon or Blue Moon. How can I find someone that would know more on this topic so that it could be added to that list of earthquakes?

Thank you kindly,

Sara Sara Elina (talk) 11:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you have an idea for improvements to an article, the article's talk page is the best place to discuss that: in this case, Talk:Supermoon ColinFine (talk) 12:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

See also Tidal triggering of earthquakes and do non-Wikipedia (Google, etc.) searches on moon and earthquakes. Theories include sun-earth-moon alignment distorting earth's crust and weighting/unweighting of ocean tides. David notMD (talk) 12:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you :-) I think I am too much of a novice to edit the source. Can you guide me further where to click so I don ‘t edit anything by accident before knowing if experts on the subject would agree.. Kindly /Sara Sara Elina (talk) 14:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sara Elina, you can go to Talk:Supermoon and click the Add topic link at the top. Then type your suggestion for improving the article into the box labeled Description, add a title in the Subject line, and finally click the blue Add topic button. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 15:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Selected credits

Hello, I was wondering if there was a standard that must be met for a work to be included in a section beginning with "Selected credits", on an article about an actor. And more generally why this may be added to a section: to avoid making the article too long? or because we assume it is too difficult to reliably confirm every role they've had? Thanks (perhaps there is a guideline about this that I haven't found) BloubDeFontenilles (talk) 14:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@BloubDeFontenilles: I don't see any such recommendations at WP:FILMOGRAPHY or MOS:FILMOGRAPHY (which are shortcuts to different pages). When the filmography gets too long, a separate article can be created (e.g. Tom Hanks filmography). GoingBatty (talk) 16:22, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@BloubDeFontenilles An alternative is to look at some of the featured article for the related Project, which in this case you'll find at WP:ACTOR. You could also ask your question at one of the Talk Pages associated with that Project, where those most interested and experienced will likely reply. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:25, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Ip Vandal rv common notice text

Hi, I search of tasks on Wikipedia, I have decide to look on the recent ip edits list and start reverting any kind of vandal edits. In that case after reverting what is the default notice text that I am required to write on the IP eidtor talk page to notify them. Can someone guide me please. For example look at the latest edit on: Ministry of Culture, Sports and Tourism. Now what notice do I send to that ip editor? 456legendtalk 11:27, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, 456legend. There is no warning that you are obliged to give, (and it's not clear that there is always much point in putting warnings on IP user talk pages, because the vandal may not be on that IP address for long). But the series of templates uw-vandalismn is available - you can choose the n that you think is most appropriate in the case. See Template:Uw-vandalism1 for more information. ColinFine (talk) 12:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much 456legendtalk 14:37, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@456legend: You might want to enable the Twinkle gadget to make it easier to add those warning messages. GoingBatty (talk) 16:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Making drastic changes to proofreader's marks article

I'm wondering if it would be okay to make changes to the List of proofreader's marks page? I've noticed that this page is missing a large number of markings from a variety of national and international standards which I feel should be included. Kjharcombe (talk) 16:26, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Kjharcombe We are encouraged to be bold but in this case I suggest you first mention your intention at Talk:List of proofreader's marks so that others interested (36 page watchers) can chime in if they don't agree with you. Good luck! Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:29, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

hi are you human

human gggggggggggggggggggggggg Hshaw1546 (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Hshaw1546: Yes, the Teahouse is populated by humans. Do you have a question about using Wikipedia? GoingBatty (talk) 16:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Guest Appearances bulleted list

Hello

On Jimmy Carr I'm not sure what type of feature the "guest appearances" bulleted list is at the bottom. I have a number of items to add, but don't want to blunder in and break it (still feeling my way with edits). Can someone point me at the relevant help page, please?

Thx SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 07:02, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

To add an entry to a bulleted list (in source editing mode) you just need to add an asterisk on each line (*). I would make sure that whatever you're adding doesn't belong in the other tables on the page though. If you're still worried you can make sure you get it right by copying the relevant section into your sandbox and trying it out there. Reconrabbit 13:28, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you - sandbox is a good idea. Job for another day i think.

I'm planning out what needs to go in the tables / text or that bulleted box. There are quite a lot of shows that show him listed on the page related to the show - but then are not linked back to his personal page. I'm probably annoying someone, somewhere (by making lots of small edits and publishing) but trying to go slowly and get used to the interface. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 14:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@SecretSquirrel9 Small edits are fine and allow others to check they are OK. If you make one huge edit, someone may object to part of it and decide it is easier to revert the whole rather than just the bit they don't like. You made one external link to IMDb which I'll comment about on your Talk Page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:43, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I got that impression when I did my first edit that was rejected (discussed elsewhere) and I didn't know which part I'd sinned on! JC is kind of my specialist subject (and comedy in general) and I have a couple of decades of data and images. The problem for me is knowing it...and proving it. SecretSquirrel9 (talk) 17:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

How can I make sure my draft is approved?

Ok, so how can I be 100% sure that my draft will be approved? PlaneCrashKing1264 (talk) 16:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@PlaneCrashKing1264: Welcome to the Teahouse! You have created several drafts, so I'll keep my reply general. Please follow the instructions at Help:Your first article, gather multiple independent published reliable sources that demonstrate that the topic of the draft meets Wikipedia's notability criteria, and write the draft based on those sources, following Wikipedia's Manual of Style, including footnotes. Good luck with your drafts! GoingBatty (talk) 16:18, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@PlaneCrashKing1264 You can't be absolutely sure, as the whole point of the WP:AfC system is to get feedback from experienced reviewers if they don't immediately accept a draft. Looking at Draft:Chua Vietnam (Japan) you most recently submitted it seems in a pretty good state but I'm not a reviewer. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:19, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Chua Vietnam (Japan) is, I think, intended to be about a building. But its content drifts a long way from that topic. There's a whole section on "Religion in Vietnam", which is unnecessary as Wikipedia already has an article on that subject. There'a section on "Relationship with the local community"; but it's not the building that has that relationship, it's the abbott. There's a section on "Geography", which is about Aikawa town. An article in Wikipedia, or indeed any encyclopedia, should make it clear what its subject is, and stick to that subject. (If you were writing a newspaper article about the temple, it could be different.) Maproom (talk) 18:14, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

How do I find out if a picture is still copyright protected?

I have a picture of my grandfather from a 1936 box of Wheaties. I would like to add it to his page, Truman Spain. DeeDotEssKay (talk) 11:30, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I think it's awesome that you have someone famous as your grandfather. Commons:Hirtle chart is a helpful guide for determining whether an work is in public domain. Since Wheaties is an American brand, this chart is applicable here. I hope this helps! Ca ^{talk to me!} 11:47, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons includes several boxes from 1937, like this one. Is that an indicator copyright was never claimed? Valereee (talk) 13:09, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jmabel, does this [7] count as "Published without a copyright notice"? If not, we can put it on en-WP as "fair use", I didn't find any other image of him with a quick googling. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:35, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Gråbergs Gråa Sång: we'd need to see both sides of the card to know for sure, but if we've seen both sides of several similar cards, and they had no notice, you could mention that in the "permission" section of {{Information}} to explain why it is a reasonable assumption that this would not have had notice either. It would help to have links to a couple of similar cards for which we know that, from the closest possible date.

Basically, Commons has a "beyond reasonable doubt" standard. If it's part of a series, and we can show that something was typical for the series, and there's no reason to think this is different, that's good enough, as long as the reasoning is documented.

@Ca: Probably you cannot do all of this through Commons:Special:UploadWizard, so expect to make an edit after uploading. Feel free to ping me after uploading to Commons so I can verify that it was done right. Also, I see there is no existing Commons category for Truman Spain (Q7847732). Let me know if you need help setting that up. - Jmabel | Talk 18:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Jmabel Per my research today it seems this is a "WHEATIES PANELS SET", meaning it was printed on the box. So the other side would be blank. I guess there could have been something relevant printed elsewhere on the box. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Yes, if it was physically attached to the box then a notice anywhere on the box would suffice as giving notice. But the other thing I'll guess strongly is that such a copyright would never have been renewed (which would have been necessary for anything in the U.S. in that era, and is not too hard to check, it's all online if not organized as well as one would hope). For a 1936 work, you'd need to check the renewals in 1963 and 1964. - Jmabel | Talk 19:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

How to ad email to a wiki ad

I FreeMarketEnterprises (talk) 11:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

That's a rather surprising question (if I understand it correctly). Are you planning to advertise on Wikipedia, FreeMarketEnterprises? -- Hoary (talk) 12:11, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

What is a "wiki ad"? ColinFine (talk) 12:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

This user tried to add an email address to an Wikipedia article, tripping a edit filter that disallows such additions. The short answer is no, you can't. There is no reason to add emails to articles here given that this is an encyclopedia, not a site for advertising. – robertsky (talk) 12:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Actually you tried to randomly add your email address to an article about a tree! Regardless, Wikipedia doesn't allow advertising. Secretlondon (talk) 18:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Also Free Market Enterprises is a Trade name used at, for example, https://freemarketcompanies.com/.

If this is you, you must change your Username to explicitly represent an individual (say "JaneatFreeMarketEnterprises"), and only that individual may use it: shared Company accounts are not allowed on Wikipedia.

And if this is not you, you must change it so as not to (appear to) impersonate another entity.

Please read Wikipedia:Username policy, particularly Sections 2.4, 2.5, 5, and 7.

Please also read WP:NOPROMO. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.103.187 (talk) 19:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

search for books without covers in their infobox from 2010s

I have been searching for images for infoboxes that do not have an image in most decades. I would love to do the 2010s next and then 2020s. I have this built, if anyone can help me to configure it next for 2010s and then 2020s?

[8] Iljhgtn (talk) 17:41, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn I think that all you need to do is add a "1" before the final / to get those from 2010 - 2019 publications. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

i will look at it then again, it is hard for me in source editor mode, i only normally use visual editor. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn When I click on the link you added, I get to the search results page and can just add the extra digit there before hitting the "search" button again. And, of course, placing a "2" rather than a "1" gets the 2020s results.... Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Please help User:Iljhgtn/Tools#Book_articles_without_cover_images Iljhgtn (talk) 18:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn:  Fixed in this edit. When making the edit, I presumed that "2000s" meant the decade 2000-2009, not the century 2000-2099. GoingBatty (talk) 19:50, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

you are correct in your assumption. i look at these by decades, thank you for your help Iljhgtn (talk) 19:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Please help. Keeps getting removed. Below is my draft. what am I doing wrong?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Adriantrevorpunt/sandbox/Webafrica Adriantrevorpunt (talk) 19:53, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Adriantrevorpunt: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you were editing Webafrica to change it from a redirect to an article. In this edit, Rosguill reverted your edits with a summary "rv, promotional, likely WP:UPE". Since the edit summary holds a limited number of characters, Wikipedia editors sometimes use abbreviations.

• "rv" means "reverted"
• "promotional" means "Wikipedia is not the place to promote a business" (see WP:NOTPROMO). The sources you have used in the draft seem to be press releases or interviews, not independent sources.
• "UPE" means "undisclosed paid editing", and WP:UPE is a link to Wikipedia:Conflict of interest#Paid editors, which provides instructions on how paid editors would disclose their relationship with their employer on an article talk page.

Disclose your relationship with the company, and then rewrite your draft based on multiple independent reliable published sources that provide significant coverage of the company. GoingBatty (talk) 20:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

The editor in question admits to being paid and possibly sharing an account in Special:Diff/1200557989 but has not properly complied with WP:PAID. _signed, Rosguill ^talk 20:40, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

special user name... Things

This might not be the right kind of question to ask here but, how do I get my user name signature to look cool? Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 21:07, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Jude marrero, welcome to the Teahouse. There are instructions and examples here. Just keep in mind that there are limitations on things like length, color contrast, external links, etc. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 21:23, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Question

What's this operation called [[The actual page name this link is supposed to redirect to|custom name]]. I saw a Wikipedia page explaining the code a while ago but I forgot the name. Bzik2324 (talk) 22:04, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Bzik2324 Welcome to the Teahouse. This is called a 'piped link' (the vertical character being known as a 'pipe') For more information, see Wikipedia:Piped link. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:16, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

this is called 'piping'! it's used to link something under a different title then the original! Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Hells Bells (Talk Page btw))} 00:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Question regarding inclusion of criminal charging in BLP

Hey - looking for some advice here from people who know the policies/guidelines better than I do :)

On the BLP Ben Eager, I noticed that a single-sentence paragraph that mentioned the subject being charged with a crime in 2012 was removed with the edit summary Defamation. The sentence appeared to be sourced (albeit with a dead link), and I have since found additional (seemingly reliable) sources from the time that support the statement (as well as finding an archived copy of the dead link). However, I'm looking for guidance regarding whether I should reinsert the sentence into the article (proposed version below).

I've found WP:BLPCRIME & WP:BLPPUBLIC, and my understanding based on what I've read is that the subject is a public figure for those purposes. (re. BLPPUBLIC, I've searched Google a bit, but haven't been able to find anywhere where the subject has responded to the charges - or what happened with them in the end at all.) I also think that a single sentence on this apparently well-reported-at-the-time incident is keeping in line with WP:DUE. However, as I'm not as familiar with BLP policies as I'd like to be (as well as being unfamiliar with how DUE is applied in these sorts of cases), I'm looking for a second opinion as to whether or not this should be reinserted.

Proposed sentence
In October 2012, Eager was charged with assault, assault with bodily harm and assault with a weapon, after allegedly beating up the doorman at a pub in the Rosedale neighbourhood of Toronto. References

Let me know if you have any queries, and/or if I've explained anything poorly. All the best, ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 01:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

A smart kitten, as you're looking for advice from people who know the policies/guidelines better than either of us does, you should instead ask at Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard. -- Hoary (talk) 04:22, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Being charged with a crime (as in this case) generally does not warrant mention in an article on a person. Being found guilty of a serious crime does warrant mention. (If reliable sources state that he was charged, but don't mention that he was found guilty, it's likely that he was not found guilty.) Maproom (talk) 08:33, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary and Maproom: thanks for the advice :) ‍—‍a smart kitten_[meow] 00:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Could someone cite topic bans and regular bans procedure?

What's the policy for those? I'm facing a topic ban right now and others are threatening a ban. I would like to see some revision to the procedure because there was no warning, no talking to, and it's been difficult to get the reasoning behind the ban. If someone is topic banned then they should be quoted for CIR, DEADHORSE, etc., not just told they've done those things. I'm just trying to make that point in the best possible place :) Cmsmith93 (talk) 01:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

• Cmsmith93, this is not the place. Wikipedia talk:Administrators' noticeboard was also not the place. You also tried User talk:RegentsPark. But it all started on WP:ANI, of course, where you were offered links to WP:CIR etc. So no: stop it. Drmies (talk) 01:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
  • Of course this isn't the place. The Admin's noticeboard was about different things, unrelated to this. I'm asking what is the place? Cmsmith93 (talk) 01:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
    • You could certainly start with WP:BAN. Cheers. Dumuzid (talk) 01:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)
    • Well, you're not "facing" a topic ban, you have been topic-banned. And there was a note there that led you to User_talk:ScottishFinnishRadish#Could_you_explain_my_ban?, where an answer was given. On the administrator's noticeboard one or two editors expressed surprise you hadn't been blocked altogether, and those editors may have a point. Drmies (talk) 01:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Sharing a video from Flickr

Hello!

How could I share a video from Flickr? I did a test, but couldn't figure it out. On Flickr, there are a number of high quality and relevant videos with appropriate license. It would be good to figure out how to upload them on Wikimedia.

I tried sharing a video from Flickr but I get an error – "File extension ".jpg" does not match the detected MIME type of the file (video/x-m4v)" (printscreen here) However, there are videos originating from Flickr on Wikimedia, for example:

• example1
• example2

I found a couple of Wikipedia bots doing Flickr uploads, but I one is inactive (presentation page) and the other one does not work for me. It asks to login, I do, but it never logs me in. I tried different browsers too. There must be a better way. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Learn new things in 2024 (talk • contribs) 01:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 01:19, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Asked on Commons:Village_pump on the advice of Drmies. Thank you @Drmies! 🙂 Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

How do I create an article for my own personal use that no one else can see?

Just trying to create a reference for myself that no one else can see of a set of templates here that was deleted for no reason despite experts in the field referencing it all the time. 162.206.224.229 (talk) 23:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

uhh, well most things on here are public, but for that type of thing, i would recommend something like your sandbox? Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Hells Bells (Talk Page btw))} 00:10, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

How do I create an article for my own personal use that no one else can see? The answer is that you should use another website, or use your computer's hard drive. Or even better, use a typewriter or a ball point pen and sheets of paper. All content added to Wikipedia can be seen by others. Cullen328 (talk) 03:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

How do I edit a protected template

Need to edit the Template:Top male singles tennis players by country to Remove a player that switched nationalities. Can you please help me. Sashona (talk) 20:45, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sashona Hello and welcome to Wikipedia! If you could tell me which player you need to switch around, I could do it for you. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 20:51, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

The player is Alexander Shevchenko (tennis) and he switched from Russia to Kazakhstan on 28 January 2024. Sashona (talk) 21:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Looking at the docs, it looks like it will be updated weekly. Give it a few days and it will update. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 21:08, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sashona: And it currently says "As of Jan 28, 2024". ATP updates rankings on Mondays so he was still listed as Russian in the Jan 15 rankings [9] which were current on Jan 28. There are no ranking updates during Grand Slams so it wasn't updated Jan 22. ATP moved him to Kazakhstan in the Jan 29 rankings [10]. Wikipedia should automatically follow in our next update. Come back if you see him as Russian in rankings saying "As of" with a date after Jan 28. However, {{Top male singles tennis players by country|RUS}} has to be changed to {{Top male singles tennis players by country|KAZ}} on his article after the next update. I don't know whether a bot does this automatically. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:59, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Templates with Rankings should be updated on Mondays when rankings are official, e.g. 29 January 2024 not 28 January. Then it would have shown Shevchenko is playing for Kazakhstan. Sashona (talk) 22:03, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sashona: It's more complicated than I thought. Module:ATP rankings/data/singles.json was updated Monday Jan 29 but says as of Jan 28, probably because the source [11] says "Report as of Jan 28, 2024". The ATP rankings are updated Mondays but based on Sunday results. The "as of Jan 28" rankings are those listed by ATP on Monday so it is the current rankings now and not those from Jan 15. Shevchenko is listed as KAZ in the source. Maybe Module:ATP rankings/data/singles.json said RUS because Module:ATP rankings/data/overrides.json said RUS at the time. This entry has now been removed.[12] I have manually updated Module:ATP rankings/data/singles.json to change Shevchenko from RUS to KAZ.[13] This has affected {{Top male singles tennis players by country|KAZ}} on Alexander Shevchenko (tennis) so he is now listed there. Module:ATP rankings/data/singles.json is normally updated by a bot and I'm not entirely sure how it will list Shevchenko in the next automatic update. I hope it wil be KAZ now that his old RUS entry in the manually updated Module:ATP rankings/data/overrides.json is gone. You can contact me if you discover he has disappeared from {{Top male singles tennis players by country|KAZ}}. PrimeHunter (talk) 02:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, the template should still say "Rankings as of 29 January 2024", which is the correct day, always on a Monday when the official ATP and WTA tennis rankings are published. So the timing of this "bot" job needs to be revisited to make sure there are no issues in the future. Also it would be great if Wikipedia can automate the update process for the WTA female players templates. Sashona (talk) 03:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Amazon no longer valid for source for uploading image book covers?

i upload a variety of book covers under non-free use guidelines. Amazon.com was often a valid source for finding these book covers, but now two uploads that I have tried have failed and have listed my linking to amazon as "SPAM" or something to that effect? i do not know what changed in the last day or so. Iljhgtn (talk) 23:25, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

Iljhgtn, I suggest that you try Google Books instead, or the publisher's website. Cullen328 (talk) 23:39, 28 January 2024 (UTC)

i am fine with going to other sources and places, but i just found that it only started listing this link as spam within the last 24 hours or so, so i was a tad surprised. Iljhgtn (talk) 00:00, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Unrelated to spam, but one problem with using covers from Amazon is that new printings with new covers are published quite frequently, and Amazon will usually switch to the latest, current version, whereas in Wikipedia the illustration captions often specify a particular edition (often the first). Popular, frequently reprinted books can accumulate a surprisingly large historical array of covers in a comparatively short time. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.103.187 (talk) 08:17, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

that makes sense and i do my best to look for the oldest, closest to first edition available, but when not available, i find the best non-free file that can fairly be used. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:20, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn

This is great – Iljhgtn/Tools#uploading_an_image/logo. Do you have a similar "instruction set" for book cover uploads? Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:16, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

no, but it isn't necessary. you use the same rules essentially, but then just find a book cover that you can use from a major source like goodreads or used to use amazon. i'd hunt to find one that is as early as possible mostly. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Iljhgtn

Could you link to a book cover that you've uploaded?

What license to you choose – I'm stuck here. Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

you are uploading it wrong, you need to upload as it IS copywritten but it is a non-free file that you believe is fair use, I then say in the bottom section "this image is being used only once, in the infobox of the named article and for purpose of identification only" when it asks me how the use will be limited. I will find one that I have uploaded for you. I've uploaded a lot of children's book covers from Mem Fox of Australia, so let me check there. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Here i found one at Let's Count Goats!. See if you can follow me that way. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you once again @Iljhgtn! 🙂 Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Different upload link, found it.

Thank you @Iljhgtn
Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Right. Yes. I have that link also in my list of "tools" saved on my userpage. Sorry I did not think to link to that sooner. Iljhgtn (talk) 02:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Uploaded a book cover and added to an article (Att vara Per Gessle). Works well. Thank you. Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 03:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

You are welcome. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Videos from Youtube on Wikimedia

I came across a number of videos on Wikimedia originating from Youtube:

• example1
• example2

What YouTube videos are allowed on Wikimedia and how does upload procedure look like? Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 01:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Sidenote:

Did these two videos - example3 and exmaple4 videos get uploaded via the regular Upload Wizzard? Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 01:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Those are on Commons: try asking here. Drmies (talk) 01:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Drmies

What's the difference between Wikipedia and Wikimedia, why are they separate? Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikimedia is the overarching organization, so to speak. Commons is where they have pictures and videos. We write beautiful articles. Drmies (talk) 02:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Learn new things in 2024: We write beautiful articles in English. There are dozens of Wikipedias in other languages. Commons is a central repository of pictures and videos that can be shared across all Wikipedias. Better to upload a picture or video once than dozens of places. GoingBatty (talk) 03:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

If you add a town or city category, should the historic or ceremonial county category then be removed?

For example, I've just added Musical groups from Bradford‎ category to the Bradford band Black Dyke Band.

Should the Musical groups from West Yorkshire category now be removed? Danstarr69 (talk) 05:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Danstarr69: Welcome to the Teahouse! Since Category:Musical groups from Bradford is a subcategory of Category:Musical groups from West Yorkshire, then yes, you should remove Category:Musical groups from West Yorkshire. For more info, see WP:PARENTCAT. GoingBatty (talk) 05:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikidata & Commons categories

Some people and organisations have a Wikidata entry (e.g. Bear Grylls), some don't. Some people and organisations have a Commons category entry (e.g. Bear Grylls again), some don't.

How do Wikidata and Commons categories get created? Can they be created automatically by a bot or something?
Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Learn new things in 2024: Welcome to the Teahouse! Wikidata and Wikimedia Commons are separate projects from the English Wikipedia. Some of there entries get created manually, but I don't know what bots they have. You could peruse the information in wikidata:Help:Contents (which includes a section called "Bot operators") and commons:Help:Contents. If you still have further questions, you could ask at wikidata:Wikidata:Project chat and commons:Commons:Help desk. Hope this points you in the right directions. GoingBatty (talk) 03:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Commons categories are created manually, just like enwiki. It takes someone to go to commons, decide there are enough files to be worth creating a category, create the cat page, and place the files in it. Like enwiki, commons tends to frown on very small cats, so sometimes it will just be a few files in a cat with a broader scope. There's no guideline that commons and enwiki need to have the same granularity. DMacks (talk) 07:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Need help

I recently moved a page from userpage to mainspace, but I forgot to remove my username, so the page appears as Youprayteas/Ardahan Castle. I can't seem to move it again since somehow Ardahan Castle is a redirect to Youprayteas/Ardahan Castle. Please help me, this is an accident and not an attempt on vandalism or something. Youprayteas (talk) 08:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC) PS: The issue is fixed. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Youprayteas (talk • contribs) 09:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Youprayteas, it seems like User:Liz already fixed the problem. Don't worry about making mistakes, everyone does it sometimes! Ca ^{talk to me!} 09:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Citations numerological order broke following an edit to a page? How to fix the numbering of citations?

I edited the Beta Lyrae page to add some notes regarding the etymology of the Sheliak star following a couple hours of original research. I added several primary sources to back my addition regarding the origin of Sheliak's name. I made 2 edits, one originally adding my findings, the second expanding on it and changing the wording.

Following my second edit, the citations now appear to have changed numerological order, and for the life of me I cannot tell why this happened. Might it be some issue with the visual editor? When I press edit on the page the numbers for citations do go into the right order, but then when I leave the editor it goes back to starting at 12. Any chance someone could help fix it so the citations begin with 1 again? MWvBins (talk) 09:32, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, MWvBins. The Mediawiki software renumbers references automatically when changes are made to the references. In this article, many of the references are first used in the infobox. Since the infobox coding is at the very top of the coding for the article, those references are automatically numbered 1, 2, 3 and so on. References in the body of the article that are not used in the infobox will have numbers like 13, 14, 15 and so on. This can be seen quite clearly in the article's infobox. Cullen328 (talk) 09:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi MWvBins, the VisualEditor does not parse references defined in templates. It treats those references as simple strings of text. The infobox at the top right of the page is created by templates like {{Starbox begin}}. If you try to edit the box in the VisualEditor, you will see that some parameters are references. To get the correct layout for a Wikipedia article (with the infobox in the top-right position), the infobox templates must come first in the article's source. The references for an article are automatically numbered. That's why references from an infobox or topmost image caption are often the first reference. Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 09:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@MWvBins: I've switched the list-defined references in that article from a template to standard wiki syntax just now.[14] You should be able to see and modify more of the article's references in the VisualEditor. I would not worry much about the numbering, Rjjⁱⁱⁱ (talk) 09:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

2024 Race for Governor of N.C.

Please insert the website for Candidate, Attorney Marcus W. Williams: https://WilliamsHouseUSA.com or www.AttorneyMarcusWilliamsforGovernor.com Further, please remove the derogatory and arbitrary comment of: "...perennial candidate..." which was gleaned from some meaningless news article. Thank you. 2606:A000:FFC0:4:75DD:AA77:CC95:68D0 (talk) 01:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

??? ltbdl (talk) 01:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

user:ltbdl, it may be related to User:Whittman/sandbox, who knows. Drmies (talk) 01:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

More likely 2024 North Carolina gubernatorial election, but it would be nice if these drive-bys specified which of our 6.77 million articles they were talking about.

The requested link to this candidate's official campaign website is in fact already in the article, along with those of eight others, in the External links section. I do not know enough about USA politics to decide whether the specified comment is appropriate or not. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.103.187 (talk) 02:45, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

IP editor: Welcome to the Teahouse! The best place to make a comment or suggestion about a Wikipedia article is the article's talk page. For example, if you were referring to the article 2024 North Carolina gubernatorial election, its talk page is Talk:2024 North Carolina gubernatorial election. At the top left of every article is a "Talk" link that will take you to its associated talk page. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 03:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I have removed the unsourced contentious claim "perennial candidate", per WP:BLP. ColinFine (talk) 10:24, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

How many admins are women?

Hi everyone, I know that the Internet and technology tends to be male-dominated and I was just wondering how many Wikipedia admins are women? I feel like we shouldn’t have to specify but I guess it’s the world we live in, but by women I mean actual female. Karen.r91 (talk) 00:22, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello. I'm a bit concerned that the underlying premise of your question is limited to what I assume you mean to be those assigned female at birth. You are entitled to your personal views, but Wikipedia is an environment open to humans of all races, genders, religions, etc. There will be trans women around.

In any event, to answer you, no user is under any obligation to identify their gender, or identify it correctly. I do know some who identify as female, but I'm not sure of the percentage. 331dot (talk) 00:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, it's not that 331dot, personally, is unsure of the percentage, but that none of us know the percentage, since wikipedia does not collect information on editor gender. It does collect information on editor pronouns, but that won't be useful to you, because many editors leave this blank (and thus are not gendered). Not to mention that "people who use the pronoun 'she'" does not accord with your desired definition of woman. -- asilvering (talk) 00:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

On the Internet, nobody knows you're a dog Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Hells Bells (Talk Page btw))} 01:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

It’s not my “desired definition”, it’s the definition. What a person “identifies as” is irrelevant in the face of objective fact. I respect your opinion and believe it’s ok for us to disagree, though. Karen.r91 (talk) 02:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Karen.r91, you may find the article Intersex enlighting. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.103.187 (talk) 02:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Karen is a known LTA troll who posts stupid stuff. I've blocked this account, and suggest it's ignored. -- zzuuzz ^(talk) 02:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

BTW We have an article on Gender bias on Wikipedia. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. David notMD (talk) 03:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

What do you know? Sockpuppeting trolls are unable to control themselves, waste other people's valuable time, and get blocked for acting like pests. "Tale As Old As Time". Cullen328 (talk) 10:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Can someone help me nominate a bunch of articles/stubs for deletion?

If you click around to some of the linked articles on this page, it would appear that there are dozens of stubs created for every little agency and sub-agency of this region. Most are written poorly, where there is any writing at all. Not to be conspiratorial but it seems like some entity created them for weird SEO or propaganda purposes. Government of Bashkortostan. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 13:32, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

See under Agencies, list of agencies that Wikilink to short articles about those agencies. David notMD (talk) 13:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Yeah, I know. And most of them are poorly written if they have any words at all beyond repeating the title. Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 13:41, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Appears these were all created by User:Ayratayrat in 2014. As Ayratayrat is still an active editor, perhaps opening a discussion on that person's Talk page would be preferred to a multi-article deletion attempt. David notMD (talk) 13:44, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't think stubs on government ministries is great propaganda, nor what Bashkortostan would want with English language SEO. Most likely they're created in good faith. If you feel they're not likely to improve and don't stand well alone, consider merging them before deleting. CMD (talk) 13:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Dreameditsbrooklyn (talk) 13:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

how long do i have to wait to have my account confirmed?

I'm really keen on updating pages that have concerningly incorrect information displayed that I can rectify and substantiate with the requisite sources and citations. would it be possible for someone to tell me how long this process will take? Sighsharehere (talk) 13:05, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Sighsharehere: Accounts become autoconfirmed after 4 days and 10 edits. You already have the requisite number of edits, so you should be confirmed at 7:15 (UTC) on February 2. Deor (talk) 13:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Sighsharehere and welcome to the teahouse. In addition to when your account will be autoconfirmed, if you see something that should be changed on an article that you cannot edit, you're free to make an edit request (see Wikipedia:Edit requests) to signal to other editors to fix it. Just follow the instructions and be as exact as possible about what needs to change. Skynxnex (talk) 14:00, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

{{course assignment}}

sometimes i see that, what does that mean that an article was a "course assignment"? Iljhgtn (talk) 02:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

For example: Paul Oliver v. Samuel K. Boateng Iljhgtn (talk) 02:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Specifically: Talk:Paul Oliver v. Samuel K. Boateng Iljhgtn (talk) 02:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Seems that students get to make an article as an assigment.

Talk page of your example – Paul Oliver v. Samuel K. Boateng Learn new things in 2024 (talk) 02:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Welcome to the Teahouse! The {{course assignment}} banner generates text stating "This article was the subject of an educational assignment", which links to Wikipedia:Student assignments. Did you have a specific question about the information on Wikipedia:Student assignments? GoingBatty (talk) 03:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

just does not seem like a good idea to me to be letting students create things left and right. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Iljhgtn: Knowledgeable instructors teaching people the proper ways to use Wikipedia seems like a much better idea than people trying to figure it out on their own, getting frustrated when they realize Wikipedia has actual policies, and wasting the time of our small pool of volunteers. GoingBatty (talk) 03:29, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

that does make sense. Iljhgtn (talk) 03:34, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia is the encyclopedia that anyone can edit. -- asilvering (talk) 03:50, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

There is an extensive and nice-looking set of training materials and practice/walkthough modules that instructors can deploy. That, plus careful instructor supervision of article-choice and content contributions can lead to good results. DMacks (talk) 07:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

More often, the assignments are to improve existing articles versus creating new articles, as new-to-Wikipedia editors are highly likely to fail at the latter. Basically, an unfair assignment. David notMD (talk) 13:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

i do not have strong feelings on this, apparently others might. i am happy to move on. thank you all for your thoughts. Iljhgtn (talk) 14:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Past or Present Tense?

I'm just wondering if all the words in any article should completely be written in past or present tense. Also, when and how to tell if it's supposed to vary, repeatedly from one of the two, during each section of the article. Finally, do we censor inappropriate words stated by celebrities, pilots, or just random people? If so, how? CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine (talk) 04:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine: Use appropriate tense. I try to avoid future tense, but past or present is appropriate depending on context. For example, when describing the past career of a notable person, use past tense, but when describing that person's current career, use present tense.

As for censorship, emphatically no, because we have a policy that Wikipedia is not censored. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:59, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@CreatorOfMinecraftHerobrine The WP manual of style has a section about what tense to use and when: see MOS:TENSE. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Explanatory footnotes

My article Draft:Aliasing_(factorial_experiments) produces an empty section entitled Explanatory footnotes. (1) What triggered this section to be created? (2) How do I move some of my footnotes from the Notes section into the Explanatory footnotes section? Johsebb (talk) 18:06, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Johsebb, welcome to the Teahouse. To answer your first question, that section was added in this edit from almost a year ago. It wasn't empty then, it was created to hold a short explanatory note which has since been shunted to the Notes section instead. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 18:31, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

To answer your second question, the "Explanatory footnotes" section contains the code {{reflist|group = note}}. To have a footnote appear in this section, change <ref> to <ref group="note">. For more information, see the documentation, examples, and other options at Template:Reflist. Hap[y editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:46, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Odd that I hadn't noticed the addition of that section before.... Johsebb (talk) 15:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Stuck on The Wikipedia Adventure Mission 1?

Hi all,

Thought I'd try out the Wikipedia Adventure to sharpen up my skills at editing, as I'm new. I'm attempting Mission 1, where you edit your userpage to say hello, but I can't seem to get the game to understand that I've now done this. I left the box open, edited the source of my userpage, and published my changes, but the box is still there. Any advice?

EDIT: Seems to be related to me using the 2017 wikitext editor; everything worked fine after I turned it off in Preferences:Editing. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Chronque (talk • contribs) 16:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Chronque (talk) 15:25, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

on whatever the fuck this is

what

for whatever reason, this exact error has been flooding the entire right side of my screen since... the second time i tried to turn my pc on today?

in case of need, the full link is https://en.wikipedia.org/w/load.php?lang=en&modules=ext.popups.main&skin=monobook&version=1ul2s

any idea what it could be? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 15:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

It looks like a javascript error on the popups extension Polyamorph (talk) 16:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

turning navigation popups off seems to have stopped the flood of errors, at the cost of having the second best tool i have (behind dark mode) disabled for now

maybe someone made a small oopsie with the gadget or something, or my pc is just acting up again

until then, thanks cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan WP:JSERROR, if you're feeling up to it. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan et al: This has been reported by other users at VPT here: Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Empty_element_error?. Probably best to centralize discussion there, but looks like it's already being worked on. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

got there just now by accident

good to know it's not my pc's fault for once cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 16:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Posting/Pasting from a google docs file

Hello and thank you kindly for taking the time to properly inform me regarding this topic.

I wrote the full page (including external links, sources, affiliations, publications, images and so on...) for the internationally-known artist Linda Saskia Menczel, taking inspiration from other wikipedia pages of great sculpors, artists and painters; such as Constantin Brâncuși, Michelangelo and Leonardo DaVinci.

I have just recently read about the copy-paste policy of wikipedia, and I understood that there are cases in which we can still paste our bulk-wrote text/article into wikipedia and edit it before posting.

My question is: Can I paste my article directly into wikipedia and sending it to review before posting it, considering that the article, and everything related to it was written BY the artist herself and I together, and according to the neutral-tone-guideline? Because re-writing it would be another effort considering it was finished already. (I should mention that we have not seen the copy-paste issue before starting to work at her page).

Thank you again, an please let us know if there is any chance to paste it into wikipedia to continue working at it & reviewing it without doing it all again by hand.

Kind regards, Emanuel (the artist's son). EuropeGotArt (talk) 08:52, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, EuropeGotArt. We do not permit shared accounts and anything you add to Wikipedia must be written by you and only you. Any content that was written BY the artist herself can only be added through the artist's own Wikipedia account. This is a matter of copyright law and handling freely licensed content properly. On another matter, comparing this artist to Brâncuși, Michelangelo and DaVinci is likely to attract heightened scrutiny. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Cullen328 (talk) 09:42, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

And please read WP:COI You have a conflict of interest in writing about your mother. Meters (talk) 09:44, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Understood! Thank you for the clarifications!

Regarding the other matter, by inspiration I meant we checked how other sculptors had their wikipedia page structured, and what info and in what order their article was written; there is no intention of comparing the contemporan artists with the 'consecrated' ones.

Again, thank you for the clarifications and the COI thread! EuropeGotArt (talk) 11:15, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, EuropeGotArt, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. Besides the points that Cullen made, I have another concern about what you said: "taking inspiration from other wikipedia pages". While the format and appearance of a Wikipedia article is important, of course, the far more important part, that comes first, is the bit that most readers don't even notice: identifying the sources on which the article is to be based. Imagine saying "I have never done any house-building, but I am going to take inspiration from those splendid mansions I've seen". Unless you take the time to study and practice the necessary skills - and particularly the hidden skills, like surveying the site, meeting legal requirements, and building the foundations - your house is not going to be a success, and you are going to have a lot of frustration and disappointment.

Another part of this is that Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

What your mother says or wants to say is almost irrelevant to a Wikipedia article about her - as is your knowledge of her. In fact, one of the things that makes it difficult to write an article when you have a COI is that you need to forget pretty well everything you know about the subject once you start writing. Your article must be based almost 100% on what those independent critics have published about her.

I'm sorry if this sounds negative, but my experience is that most people who try to do what you are trying to do have a miserable time, unless they first get themselves thoroughly acquainted with how Wikipedia works, and adjust their expectations to match that. ColinFine (talk) 12:05, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

I may be interested in working on this, posted at OP:s talkpage. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:22, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Initial research not that promising: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Romania#Help,_please. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:53, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Talk page etiquette

Hello, I have done a search for talk page etiquette, specifically regarding the interactions between user edits on the page while there is an active conversation going on on the talk page. After reading these pages: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Help:Talk_pages https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Etiquette I haven't found an answer to my question. Would appreciate any insights. Thank you, Hemmingweigh (talk) 05:38, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm afraid I don't really get your question. Can you try rephrasing it? Ca ^{talk to me!} 06:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Hemmingweigh, I'm unclear what your question is, but Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines has some do:s and don't:s. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:18, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

We also have general hints as how to behave on-wiki, to be found here: Wikipedia:Etiquette; talk page behaviour is to be found there, under Wikipedia:AVOIDABUSE . Lectonar (talk) 08:20, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

If you can tell us what your question is, we might be able to answer it. Valereee (talk) 17:09, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Puffery word

I just read the MOS:PUFFERY, where i didn't find the word 'Highly'. Have a look at this, It is written "He was born on 26 February in Sufi City of Safipur, in a highly religious Sufi family. May i remove the word highly or not? Kindly help. -- QuadriSyedSahab(T · C 09:58, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia articles should reflect what reliable sources say. Does that statement reflect what is stated in reliable source? If not it can be removed. The listed MOS words are only examples of puffery, and there are many more that are not listed there. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:36, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Shantavira The subject belongs to a Sufi family but i don't think it can be 'Highly', there are many Sufi family in India. -- QuadriSyedSahab(T · C 15:02, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, QuasdriSyed, and welcome to the Teahouse. In this context, I don't see the word "highly" as making a value judgment, so I wouldn't call it puffery.

Much more serious is the fact that the paragraph is unreferenced. Until I just edited it, it had the appearance of being sourced, but the reference was to a website about the location, which did not mention the subject of the article at all. So I have removed the ref and added {{citation needed}}. ColinFine (talk) 10:37, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@ColinFine, I understood and Thanks for welcoming me. I fixed and refilled some of the Bare URLs. -- QuadriSyedSahab(T · C 15:30, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I think you are misparsing the sentence: the epithet is highly religious which is another way of saying very religious. It has no evaluative content. ColinFine (talk) 17:04, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@QuadriSyedSahab: "highly" isn't exactly puffery, it's a rather meaningless intensifier word, similar to "very", and can be removed without changing the meaning or impact of the sentence. As Mark Twain supposedly once said "substitute 'damn' every time you’re inclined to write 'very;' your editor will delete it and the writing will be just as it should be." So "the sun is very big" becomes "the sun is damn big" and someone will remove the word "damn" and everything is fine. The same could be said for "highly" in this context. ~Anachronist (talk) 19:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I believe that helpful advice came from William Allen White, not Mark Twain. (Like Winston Churchill and Sir Thomas Beecham, Mark Twain is one of those names whose gravitational pull attracts unattributed or wrongly attributed quotations in staggering numbers :) — Crawdad Blues (talk) 20:28, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

What is the best place to start editing Wikipedia?

Main Page Incastudent (talk) 18:03, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Anywhere you see something in need of fixing. Be bold. TypoEater (talk) 18:26, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Incastudent Someplace reasonably calm, don't dive straight into areas like Israel/Palestine conflict. See if there's anything you like at Wikipedia:Task Center. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:48, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

You can also try Special:Homepage. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:43, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello Incastudent. I started with, and still continue, just editing pages I have a special interest in, for it’s a lot of work searching for proper references and rewriting awkward paragraphs, and I need motivated to put in the effort. I just decide to check if there’s an article about (insert topic interested in) and if there is, and it needs improvement, that’s my next project. As you were already advised, don’t start out with big, popular articles, for lots of people are already working on those ones. Focus on the lesser known articles with a smaller number of daily views, for you may be the only one to come along willing to put in the effort to improve things.

Best wishes on your upcoming volunteer endeavors. Karenthewriter (talk) 00:18, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Need help

How to edit Wikipedia? I’m a recently created editor and wanted any welcome for me. What about Signpost? Plotogate3-7 (talk) 16:06, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Plotogate3-7: Welcome to the Teahouse! I added a welcome message to your user talk page. The Signpost is available for everyone to read, but doesn't have a section to welcome new editors. Thanks for joining Wikipedia! GoingBatty (talk) 16:49, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Yep, what about creating drafts? Plotogate3-7 (talk) 17:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Plotogate3-7: Creating a new Wikipedia article draft can be quite challenging, especially if you do not have a lot of experience editing existing Wikipedia articles. To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction, and then spend a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. Once you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of the subject, and determine whether it meets Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could follow the instructions at Help:Your first article and summarize what the sources have published, and be prepared for a process that may include waiting for review, declines, and rewrites before an article is accepted. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:57, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

That’s good, I know. Plotogate3-7 (talk) 22:01, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

If you want technical help starting a draft, you can head over to WP:ARTICLEWIZARD. Professor Penguino (talk) 05:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Biography of living person ; Academics

What is required to establish notability for academic. Is the number of citations for their publication, and an h index and i10 index sufficient? What range do they need to be for academics working in the field of philosophy ? 2. For being a holder of named chair in a university, is there a further criterion , in terms of level of recognition of university etc? Rprakashmathur (talk) 12:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rprakashmathur The accepted criteria are listed at WP:NACADEMIC. Note that they are expected to meet only one of the listed conditions. If you tell us the name of the person you intend to draft an article about, we can probably give you more advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Acharya Dr. Sthaneshwar Timalsina .This is the draft article.

and this is his profile page on Google Scholar. https://scholar.google.com/citations?hl=en&user=RkSKtKcAAAAJ

Cited 444 times. h index 9. He is also an endowed chair in Stony Brook University, at NewYork.

Request your guidance Rprakashmathur (talk) 12:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

See the comments on the draft, which has recently been declined. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:54, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

The draft contains direct external links, which will need to be replaced or converted into citations. Maproom (talk) 13:12, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

How do you start out with editing in Wikipedia? More specifically, how can I practice concise editing?

Hi everybody,

I'm very new to Wikipedia, and I want to help, however I can, in making better this vast source of information. I've started out with copyediting, but more often than not I find myself getting stuck and making errors. I've done about 5-6 copyedits now, and now am venturing into more advanced edits, but then again, I find myself getting stuck and having trouble with finding out what to write. Can someone help me out with this?

Thank You!!

:))

InGoodlyFaith (talk) 17:52, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@InGoodlyFaith See if Wikipedia:Task Center and Wikipedia:Requested articles have anything you find interesting. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

InGoodlyFaith, hello! Here are a few ways to augment your editing practice:

1. Often the best way to cultivate concision is simply to understand the topic better. For a given topic, compare the different ways in which the same material is digested and summarized across all the secondary and tertiary sources you have access to.
2. Read our Manual of Style—there are many good habits and conventions there that either directly or indirectly promote concision and economy in writing.
3. While "trimming every redundant word from a sentence" isn't always the best way to write precise prose, it's still a worthwhile exercise. Here is a page where an editor provided numerous examples you can practice with, which I found very helpful.

Best of luck, and happy editing! — Remsense诉 19:39, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I'll try these out, I wasn't aware. Thank You!! Have a good day! InGoodlyFaith (talk) 13:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

How to declare a COI without financial involvement?

When there is no monetary transaction or financial relationship but the person is known to you, though not related. How should a COI be declared ? Rprakashmathur (talk) 13:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Plain and simple conflict of interest guide. Lectonar (talk) 13:51, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

You can declare it in your user page, the talk page of the article(s) you are editing, or in the edit summary. I recommend using WP:edit requests if you want to change something, rather than editing the CoI article directly. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

on turning tables into tables that look cool

i was doing some test things on my sandbox with tables, and didn't find out how to change cells' width (height is automatic, so eh), color, and orientation on the visual editor. switching to the visual editor and back, with or without actually doing anything, broke the tables completely, and also the rest of the page one time

is there currently a way to change anything besides text with the visual editor? cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I don't think so. You are given some options in the properties pop-up, but nothing else. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

source it is :(

thanks cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 14:44, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Rfc

Did I use the RFC template correctly? A bot removed it in a subsequent edit following my edit here: Special:MobileDiff/1201278346. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 13:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

The first timestamp after the rfc tag tells the bot how long to leave the RfC "active". You added the tag right before a December 2022 timestamp, so the bot figured it was time to remove the tag. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh, appreciate the advice. I'll put the RFC at the bottom then. Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 13:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Didn't work. Can you help me fix it? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 15:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

How to capitalize name in article title

Article Toni Beaulieu is titled Toni beaulieu. Can the b be capitalized? The article is a stub owing to miscommunication with co-author/editor. My apologies to readers . . . Ganellia (talk) 17:08, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Toni Beaulieu. Move has now been performed by Significa liberdade (to whom thanks), leaving T— b— as a redirect. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.205.103.187 (talk) 17:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ganellia, and welcome to the Teahouse. You appear to be writing the article WP:BACKWARDS. If you don't start citing reliable independent sources pretty quickly, somebody is going to move it to draft space, as it is not acceptable as a mainspace article as it stands. Also, please note that external links are not normally permitted in the main text: they should be removed or (if appropriate) converted to citations. ColinFine (talk) 18:27, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

See Help:How to move a page for another time. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:28, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Talk page assessments of Wiktionary redirects

Hi folks. I am trying to clear the backlog of articles that are currently unassessed. Running into some issues, namely with Wiktionary redirects that have a talk page that put them in a specific wikiproject scope. Looking at the category a lot of the articles don't have talk pages at all. But some of them do like Deflagrating spoon and All bets are off. Should they just be classed as redirect? Templates removed altogether? Thanks! (Edit: Just noticed that the articles I listed are already class=redirect, but it doesn't work. The page still shows up when searching all articles with quality=Unassessed-Class.) Reconrabbit 18:30, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Image

how to rename this jpg file Abundant Possess (talk) 18:47, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Abundant Possess It seems at [15] that you figured out how to ask. You have to wait for someone with permission to do it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:54, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

...which I did. DMacks (talk) 18:55, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I want to ask you one more question. Can I reference the British Raj to create a new article page Abundant Possess (talk) 07:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I'm not quite sure I understand the question, but WP:AGE MATTERS and WP:RAJ may be of some help. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Which just happened. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:56, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Having problems getting a small company page approved.

Urgh - first time writing a new article https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Reveald,_Inc. I used another small company as a prototype https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SecurityScorecard and I *think* I sited the appropriate independent sources for various things the company has done but I've been rejected twice now - any suggestions? I am not seeing how the Scorecard article is more independent than the Reveald one (other than I could remove the PR Newswire references - they are now duplicated with the third party references). Advice? @Infosecwiki Rockpool (talk) 14:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for following proper Conflict of Interest procedures. However, I'm afraid the article you used as inspiration is a poor one. The cited sources barely talk about the firm SecurityScorecard at all.

Articles on companies require especially higher levels of sourcing since they often have a PR team that carefully curates their image. The cited articles seem to be an example of churnalism, and uncritically repeats the company's word at face value. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Rockpool: When looking for better articles, see articles at the higher end of Category:Company articles by quality or Category:Computer Security articles by quality. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 19:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Logos & Help

Is there a way to upload logos to Wikimedia? I am looking to upload a logo for a draft I am working on, Draft:40-Mile Air and I am unsure about the rules regarding uploading logos.

Also any advice for my draft is welcomed. Thank you! Phantomb1 (talk) 19:20, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to Wikipedia, @Phantomb1. In my opinion, you shouldn't be worrying about uploading logos until your draft gets accepted. In its current form, your draft is a long way away from being accepted, According to our notability guildines for companies, you need multiple reliable, secondary sources that provide significant coverage. Your draft does not have any independent sources. You need to find those sources or your draft will never be accepted. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 19:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Phantomb1 General advice at WP:LOGOS. If the logo in question is subject to copyright (as many are) you are not allowed to include them in drafts, only in accepted articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Phantomb1, I looked at 40-Mile Air's website and that logo seems highly likely to be protected by copyright. If so, then it should not ever be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons, where copyright protected content is not permitted. If your draft is accepted as an article, only then should the logo be uploaded here to English Wikipedia. Please review and comply with the policy on Non free images. Cullen328 (talk) 20:17, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Phantomb1, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that, like many many new editors, you have plunged into the challenging task of creating a new article before spending any time learning the craft of editing Wikipedia. (I know your account is not actually new, but this appears to be the first editing you've done).

In house-building terms, you have thrown up a few walls without either surveying the site to check that it's suitable, or familiarizing yourself with the local building regulations. And now you're asking for help in putting a decorative moulding on the roof (asking about the Logo).

My advisce is always to put aside your draft for at least a few months, and learn about Wikipedia by making improvements to existing articles, learning in particular about the core policies of verifiability, neutral point of view and notability, as well as reliable sources.

Then when you've learnt enough about all of those, read your first article and come back to the draft. You will then start by finding reliable, independent, sources for the topic, so that if you can't find any you'll know that it's not worth spending any further time on. ColinFine (talk) 20:21, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Question about level of detail in comic articles

I found this article and I'm unsure what to think of it - Achewood. It seems excessively detailed, especially in regards to the characters which are only cited to the comic itself. Is this kind of stuff allowed for fictional content? Any recommended ways to improve or clean up the article? Thanks, StreetcarEnjoyer (talk) 20:32, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

StreetcarEnjoyer per WP:PLOTSOURCE plot itself doesn't have to be cited, and that presumably extends to descriptions of characters. Any analysis of the plot or characters should be cited, however. I would recommend starting with removing excessive detail that is not relevant to the article. For example, Roast Beef had a desperately unhappy and impoverished childhood, ranging from simple lack of food due to poverty to an incident where he overheard his mother killing his father, apparently in self-defense. can be shortened to Roast Beef had an impoverished childhood. The reader can probably get some events related to his life from the plot summary, if it is important. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:40, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Question about citing multiple books from the same author

Hi

When you cite a book you would write something like this under the bibliography.

(cite book |last=Doe|first=John |title=Whatever |publisher=Whoever publishing |year=19xx |isbn=xxxxxxxxx)

and then to cite it in the article you would put this as the cite

(sfn|Doe|19xx|p=31)

But what if I wanted to cite another book from the same author, publisher and date in the same article?

Like

(cite book |last=Doe|first=John |title=Blah Blah |publisher=Whoever publishing |year=19xx |isbn=xxxxxxxxx)

If I put (sfn|Doe|19xx|p=39), it would be the same as the other cite. How can I seperate the two citations?Wikieditor9117 (talk) 19:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Wikieditor9117 The documentation at the template {{sfn}} shows how this can be done. Alternatively, you could use two {{cite book}} templates with named references and then use the page template {{rp}} to indicate the pages in each. Mike Turnbull (talk) 19:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

As Mike Turnbull said, this is detailed in {{sfn}} under the heading "More than one work in a year" (Im just spelling out just in case you miss it). You just add a letter suffix to the year in both the sfn and cite book templates.Polyamorph (talk) 20:29, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

OK thanks.Wikieditor9117 (talk) 20:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

New stubs to edit

Hi, I mainly edit stubs of footballers but I was getting pretty sick of it. I will keep doing it but I wanted try editing stubs on other articles, though my knowledge of a lot of topics isn't great. What stubs could I edit and what resources could I use? Thanks :) RossEvans18 (talk) 18:57, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@RossEvans18 Well, at Category:Stub categories you'll find 19,108 categories of stubs, pick something you like. As for resources, have you tried The Wikipedia Library? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:36, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

If you choose a topic area covered by one or more WikiProjects (you can find them via an article’s talk page), you’ll find that those Projects have an Article Assessment Table. These show ‘Importance’ as well as Quality, allowing you to focus on improving the highest priority articles. Hope this helps. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:55, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

@RossEvans18, you might be interested in the backlog drive that's starting in three days, WP:FEB24. Finding a reference for a totally unsourced article is often similar to expanding stubs. -- asilvering (talk) 00:17, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

This sounds really good, I'm not sure how much I'll be able to contribute but it's a lot of what I do anyway, adding references to articles with very little in them. Thanks for letting me know about this, I didn't know about this :) RossEvans18 (talk) 03:21, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

List of fruits is a good place to look for unsourced articles. Casper king (talk) 21:35, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

List of fruits - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia This is the actual link Casper king (talk) 21:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Fruit probelsm

Hello today I was looking through the list of fruits.  I noticed that tons of the articles are very bad like no citations at all and poorly written. I read the first four articles, and they were all like this. I am not knowledgeable about fruit, nor am I particularly interested in fixing the problem to be honest. None the less it is a very bad look what should I do about it? Casper king (talk) 21:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I spelled problems wrong! sorry.  Casper king (talk) 21:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Here is the list List of fruits - Simple English Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Casper king (talk) 21:37, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Simple English Wikipedia is a different project.

You're welcome to edit the articles and make any improvements you see necessary. If you're not "particularly interested in fixing the problem" then you don't need to. We're all volunteers here. DS (talk) 21:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Here on English Wikipedia (as opposed to Simple Wikipedia) we have this List article: List of culinary fruits, and this list of Tropical fruit. How do some of those articles come across to you? Nick Moyes (talk) 21:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Copy-editing Program

Hello, I first started editing in August, and I remember a program (not a list) that would give me pages to look over, but I can't seem to find it now. If anyone knows where or how to find this, I would be very happy! Thanks in advance! Seltzerbubbles (talk) 17:42, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Seltzerbubbles, welcome to the Teahouse. Was it Special:Homepage? PrimeHunter (talk) 18:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello PrimeHunter, that was the correct page. Thank you very much! Seltzerbubbles (talk) 22:32, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Participate on Wikiprojects.

Hi editors, may I please participate on Wikiprojects, such as years and modern arts? I wanted to join, but how could I be qualified for the program? Thanks on your recommendation. ArtForDecades610 (talk) 20:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@ArtForDecades610: Welcome to the Teahouse! There is no qualification process to join a WikiProject. See WP:WikiProject Years and WP:WikiProject Arts for more information. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:41, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@GoingBatty Right, if I joined the WikiProjects, what could I do in there? Any activities I can use? ArtForDecades610 (talk) 22:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@ArtForDecades610: Each WikiProject has items on their page indicating things they want to do or pages they want to monitor. Each WikiProject also has a talk page for discussions. There are also WikiProject Cleanup Listings which can help you find articles to improve based on WikiProjects. GoingBatty (talk) 22:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Eppley Airfield table fix

Hello. Go to above article, scroll down to Annual Passenger Traffic 2000-2023. Just align the data with the proper decade, move columns to left. Must be simple, cant figure out how to fix problem. Thank you.Theairportman33531 (talk) 21:56, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Theairportman33531:  Fixed! GoingBatty (talk) 23:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Next Generation (Alpha - Beta)

Hello!

It probably is incorrect, but I have seen an overall consensus on many websites that 2024/5 is the last year of Gen Alpha. 2025/6 is Beta until 2039/40. I understand that Alpha has no agreed end date yet, but because of the overwhelming volume I published the Beta page with updated cites, etc.

I have no idea how to change the .svg file, but maybe it should be done soon. (I known, only admins!) But I wanted to bring this to everyone's attention that a great majority of websites say 2024/5 is the end of Gen Alpha. Orastor (talk) 22:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Orastor: Welcome to the Teahouse! Maybe you're referring to commons:File:Generation timeline.svg? This file isn't protected - anyone can upload a new version. Or, you could contact one of the previous editors of this file to see if they'd be willing to update it. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Help me with my article

Hey Guys, what do you think of my text to wikipedia?

Sandbox text without citations - better to use link below

'Rebecca Victorino Faria Silva, born on December 11, 1992, is a Brazilian entrepreneur and wellness influencer with a focus on lymphatic drainage and health. She is known as the founder and owner of 'Detox By Rebecca.' Carrer Rebecca began her professional journey in Brazil in 2010, offering lymphatic drainage services in a makeshift space. Over the years, she specialized in the field and, by 2017, worked as a massage therapist. In 2018, Rebecca expanded her expertise by studying Oriental Medicine in Sydney, Australia. Subsequently, she established a specialized spa in the United States, emphasizing lymphatic drainage and gained notoriety by developing her own technique. Rebecca has gained recognition, having been featured in various magazines, including Forbes, POOSH and others. She has worked with a diverse clientele, including individuals such as Hailey Bieber, Kim Kardashian.'

See text and citations at User:OffBeat.us/sandbox

Is it ok to publish here? OffBeat.us (talk) 23:13, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Hello, OffBeat.us, and welcome to the Teahouse.

I'm afraid that, as usual for people who try to create an article before they have spent time learning the craft of writing for Wikipedia, the answer is No, not in its present form.

You have done better than a lot of people: you have actually got some sources. The problem is that none of them meet the golden rule that is required to establish that the subject is notable: most of them are not independent, and one of them doesn't mention the subject at all.

Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources.

My advice, as usual in these circumstances, is to forget about your draft entirely for a few months, while you learn about Wikipedia by making improvements to some of our six million existing articles; in particular, learning about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view and notability.

Then once you've got a hold on those, you can read your first article and try again to find sources with the necessary qualities. ColinFine (talk) 23:49, 29 January 2024 (UTC)

Thanks A LOT, really, you were the only person that told me that at all <3 thank you a lot OffBeat.us (talk) 23:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

• Comment - For context, this is a WP:SPA for spam. This account is likely a sock, and they tried to create and recreate this article in the pt.WP several times until their account got blocked.--Kacamata! ^Dimmi!!! 16:51, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

  Unlike the pt community like YOU, the en community is helping me, if it was SPAM, I wouydnt beeing here asking for help OffBeat.us (talk) 23:34, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Question on whether a line is puffery or not

Hello, I had a question if one particular line is puffery or not neutral in anyway.

In the lead paragraph of this page Henley & Partners -

It has been criticised for its core business model, which detractors believe to threaten the fight against cross-border corruption and crime. Henley's immigrant investor programs in Malta and in St. Kitts and Nevis have stirred controversy. According to a report by the International Monetary Fund, the program has helped St. Kitts and Nevis come out of a four-year recession.

To the existing text, I have added a line (which I have marked in bold just for clarity) which I got from a WP:RS citation source - https://www.gq-magazine.co.uk/article/st-kitts-and-nevis-citizenship

Another editor felt this line is puffery and not neutral. In my understanding, this is not puffery in anyway.

I just wanted to make sure I seek opinion here if it is coming across as puffery in anyway.

ANLgrad (talk) 23:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

It strikes me as blatantly biassed. The article cited is based on an interview with Christian Kälin, chairman of Henley & Partners, and so cannot be regarded as an independent source. Nevertheless, it makes it clear that in its author's opinion, they're a bunch of opportunstic crooks. Yet you have picked the one statement from the article that presents them in a positive light. If you have to cite that article, how about "Christian Kälin has changed the world – he thinks for the better, many other people think very much for the worse." Maproom (talk) 23:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

The bolded sentence contains no puffery, but its inclusion in the lead may be undue. See also MOS:LEADNO. Perception312 (talk) 00:53, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Maproom, the idea was to keep the entire line about the criticism on the core business model and also the part about the cross-border corruption and crime. However, at the end of the sentence adding the fact that it brought economic benefit to the countries is only neutral. There are multiple sources that talk about how the program has helped St. Kitts and Nevis come out of a 4 year recession, thus having a positive economic impact to the countries.

@Perception312 I do understand that it could be UNDUE in the lead paragraph. If the above bold line is UNDUE, it could simply state -

It has been criticised for its core business model, which detractors believe to threaten the fight against cross-border corruption and crime. Henley's immigrant investor programs in Malta and in St. Kitts and Nevis have stirred controversy, despite economic benefit to both the countries.

I have marked the new text in bold just for ease of understanding. Do you think this is a good improvement to the text?

ANLgrad (talk) 23:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)

WikiProject creation

Hello all! I am wanting to create a Wikiproject page for the Gilmore Girls site because the current project group has been archived. Would anybody be able to help me with this?

Thank you! Imroberts (talk) 11:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I guess this is connected with Gilmore Girls, but I don't know what a "Wikiproject page" is, nor a "project group". Are you aiming to create, or resurrect, a WikiProject? Maproom (talk) 14:08, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

I am looking for a forum that is discussing Gilmore Girl page edits, how would I locate this? Thank you. 148.88.245.66 (talk) 18:33, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Imroberts. Welcome to the Teahouse. ... and your enthusiasm is to be greatly welcomed, too!

However, you do have an account that is just 2 days old and only 9 edits under your belt. Someone with that limited amount of editing experience, rushing in to create a WikiProject from scratch, is quite likely to end in a waste of time for all concerned. My advice would be to get some real, demonstrable experience of editing Wikipedia and of contributing to articles relating to that topic over at least the next 6 months or so. Along the way you would probably encounter other like-minded enthusiasts for the subject who might be interested in collaborating with you - or you might singularly fail to find any others. Who knows?

Once you've done that, that would be the time to raise such a suggestion, not right now. I can't see where you say a project on this topic was 'archived'. One was certainly proposed back in 2011 but the proposal was not met with enthusiasm, and was rejected. See WikiProject Council/Proposals/Gilmore Girls.

Whilst not wanting to dampen your enthusiasm, experience shows that many new users simply don't stick around for long after their initial burst of enthusiasm. So, to avoid people starting WikiProjects that simply don't get off the ground, it's best for a few active editors to come together to put forward any proposals for any new WikiProject. Some guidelines have been produced on the proposal of any new WikiProjects to join the couple of thousand that apparently exist already. See WikiProject Council/Guide. I hope this helps and doesn't put you off from editing or creating new articles under the WikiProject Television banner. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Imroberts:, thanks for your interest in discussing Gilmore Girls. The place to start discussing this topic is at Talk:Gilmore Girls. If it turns out that there are tons of editors there that are interested in discussing the topic in greater detail, you could get together and create a WikiProject for it, if it hit critical mass. But I strongly suggest starting out at Talk:Gilmore Girls, first. HTH, Mathglot (talk) 09:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

How to link translated article to original

I have just translated my first article Sabine Fischer (Political Scientist) , but I don't know how to attach it to the original article: [16] Also it doesn't seem to show up if I look it up on Google. Does it have to be reviewed first? Thanks Зэгс ус (talk) 23:07, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Зэгс ус: Welcome to the Teahouse! In the Tools menu, choose "Add interlanguage links". (For a more detailed conversation, see the #Link articles into "languages" section above. Articles do not show up in Google until 90 days have elapsed or they have been reviewed by the WP:New Pages Patrol, per WP:INDEXING. GoingBatty (talk) 23:11, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Alright! Thank you very much! Зэгс ус (talk) 23:15, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Зэгс ус, congrats, you were successful in linking it to the German article, as reflected in this edit at Wikidata item d:Q111684861. Well done! Mathglot (talk) 09:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia Page Creation

I am looking to create a wiki page for the artist Nathan Jarrelle Management but I have no clue where to start. Nathanjarrellemanagement (talk) 20:12, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

Well, first off, based on your username, please read WP:COI. Second, practice in your sandbox, then talk to the Article Wizard. Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Hells Bells (Talk Page btw))} 20:31, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

@Nathanjarrellemanagement: Hi there! WP:AUTO explains that Wikipedia strongly discourages autobiographies. Creating a new Wikipedia article can be quite challenging, especially when you have a conflict of interest (COI). To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. I suggest spending a significant amount of time editing existing articles to hone your skills. When you're ready to create an article, you would gather multiple published independent reliable sources that have provided significant coverage of you, and determine whether they demonstrate that you meet Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, called "notability". If so, you could create an account and declare your COI on your user page. Then follow the instructions at Help:Your first article and summarize what the sources have published, and be prepared for a process that may include months of waiting for review, declines, and rewrites, before an article is accepted. If you are successful, then you could never edit the article directly due to your COI, but could submit edit requests on the article talk page. Hope this helps. GoingBatty (talk) 21:08, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

And if you do manage to write something that passes muster, please bear in mind that it will never be a wiki page for the artist, because there can never be such a thing. It will be an article ABOUT the artist. And anybody will be able to come after you and edit that article--and if those edits are relevant and properly supported by reputable sources, they'll stay. And if either you or (?) the artist doesn't happen to like those changes, well there won't be much you can do about it. Uporządnicki (talk) 21:14, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

You guys are a hoot. There's a difference between constructive info and fluff and from what I've read none of this has been constructive information. I appreciate the help you attempted to give, it passed "muster." Nathanjarrellemanagement (talk) 13:02, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

This was incredibly helpful, thank you. Nathanjarrellemanagement (talk) 12:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

He seems to be the person at linktr.ee/nathanjarrelle (a website that's blacklisted, no doubt for a good reason). There's not much there. (And if there were substantive claims there, in order to appear in a Wikipedia article they would of course have to be cited from a reliable source.) It's rather obviously too soon for a Wikipedia article. -- Hoary (talk) 23:13, 30 January 2024 (UTC)

I asked a question for help, not to be shit on. Also, you don't have to talk about me, I'm right here. Talk to me. My linktree, isn't blacklisted, it's a hub for all of my links in one place but feel free to google me. There is more than enough information out there about me in my decade of a career as an independent artist. I appreciate what little help you attempted to give. Thanks. Nathanjarrellemanagement (talk) 12:57, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

So you are writing about yourself- why did you not indicate this in your initial post above? 331dot (talk) 12:58, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

"I am looking to create a wiki page for the artist Nathan Jarrelle Management..." So, your name is Nathan Jarrelle Management??? David notMD (talk) 18:03, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Well, whether you consider it "constructive" of "fluff," it is very important to understand that anything you write for a Wikipedia article won't be either yours or the subject's (whether they're two different people or not). Anybody will be able to come after you and edit it beyond your recognition. Uporządnicki (talk) 20:05, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Nathanjarrellemanagement, you're complaining. Above, I wrote that linktr.ee was "a website that's blacklisted, no doubt for a good reason". If it's about this that you're complaining, fair enough. "No doubt" was an overstatement; "presumably" was what was meant. But more importantly the reason for the blacklisting could very well be entirely unrelated to your use of the website. And so I apologize for that thoughtless comment of mine. Still, it does seem that this is too soon for an article. If it indeed is too soon, there's no understanding that at least X years must pass before the quality and quantity of available sources will suffice for a good article. -- Hoary (talk) 07:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

User:Nathanjarrellemanagement: the artist's name seems to be Nathan Jarrelle, and if 'Nathanjarrellemanagement' represents an agency or business that is not a sole proprietorship (and possibly even if it is), you will have to change your username. I will leave you a message explaining this at your Talk page. Mathglot (talk) 09:31, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Looks like User:Anachronist beat me to the punch. Please read their message on your user talk page (here; towards the end) regarding changing your username. Mathglot (talk) 09:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

What should I generally do if I'm unsure about a tag?

I've done a small bit of weasel word extermination. As of far, if I am not sure I've gotten everything in an article, I'll simply leave the tag for someone else to look over. Is this correct, and, if not, what should I do instead? Endersslay (talk) 03:12, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Greetings @Endersslay - Two suggestions that may be helpful:

1. Look at the article's History (alt-shift-h) to see if other editors may have done any prior weasel-word edits, or are currently contributing.
2. Leave a message (new section) on the article's Talk page, noting what you have done so far, any questions remaining, etc.

Thank you to helping improve Wikipedia. Regards, JoeNMLC (talk) 03:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Endersslay. Here's my opinion although others may disagree. You seem to be editing in good faith. If you reasonably believe that you have resolved the issue that caused an article to be tagged, then go ahead and remove the tag. I do that all the time. If someone disagrees, discuss the tag on the article talk page. In general, I think that there are too many maintenance tags remaining on articles that have been improved. I favor removing several year old tags unless the issue remains obvious. If so, fix the issue, or move on. Nobody can fix everything. Cullen328 (talk) 09:39, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Articles that dont exist yet

Hello, i was wondering where can i find article ideas that haven't been written yet in Wikipedia, to be able to write an article of them.

Best regards, Nameclips (talk) 01:53, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

hi @Nameclips and welcome to the Teahouse! I advise you not to go straight to creating articles, especially if you don't have any article ideas, and instead work on improving one of the numerous articles that currently exist. making an article is difficult for a beginner, and it is best to start by editing and improving existing article than taking this difficult task. if you still want to write an article, you can check out suggested articles, and I also recommend reading reliable sources, notability, and your first article. happy editing! 💜  melecie  talk - 02:06, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Nameclips As long as you are looking for stuff to do, I recommend you tag for deletion your declined draft Draft:Nekesistema about an imaginary micronation. David notMD (talk) 09:38, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

In addition to the answers above, we have Wikipedia:Requested articles, sorted by topic. Lectonar (talk) 10:43, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

New article submission!?

Hello experts, I am new to wikipedia editing and I tried to publish a new article about Huzzle which was not available on wikipedia. But I am not able to understand what should I do to imrove it or if I really want to write about a new topic how can I get it approved? Erricyash (talk) 12:05, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. Your text was a blatant advertisement only sourced to the company itself. Any article about Huzzle must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about the company, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of a notable company. Such sources do not include the company website, press releases, staff interviews, brief mentions, annoucments of routine business activities, or other primary sources. As a declared marketer you may be too close to the company to write about it as required.

"Startups" almost never merit articles- see WP:TOOSOON- a company must become established and recognized in its field to draw the significant coverage needed to merit an article. Please read Your First Article. Companies trying to force the issue of creating an article are rarely successful- articles are typically written by independent editors wholly unconnected with the subject in any way. 331dot (talk) 12:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Quote: By fostering meaningful connections and simplifying event management, Huzzle is poised to make a significant impact on the academic and professional landscape, offering a brighter future for all involved. Simply wait until reliable sources describe how it has made a significant impact. Then disinterested editors will volunteer to write it up (based on what they've read in reliable sources, of course). -- Hoary (talk) 12:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

How to go about a Merge/rebuild of a page?

There is a page for the Retroid Pocket 2. I think it probably meets notability, it's a big name in the emulation world. However, it doesn't really make sense to make a page for it by itself as it's an ongoing product line with new versions coming out every six months or so. It should, most likely, have a page called "retroid pocket" that lists everything in the series or maybe a page for the company iteself, Retroid, with a list of devices or something. What is the process for migrating the information to a new page with more information, and should we get a more senior editor involved? Arthurbarnhouse (talk) 11:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Arthurbarnhouse, you don't "migrate the information"; you simply "move" the article to Retroid Pocket, and add material to this about Retroid Pocket 1, Retroid Pocket Platinum Edition, Retroid Pocket Turbo, Retroid Pocket for Dummies ... umm, one or two of those might not actually exist. If "senior editor" as in "senior citizen", then I'd qualify; but you really don't need a senescent or even an experienced (but youthful) sidekick. Be bold (but level-headed), and DIY. -- Hoary (talk) 12:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

a drink I invented

I invented a mix drink cocktail and I'd like it to be searchable on wikipedia - is this possible to do? I see every other cocktail and the recipe such as white russian (cocktail) is on there. I haven't published it anywhere else Markmyles1 (talk) 21:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

@Markmyles1: No, this isn't possible. Wikipedia articles may not contain original ideas – your drink would first have to be reported on in reliable sources. Tollens (talk) 21:26, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

read this

Wikipedia is not for things made up one day

Babysharkboss2!! ^{Green Day (Talk Page btw)} Babysharkboss2!! ^{Green Day (Talk Page btw)} 01:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Every drink ever invented was made up one day so your comment makes no sense. Most cocktails have wikipedia articles. Mine was invented over 20 years ago and has been enjoyed by hundreds. 72.53.50.33 (talk) 02:29, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

The thing is that Wikipedia isn't intended to keep an article on every possible subject. Instead, it seeks to cover notable subjects, where notability is a specific Wikipedia term that roughly means "covered in-depth in multiple reliable sources". That's the difference between your drink and a White Russian--many people have already written about White Russians in reliable sources, and when they do the same about your drink, it too can have a Wikipedia article. But not before then. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 03:04, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for an actual useful explanation. The baby answer before was useless Markmyles1 (talk) 03:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Please be civil in your responses. The link Babysharkboss gave you contains the answer to your question. Ca ^{talk to me!} 16:53, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

My first edit war: Am I in the wrong?

Hey! I am currently in a little edit war with the user Energymeat. They are introducing (what I believe to be) incorrect information. They keep citing this one article, [17], which is the only source I could find that says AFM Gousal Azam Sarker is a victim of a conspiracy. On the other hand, the source they are trying to supress (which appears to be more reliable, though they are removing the content and the source) is The Daily Star ([18]), which is the largest circulating newspaper in Bangladesh (Source: The Daily Star (Bangladesh)), so I trust their word, and other sources confirmation on the topic. Can someone else give some input here if I am wrong? I believe the editor might have a COI as well, but I don't want to jump to conclusions, and of course, AGF. OnlyNano 18:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, OnlyNano, and welcome back to the Teahouse. With regard to edit warring: it doesn't matter whether you are in the right or not: do not edit war.

I see you have started discussing it on User talk:Energymeat; but "I'm right and you're wrong and you need to stop doing it" is not discussing, even if you're right. Please see dispute resolution, and consensus. ColinFine (talk) 18:42, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. My intentions are to have them stop editing that article, specifically with that piece of information, as they are just editing it back several times, without resolution. Thanks for those resources, I'll check them out! OnlyNano 18:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

OnlyNano, edit warring is a blockable offense so you must stop now to avoid being blocked. You are simply not permitted to edit war even if you are convinced that you are correct. I notice that you have not engaged in any discussion at Talk: AFM Gousal Azam Sarker which should be your first step when there is a content dispute. Please start there, and explain your reasoning in detail. Cullen328 (talk) 19:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

In addition, OnlyNano, it is not a good idea to repeatedly threaten the other editor with a block when you are engaging in behavior that could get you blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 19:13, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello I am not in an edit war, i have merely appended the information in the source I provided in addition to all the prior information reinstated preserving all sources. This is the perfect balance of providing a full picture. Thanks! 103.72.212.51 (talk) 20:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

OnlyNano, you have been edit warring at AFM Gousal Azam Sarker, and have made no attempt to discuss the issue at Talk:AFM Gousal Azam Sarker, so you are clearly in the wrong. The same goes for Energymeat.   Maproom (talk) 19:59, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Biography Death Policy

Wikipedians, what is the policy on how the death section of a Wikipedia article is written? Do we delete any part of the section if it is too much like an obituary? Ex. (A1139530 passed away yesterday... he is survived by his mother and his three children). Would we delete the "he is survived by..." section as it seems to be too close to an actual obituary rather than an encyclopedia article? Thank you for the help. A1139530 (talk) 16:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, you are correct. We don't use euphemisms like "passed away" or obituary-like wording such as "survived by" in articles. Manual of style actually disrecommends such phrases: MOS:SURVIVEDBY. Ca ^{talk to me!} 16:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Change the wording and state "according to A1139530's June 10, 2010 obituary, at the time of his death his mother and three children were still living." Then add the obituary as your reference. Karenthewriter (talk) 16:56, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Surviving spouses can be named but not children. David notMD (talk) 20:42, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

dasrules3

Hello, you did approved my article because there weren't any sources for it. I didn't put it sources, because I created the math theorem myself and I researched it and it hadn't been a thing before. That is why there is no source because I helped make it. Dasrules3 (talk) 16:26, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Dasrules3 Welcome to the Teahouse! See replies at Wikipedia:Teahouse#a_drink_I_invented. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 16:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

This is about Draft:Dylan Right Triangle Theorem. Dasrules3, the relevant content guideline is Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. If your theorem receives significant coverage in several peer reviewed academic journals covering mathematics, it may then be eligible for a Wikipedia article. Otherwise, no. Cullen328 (talk) 19:22, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

See WP:TOOSOON for why this is too soon. After you publish your theorem in a valid maths journal and people with no connection to you have written about it, one of them may decide to create a Wikipedia article about it. David notMD (talk) 20:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Who can help me to write my wikipedia?

It seems that, articles can't be written by yourself, your family, friends, colleagues, company, organization, clients, or competitors than someone from Wikipedia need to write so is anyone out there can help??

Meera Yogi Meerayogi (talk) 17:05, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

you can write a Wikipedia article yourself. anyone can make a Wikipedia article. What do you need help with? Babysharkboss2!! ^{Green Day (Talk Page btw)} 17:08, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, but people who try to write WP-articles about themselves almost always fail per WP:COI etc. Especially if they are WP-newbies. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

oh, is that what they mean? then yeah, don't do that. My bad, i thought they meant something else.

Babysharkboss2!! ^{Green Day (Talk Page btw)} 17:13, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Meerayogi, Which are the 3-5 best sources you can think of that are at the same time reliably published (WP:RS), independent of you and about you in some detail? This excludes blogs, wikis, your websites, social media, etc, etc. See also WP:An article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 17:09, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Meerayogi, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia.

To emphasise what is said in the article Gråbergs pointed you to: if there is an article about you in Wikipedia (whoever writes it) it will not belong to you, it will not be controlled by you, you will be strongly discouraged from editing it (though you will be welcome to suggest edits) and it won't necessarily say what you would like it to say. ColinFine (talk) 18:38, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

This is part of a long standing history of conflict of interest editing at Sockalingam Yogalingam user says she is his wife. Theroadislong (talk) 18:44, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

If you are in fact his wife, you can propose changes on the Talk page of the article. Asking "...is anyone out there can help??" at Teahouse is useless, as is asking on your own Talk page. Hosts are here to advise on how to edit, not to be co-authors. David notMD (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

am i biased?

i love isopods and the bathynomus jamesi doesnt have a page, should i make one or would i be biased? Porridgeluver (talk) 02:07, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Unless you are an isopod, I don't believe you would have a conflict of interest in creating Bathynomus jamesi!

When writing your first article, I'd recommend reading this helpful guide for article creation in its entirety, and experimenting with editing at your sandbox (you can click that red text to create it). Additionally, you can ask somewhere like WikiProject Arthropods, WikiProject Biology, or WikiProject Animals for some potential reliable sources & help writing the article from other editors interested in biology. Happy editing, and welcome to Wikipedia! Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 06:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Porridgeluver. If simply having an interest in a topic and loving to write about it was a major problem, then Wikipedia could not exist. That is what motivates all productive editors. If you are paid to edit by the World Isopod Association, then there may be a problem. Just write neutral, well referenced content about isopod species, following Wikipedia's policies and guidelines and all will be well. Just be aware that you need to write in a more formal tone. Cullen328 (talk) 09:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I for one welcome our new tetrakaidecally-limbed overlords. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.208.215 (talk) 21:27, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Bot edits are driving me crazy - can I avoid notifications about their edits?

I have a few thousand articles on my watchlist. I occasionally fix vandalism and bad edits on them. But there is a bot, Qwerfjkl, that appears to be making minor edits to the talk pages of every article on my watchlist, and I'm getting hundreds of emails about it. I care nothing about whatever this bot is doing, but I have to look at the change in order to keep receiving notifications about edits. Is there any way to tell the Wikipedia software not to notify me when a specific bot modifies an article or its talk page? I would still want to receive notifications about edits done by other, human editors, of course.

Thanks for any info! PopePompus (talk) 01:54, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

You can add the filter "Human (not bot)" to your watchlist. Hopefully that would also stop the emails. Perception312 (talk) 02:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! I didn't even know those filters existed. PopePompus (talk) 02:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Another thing to think about, PopePompus, is turning off email notifications for every edit to pages on your watchlist. I have been editing for almost 15 years and have over 58,000 pages on my watchlist. If I had email notifications enabled, I would be getting emails several times a minute. Cullen328 (talk) 03:10, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

But if I turn off email notifications, what's the point of having a watchlist? I thought the entire purpose of putting an article on your watchlist was to get email when the article is changed. PopePompus (talk) 03:28, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

An alternative would be just going to Special:Watchlist and skim that instead of getting an e-mail notification for each one. Umimmak (talk) 03:34, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

For my Watchlist of about 40 articles it appears that I chose an option that does not include emails. Instead, I see activity only after I log in and click on Watchlist. For people with large lists (Cukken328!!!!) filtering out bots a great idea. David notMD (talk) 09:35, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Trust me, skimming your watchlist every once in a while is a lot better than being inundated by a deluge of emails every day. Wikipedia activity isn't so urgent as to require near-constant attention. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:14, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@PopePompus: If you want to receive notifications about other bots but not the bots changing the WikiProject banners, you could also exclude the "Talk banner shell conversion" tag from your watchlist. There are other options discussed at Wikipedia:Bots/Noticeboard#Flooding watchlists. GoingBatty (talk) 22:24, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Inactive work groups on new articles

I am working on various articles such as American Sable rabbit, Velveteen Lop, Golden-backed tree-rat. These variously do or do not have the Pocket pet work group applied in the talk page. Is it appropriate to add work groups even if they are inactive? Thanks. Reconrabbit 13:19, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Reconrabbit, I don't see why not! In my view, never making an inactive WikiProject or work group visible on new pages is a good way to ensure that they won't be reactivated! — Remsense诉 14:03, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Reconrabbit I fully support Remsense's reply to you. A key point to add is that, even if an WikiProject or one of its sub groups/task forces appears to be inactive, its Quality Assessment Table nevertheless remains an inordinately useful tool for seeing all related articles, and their importance and quality levels. This can be immensely useful to someone who wants to work on the most important Stubs or Start class articles to improve, or perhaps find a GA article to bring up to Featured Article standard. So, even though this was a very small task force, with a very small assessment table, I earnestly recommend you add the template to any relevant articles that don't have them! Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:18, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. I have some concern over this because some work groups, like Wikipedia:WikiProject Korea/Cuisine, merge the name into something like "This article is included under inactive work groups: view" when added. Reconrabbit 22:41, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Newbie issues

Hi, I'm having some issues in regard to drafting my first article. I'm attempting to improve Wikepedia's range of information on the Irish legal system and courts, but I don't understand how to fill out the references properly. All of the explanations I find when I search for help just further complicate it and confuse me unfortunately. Would anyone here be kind enough to explain the drafting process in simple terms? I am very much not used to online resources. Very helpful person singular (talk) 00:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Very helpful person singular Welcome to the Teahouse. Using one of our two editing tool options (called Source Editor), I have fixed the formatting of your draft and corrected the first citation. You weren't far off, but you unfortunately added the 'retrieved date' in a format incompatible with the template (02/02/2024, as opposed to 2 Feb 2024), which caused all those scary red warning messages to appear.

If you use the 'Preview' option when entering a reference in the Citation template popup, you can easily check how the reference will look, see a problem and fix it before inserting the individual reference into the article. Only when you've done that preliminary preview of the single citation need you insert it and then preview the entire page. Does that address your concerns? Nick Moyes (talk) 01:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, thank you very much for you help. Very helpful person singular (talk) 01:07, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

General question about notability (any article, but maybe specifically one)

If this isn't the right page to talk about these sort of things, direct me to the right place. I'm well aware it could go in a specific talk page, but the talk page is empty (as in, I did post something in it, but nobody seemed to be focused on the page ever since I came across it). This seems like a good place to go when you were curious and there's nobody around.

I've came across a article about Starmad. To be quick, it's basically a software mentioned back in 2008 made for space mission analysis, as in, it calculates space related things such as Delta-V budget. I made previous edits to the article already, because some sections were more focused on how great/improved the software was rather than what it was in general.

What I wanted to ask is that, how can you tell if Starmad fits WP:N, and if it does (I'm pretty sure it is? But I'm a newcomer, so I can't know everything), then how seriously should it be taken? Sure, there's a paper regarding it, but that itself was made by the original creator, Davide Starnone. As for everything else, I think most of it is primary sources, since it's straight from the creation itself. There's nothing I can see from outside sources and there's no coverage on it. Some editors attempted to add new sources, but, when I came along the citations weren't formatted properly; there was no link to click on.

If, specifically, an article like this, what should be done? If it isn't notable and there's no sources able out there to prove that it is, should it be left alone, or should it be deleted? In general, how can I tell to leave a article alone for others to search for sources, or proceed with making a path to deletion?

Thanks, and sorry if this isn't the right place to discuss this. DoNot87 ^{🡵 talk} 00:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

As far as I know, a topic reported solely by its author/creator and/or their organization is not notable. I'll take a look now at the "attempted" sources but that's the gist. Dionysius Miller^talk 01:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I can't find a thing more on it than the stuff from the developer, so I've proposed it for deletion. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 01:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the fast replies! Sorry for not being WP:BOLD, I was hesitant to nominate deletion mainly because I don't want to undo something someone else has worked on, and I was worried if the article could have future edits to improve it. DoNot87 ^{🡵 talk} 01:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

In its current state, the article is worthless. The question to ask is of whether there are reliable sources for what it says. These don't need to have been on the web, let alone still on the web; and they don't have to be in English; though for this subject I'd imagine that if they had ever existed they would be on the web and in English. ¶ Even dud Wikipedia articles bring minor pleasures. I enjoyed reading that the software was/is "officially owned under the company 'SSBV'": I hadn't previously considered that a distinction could be made between the official and unofficial ownership of software, or that, say, the computer at which I am typing this is owned under me. And I'm amazed to learn that Windows software can "[assist] in spacecraft subsystems design, considering Attitude Control" among other things. -- Hoary (talk) 01:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I guess I should have known that from the start. The article was mainly made with strange wordings, and even copy and pasted from the official site (explains the weird list of strange terms... like, what even is Mission Operation Complexity, from the point of view of Mission Design and Planning?) and it makes me possibly believe that it might have either been laziness or attempts to get a article created to advertise the software (but not saying it must be, it's just weird nevermind, damn you, David).

I added the little "SSBV" thing because the start of the summary didn't fit a proper lead that all articles start with, so I wrote my own. I'm the one to blame for the usage of the term under. I possibly should have have used the words owned by instead. Oh well.

It was fun to attempt to edit this article, and I'll try to improve my skills for the future. DoNot87 ^{🡵 talk} 01:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Haha, I finished writing a proposal for deletion and before I could publish, @Seraphimblade beat me to it. I'll settle for seconding. Dionysius Miller^talk 01:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Pseudohistory

Can I use this source for the Pseudohistory article?: https://beastrabban.wordpress.com/2022/08/12/explaining-simon-webb-history-race-and-the-manipulation-of-history/ DaRealPrinceZuko (talk) 02:42, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

DaRealPrinceZuko, that is a self-published blog. These are generally not considered to be reliable sources. Read the page linked to learn more about verifiability, something we need when judging the reliability of sources. Cheers! — Remsense诉 02:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, DaRealPrinceZuko. With very rare exceptions, which do not apply here, blogs like this are not reliable sources for use on Wikipedia.

Blogs by journalists working for reliable news outlets, or by previously published subject matter experts may be accepable. Cullen328 (talk) 02:49, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Species box not autopopulating, how to fix?

Hi, trying to create a species article, normally the template box autopopulates, but not in this case for some reason: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Cudonia_lutea

Any ideas on how to fix?

Thank you! Emrosie (talk) 00:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Emrosie Welcome to the Teahouse. Just a very hasty response before heading off to bed: The problem with the failure to autopopulate is that this is a fairly esoteric taxon and the relevant template needs to be created first, with a link to the parent rank. See documentation at Template:Speciesbox, and the 'fix' link in your draft. Alternatively, copy the non-automated taxobox template from a related article and edit accordingly. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 02:07, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

fixed, thank you! Emrosie (talk) 02:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

How to add Template:Anchor

I tried to read how to add an anchor when changing the name of a section, but I didn't understand much.

If I want to change the name of this section from "Growth of the cartilage model" to "Formation of the cartilage model", what code should I write? User579987 (talk) 02:50, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

If you really want to use an anchor the code would look like == Formation of the cartilage model{{subst:anchor|Growth of the cartilage model}}==

If there aren't too many incoming links, I prefer to just adjust all the links to use the new section title, rather than use an anchor. You can see all the pages that link to the article here, and a ctrl-f search says nothing links to the section in question. You can just change it and not use an anchor. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 02:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Firefangledfeathers. Much appreciated! I also wanted to ask how to check if there are wiki-links to a section or not. This says to use the tool (Show redirects only) available from the What links here page, but when I opened the page, I can't seem to find this tool. I only have " External tools (link count, transclusion count and sorted list)". Not quite sure what's wrong? User579987 (talk) 03:07, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you paste the url of the page you're referring to? Hoping I can see what you're seeing. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:14, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers Here it is : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:WhatLinksHere?hideredirs=1&namespace=&target=Endochondral+ossification

What appears to me is " External tools (link count transclusion count sorted list) "

Is there even a tool named (Show redirects only)? User579987 (talk) 03:22, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Underneath the "External tools" line, do you see the results? I see a list of 50 articles. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:30, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Firefangledfeathers: Yes, indeed. But those are links to the whole page; how to find if there are links to a specific section of the page? User579987 (talk) 03:36, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I usually adjust the option so that it displays 500 results at a time and then Ctrl-F search for the word "section". There usually aren't that many incoming section links. If I find a lot, or are if there are many pages of search results to sift through, that's when I start to think an anchor may be needed. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Political point of view

How is Arabic Wikipedia allowed to have a political point of view on its front page... I thought Wikipedia was required to have a neutral point of view and could not endorse any viewpoint about any topic... The rich get richer and the poor also get richer (talk) 05:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Each Wikipedia has its own rules and policies. If you have concerns about the Arabic Wikipedia, you will need to discuss it there. RudolfRed (talk) 05:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

My article was declined

@Jeraxmoira My new article about an upcoming malayalam actress was declined and the reasons were unclear to me. please help Arjun Dayanandan (talk) 13:53, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, the reason for decline was clearly stated as "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject" Also be aware that IMDb is not a reliable source because it is user edited. Theroadislong (talk) 13:59, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link Draft:Sravana T N. Theroadislong (talk) 14:00, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Hi Arjun Dayanandan. The reason for the decline is that there are no reliable sources or sources with significant coverage on your draft. A WP:BEFORE search on Google News has nothing useful, so I would not recommend resubmitting it for another review. Jeraxmoira🐉 (talk) 14:13, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Is there anything I can do to avoid this and resubmit it? 27.57.29.11 (talk) 14:23, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

you need to find reliable sources that gives an in-depth coverage of the actress. One such example would be a decently long biography of the actress. However, if the actress is too new, no one would have really written about her much. Ca ^{talk to me!} 14:36, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

what if I can find a brief biography of the actress? Will that work? Arjun Dayanandan (talk) 14:43, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

A "brief biography" may help, but it may not. If it was written by Sravana or her associates, (whoever published it) then it is of no use for this purpose. Wikipedia has little interest in what the subject of an article says or wants to say about themselves, or what their associates say about them. Wikipedia is almost entirely interested in what people who have no connection with the subject, and who have not been prompted or fed information on behalf of the subject, have chosen to publish about the subject in reliable sources. If enough material is cited from independent sources to establish notability, a limited amount of uncontroversial factual information may be added from non-independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 15:04, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

by brief biography, I meant in websites like IMDB which has published her work in movies. Arjun Dayanandan (talk) 15:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

IMDb is not a reliable source. Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Hells Bells (Talk Page btw))} 15:52, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

What would be a reliable source for a movie actress who has acted in 4 movies? She is the daughter of a movie director as well. Arjun Dayanandan (talk) 16:24, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

IMDb is a user generated site, so we dont use it. see THIS page on reliable sources. when you click on it, it should send you to the IMDb section. Babysharkboss2!! ^{Green Day (Talk Page btw)} 16:45, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

How about bookmyshow? It is a movie ticket booking application and it is neither self published nor user generated site. Will that work?? Arjun Dayanandan (talk) 06:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Sadly also not reliable. All it tells us is that it is possible to buy tickets to see a movie, which tells us nothing about your subject.

What you are looking for are things like articles in respected newspapers/magazines/journals/online sites, books about her, things like that. And it has to be about her, not just the movies she's been in or about her parent.

Perhaps you could have a look at the Category:Actresses in Malayalam cinema and see what kinds of sources those articles are using. Keep in mind not all sources are reliable, and for your draft you will want to choose three or four really good sources. You might also like to look at the relevant WikiProject, especially the Featured Articles and Good Articles listed there, to get an idea of what the best articles of this kind look like and what sources they use. Good luck and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 05:25, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Its Arjun here by the way from my phone 27.57.29.11 (talk) 14:25, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

you can sign in on mobile. Babysharkboss2!! ^{(Hells Bells (Talk Page btw))} 14:49, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Any article on someone who is "upcoming" is invariably premature. See WP:UPCOMING. You will need to wait until they have actually "come up", if they ever do, and of course most aspiring actresses never do. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:22, 31 January 2024 (UTC)

Question about copyright

Hello, i have a question about Copyright

I don't know how to use and get. I want Creative Commons CC0 Licence and i don't have an computer. I use my smartphone for everything and please I'm waiting for the answer please leave a reply here about CC0 Licence. Thank you from, Akhinesh~ Akhinesh777 (talk) 14:47, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Your question is unclear. Have you read the message on your Talk page regarding Wikipedia_and_copyright? You can find more information by following the links in that message. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:20, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ahkinesh777. It sounds as if you think that a CC licence is something you have to apply for and get. If you are thinking that if somehow you get a CC licence, that allows you to use other people's copyright material, then I'm afraid it doesn't work like that.

If you own the copyright to something (say, some text or images that you have created) you have the legal power to grant a licence on it - that is to say legal permission for other people to use the material in ways specified in the licence you grant.

Creative Commons is a particular collection of licences which you may choose to release your material under. The one that most material in Wikipedia is released under is WP:CC-BY-SA, and if you look at that link you can see the particular wording to use in releasing material under that licence. ColinFine (talk) 15:21, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

i don't really understand, i don't know how to use CC0 Licence. I received some text code to copy i don't even know where to paste it Akhinesh777 (talk) 16:49, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

@Akhinesh777: The license doesn't matter unless you are uploading something you created to which you own a copyright. Then when you upload it (like a photograph from your phone) you will be prompted for the license at that time. Otherwise you don't need to worry about it. By creating an account here, you already agreed to release any text you write under the CC-BY-SA 4.0 license, and this is automatic. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:50, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I believe the author of this question is asking how to indicate that text they used in a draft article Draft:OPPO A5 was released under the CC0 license. I don't know how one would do that and if the text actually was under CC0, but it was deleted as a copyright infringement. Reconrabbit 22:46, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Don't really know how to deal with CC Licence and Copyright Infringements on Wikipedia. Can someone help me by making an tutorial video of "How to upload an picture to Wikimedia Commons" so i can easily do everything.

I know how to edit but don't really know how to upload an picture to Wikimedia commons. I deleted the picture of Oppo A5 because i don't know how to use CC licence and i thought i did a mistake here so i deleted the picture that i uploaded to the Wikimedia Commons. Please explain, how exactly use CC licence Akhinesh777 (talk) 08:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

and forgot to say, i don't really understand why i received notification about Copyright Infringement. Actually it's my own work Akhinesh777 (talk) 08:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

How do i improve or help for the page

Are you all having a good day? 46.208.249.75 (talk) 08:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Your list of recent contributions suggests that you're having a fun day. Please continue it at some other website, e.g. your own blog. -- Hoary (talk) 08:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

All contributions reverted. David notMD (talk) 12:28, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Meet criteria for B-class Article

Hi there, i had created a battle article related to the war between afghanistan and pakistan in 1960-61.

now that in the talk page Talk:1961 Pakistani Bombing of Batmalai the reviewers ticked 4 criterias needed for it to be B-class and one was left unmet. *Coverage and accuracy not met.

1.how can i fix that so it meets the criteria ?, 2.also does a article need to be B class to be reviewed in order to be indexed. Rahim231 (talk) 12:23, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

I did not take a look at the article yet, but have you tried contacting the reviewer who rated your article? They may have some valuable feedback that you can incorporate into your article, and I'm sure they would be happy to help! Ca ^{talk to me!} 16:57, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Actually (MILHIST checklist assessment) was added by a bot on the page which was under the scope of Military history WikiProject., which checked the criteria and just left 1 criteria crossed. As a newbie in this zone what should i do inorder to meet criteria (Coverage and accuracy).? Rahim231 (talk) 18:48, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Rahim231, I will answer your second question 2.also does a article need to be B class to be reviewed in order to be indexed.? The answer is "no". There is no connection between the rating of an article, which is highly subjective for lower ratings, and the process of reviewing an article for search engine indexing. If not reviewed first, all articles are indexed after 90 days. Cullen328 (talk) 20:51, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

thanks for your cooperation. Rahim231 (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Rahim231: You may wish to ask the bot owner what logic was used to assess the article. Presuming the logic is sound, you could then ask the Military history WikiProject for assistance at their talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 22:17, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks. Rahim231 (talk) 12:34, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Rahim231 I don't think you need to go to the trouble of asking the bot owner anything. One look at your article, and it's clear that it probably merits either a Start-class rating, or the 'C' Quality Assessment currently assigned to it, but absolutely nothing higher.

Now, I'm not decrying your efforts, but a B-quality article needs to have a lot more detail in it! Yours simply does not yet, and could also do with some cleanup for spelling, over-use of wikilinks (such as repeated an unnecessary links to weapons and to ammunition), plus inappropriate use, or ommission, of capital letters on occasions.

But those are minor points. When it comes to gaining a higher assessment rating there simply isn't enough detail in that article yet to leave someone feeling they've fully understood the events described. Was it a bombing campaign lasting one day, or one month? When did it start and end? Who were the insurgents, and why was the bombing necessary? Who ordered it? How many were killed and injured? What other damage was done? Civilians impacted? How did it end? What impact did it have? ...and so on. So either Start class or C-class is appropriate for it (it's often very subjective, anyway).

To improve your article, either re-read your sources and extract more detail from them, or go find better sources which give more information to form a fully rounded picture of what happened, when and why.

Oh, and you should not repeat the same reference again and again, as you've done. You should 're-use' it so that it only appears once in the Reference list, despite being inserted in multiple places. To learn how to do this, see WP:REFBEGIN if you're editing with our Source Editor, or WP:REFBEGINVE if you're using our Visual Editor. Both editing tools let you re-use a reference, thought they operate slightly differently.

See WP:Content assessment which states:

• START: An article that is developing but still quite incomplete. It may or may not cite adequate reliable sources. Providing references to reliable sources should come first; the article also needs substantial improvement in content and organisation. Also improve the grammar, spelling, writing style and improve the jargon use.
• C-class: The article is substantial but is still missing important content or contains irrelevant material. The article should have some references to reliable sources, but may still have significant problems or require substantial cleanup. Considerable editing is needed to close gaps in content and solve cleanup problems.
• B-class: It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. It is mostly complete and does not have major problems, but requires some further work to reach good article standards. See WP:Content assessment/B-Class criteria.

I hope this help. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:57, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for your brief guide, i truly appreciate it. Rahim231 (talk) 12:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

New to Wikipedia

Greetings everyone, I recently created a wikipedia account and have never edited articles before, and I want to edited something. Do you have any helpful tips and trick to use in wikipedia. Dimka12d1sa (talk) 10:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello there, you can start learning about editing and the policies in Wikipedia in this article. Please note that you can read more about the policies in their respective articles. - Dents (talk2me 🖂) he/him btw!!! 11:16, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Dimka12d1sa On how to edit in general, see WP:TUTORIAL. Some inspiration on what to do, see WP:TASKS. Happy editing! Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:21, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

How do I nominate a page for deletion?

Hi, I am not familiar with the process for recommending the deletion of an article here on wikipedia. I tried reading about them but could not understand much. Can someone please guide me through the process? I will not link the article in question here for now in case it is against the rules. Yuthoob (talk) 05:20, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Yuthoob: See the page Wikipedia:Introduction_to_deletion_process for info on that. RudolfRed (talk) 05:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. The article in question can possibly be redirected to another article. Is there a process for that? Yuthoob (talk) 05:40, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Yuthoob The outcome of a deletion discussion can be the decision to redirect instead. (See WP:Deletion process). This often happens, for example, when an article on a non-notable member of a band becomes a redirect to the band itself. It is certainly not "against the rules" to mention the title of the article you had in mind, so we can give further advice. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Updating my page independent help needed please

Is anyone willing to help me please as minor updates are needed to my page and it is not god practice for me to do them as its my page about me. Is anyone willing to help please, see below. Thanks. I am hopeless at posting this request in the wrong places - it was on Talk.

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

Extended content

At the sub-title Books I need to insert ‘(selected)’ as below. And at end of Books I need to insert a recent 3rd book as below: Books (selected) [edit] ·        Bowling, Ann (2017). Measuring health: a review of subjective health, well-being and quality of life measurement scales (4th ed.). London: Open Univ Press. ISBN 978-0335261949. OCLC 951645229. ·        Bowling, Ann (2014). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services (4th ed.). Milton Keynes. ISBN 9780335262755. OCLC 887254158. ·        Bowling, Ann (2023). Research methods in health: Investigating health and health services (5th ed.). Maidenhead Open Univ Press McGraw Hill.ISBC-13 9780335250929 ISBN10 9780335250929  eISBN 9780335250936 At the end of my Wikepedia page at External links three of my four links need updating: please delete these 2nd and 3rd links: ·     Older People’s Quality of Life Questionnaire (OPQOL) summed scoring and reverse coding ·     OPQOL-BRIEF questionnaire Links accessed 17 June 2018 and insert instead: ·        https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/older-people-s-quality-of-life Link accessed 1 February 2024. ·        https://eprovide.mapi-trust.org/instruments/older-people-s-quality-of-life-brief-version  Link accessed 1 February 2024 The 1st link is correct and should remain as: Ann Patricia Bowling publications indexed by Google Scholar The last link web location has changed and needs updating to: "Chief Medical Officer annual report 2013: public mental health" The definition and measurement of well-being and quality of life in mental health promotion and outcomeshttps://www.gov.uk/government/publications/chief-medical-officer-cmo-annual-report-public-mental-healthRetrieved 1 February 2024.

(AnnQoLAge (talk) 20:39, 1 February 2024 (UTC))

@AnnQoLAge: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see that you've added this request to Talk:Ann Patricia Bowling four hours before posting it here. Please be patient, and someone will eventually respond to your talk page request, especially since Primefac added the {{edit COI}} template for you. GoingBatty (talk) 21:58, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you I STUPIDLY REPLIED TO MYSELF AND THEN couldn't find it in Talk so hence duplication in Teahouse. A kind user has done the updates for me perfectly - am delighted. Hopeully their updates stay live without my amateur intervention. Thanks Ann 2A00:23C5:3F19:9601:7C0F:C45D:D2C3:30E2 (talk) 15:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@AnnQoLAge You have made a perfectly acceptable EDITREQUEST on the talk page of the article about you. That should suffice, and an editor will be along shortly to address it. There are currently 66 such requests pending. No need to post it here, as Teahouse volunteers don't usually get involved in answering such requests. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:58, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

unusual formatting

i was reading the page on touchscreens, and i noticed some unusual formatting in the history section where it seems the editor was attempting some sort of named list.

how exactly do i go about fixing this odd formatting while keeping to the editors original intent? 216.100.95.82 (talk) 17:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi there! The best place to ask this question is on the article's talk page: Talk:Touchscreen. Feel free to invite those editors who formatted that section to the discussion. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 17:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Template descriptions

Hullo friends. I use the VisualEditor for basically all of my edits, and when using templates in the VisualEditor, they often have template descriptions, for example {{citation needed}} or {{current}}. However, a few, such as {{char}}, have no VisualEditor description. I was wondering how I could submit a description for some of these templates. That's all. Thanks! Antrotherkus (Talk to me!) 18:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

You could post on the template's talk page, e.g. Template talk:Char for the one you've given. Remsense诉 18:02, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@antrotherkus: the VisualEditor description is called templatedata. the linked page gives instructions on how to add it. ltbdl (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) @Antrotherkus: You could also be bold and add the TemplateData yourself. Copy the code Template:Citation needed/doc#Template data and add a similar section to Template:Char/doc. GoingBatty (talk) 18:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! Antrotherkus (Talk to me!) 18:15, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

How do I update the results in the bracket of the Asian Cup 2024?

Thank you very much 14 novembre (talk) 17:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre: Welcome to the Teahouse! What article are you referring to? There isn't an article called Asian Cup 2024. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 17:26, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@14 novembre: I guess it's about 2023 AFC Asian Cup which is currently playing after being postponed to 2024. If you try to edit 2023 AFC Asian Cup#Bracket then it says {{#lst:2023 AFC Asian Cup knockout stage|Bracket}}. The code means the displayed content is taken from 2023 AFC Asian Cup knockout stage. If you try to edit 2023 AFC Asian Cup knockout stage#Bracket then check the result carefully with "Show preview" before saving. It's easy to break the whole thing. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter Yes, that's what I meant. Thank you very much for your answer, it is exactly what I wanted. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 19:10, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Page about Wikipedian tasks

I can clearly remember a Wikipedia page about solving tasks to help the encyclopedia, but I do not remember the name in any way. I think it went along the lines of "task centre" or something along the lines of that, but I'm not sure. 2A02:2F0E:512:F500:891C:1AAF:22DE:6924 (talk) 18:45, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

By the way, I'm going to create an account, so don't expect to see me on this IP address too much. I'll still check on this page, though. 2A02:2F0E:512:F500:891C:1AAF:22DE:6924 (talk) 18:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello. Wikipedia:Community portal is a good place to start finding tasks to do. Cullen328 (talk) 18:48, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

OK, thank you! Also, I just realised that was a really quick reply. March on, Wikipedian!! Usersnipedname (talk) 18:59, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Usersnipedname Sometime these pages (or something close) have somewhat intuitive redirects, in this case WP:TASKS. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 19:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

You're probably thinking of the Wikipedia:Task Center (which has a redirect at Wikipedia:Task Centre). GoingBatty (talk) 19:13, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot :–) Usersnipedname (talk) 19:17, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Loja

Como sbri uma loja Clavim (talk) 17:27, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Clavim: Welcome to the Teahouse! Google Translate says your question is "How to open a store". The Teahouse is "your go-to place for friendly help with using and editing Wikipedia", so we are unable to help you open a store. GoingBatty (talk) 17:35, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Se você estiver interessado em contribuir para a Wikipédia, você pode querer ver a Wikipédia em português. Blitzfan51 speak to the manager 20:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

the Bible and Quran are fiction?

Dear Wikipedia experts, I use and support Wikipedia monetarily a lot but contribute very little content. I have found my latest contribution (on the article Jezebel) rejected by Dimadick, probably because I added it to the main text of the article by mistake. Dimadick correctly advised me to add my comment to the talk page. But was my comment deleted there too? I see that Dimadick wrote "Deleted nonsense. Complains about the Bible not being a reliable source". Could you clarify for me please? Is it the consensus of Wikipedia that the Bible and the Quran are fiction? Thank you very much for your clarification, and my apologies for using Wikipedia wrong. MinuteSoul MinuteSoul (talk) 05:33, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Suggested read... WP:Myth versus fiction. Moxy- 05:39, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Moxy, thanks for the reference to the article about myth vs fiction. I see the references to "fiction" have been removed from the article "Jezebel". Wikipedia self-heals! Yay! My apologies for my incorrect useage of the platform. -- MinuteSoul — Preceding unsigned comment added by MinuteSoul (talk • contribs) 05:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Religious scriptures are not considered reliable sources. Please see Wikipedia:RSPSCRIPTURE. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:43, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@MinuteSoul: The inappropriate content was added by an unregistered user [19] an hour before your edit [20]. You are right the content was bad but adding your comment in the article was also bad. You could have checked the page history, seen it was a recent addition with no good part, and reverted the edit, as somebody else did 20 minutes later.[21] Your talk page post [22] sounded polemic and was not written in a good way for a Wikipedia discussion but it seems a bit hard that others just reverted it. However, the content you objected to had already been removed from the article when you made the post. PrimeHunter (talk) 17:54, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks PrimeHunter and Shantavira, as I said I am new to this and was completely unaware of how to check edits, etc. Sorry for my outraged tone, I'm learning gradually. Thanks for your patience. MinuteSoul (talk) 00:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Is this draft good enough?

I started a draft Draft:Lil Guardsman, and came back to find someone else moved it to Draft:Lil' Guardsman and wrote a bunch of stuff in it. So, is it good enough to submit now?

The IP formerly known formerly as 147.133.116.16, 107.9.59.59 (talk) 03:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the teahouse. The best way to know is to submit it. With the draft in its current state, I believe it would probably be approved, as the 5 sources I've added seem to me like more than enough to establish notability. It's just really short and I think more information could possibly be added.

I don't normally reply to others in teahouse, except this time I'm the contributor you're talking about. AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 03:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

The draft has a couple comments stating "work in progress". I suggest finishing the work and removing the comments before submitting. Good luck with the draft! GoingBatty (talk) 04:04, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I was planning to try adding more if possible. I just think it would be approved in its current state with the comments removed and probably be a stub or, at most, start class article. But I think it can be better. I just stated editing it today after all, so no harm in improving it further before submitting. AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 04:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Help with editing Patrick Hanks

Someone removed died from COVID because they think COVID doesn't exist. I don't edit Wikipedia much but I like to read the policies and edit history when I'm bored so I know about some of them, and calling COVID a hoax is WP:UNDUE. I tried reverting it but they restored it, I don't want to argue with them through the edit history so I'm not sure what to do about this, does anyone know what to do? 134.215.176.89 (talk) 00:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP editor! You've done the right thing to revert it, but please don't get caught up in an edit war. That will just lead to both of you getting in trouble. There's a whole list of things to do at WP:EDITWAR; I have left a warning on the other editor's talk page for you, and I hope you will cease reverting them as well. If they continue, you (or I or any other editor!) can request page protection or report them for edit warring.

The best thing to do is just stay calm, try to resolve the conflict if you can, and then let administrators know what's happening so they can handle the situation. StartGrammarTime (talk) 04:17, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

how do i improve my draft?

Hello, I just made few edits in the page (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:T_S_Nandakumar) adding few links and sources. I have submitted it for review and it got declined. I just wanted to know as how can i improve this article furthermore or should i delete some sentences of this article where there is no link and if any one would provide me some path or specifics as where in this page should i improve and flaws. it would be much appreciated. And i see there are many sources about the person but need some help or direction on how to go with it . I just need help in not getting this page deleted. Thanks in Advance for your help. Thank You! Ashvik08122023 (talk) 09:18, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ashvik08122023: Welcome to the Teahouse! The gray box at the top of the draft provides the answer to your first question, with lots of links to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. I also suggest deleting anything that is unsourced. Good luck with the draft. GoingBatty (talk) 15:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @GoingBatty , Can you please help me in adding appropriate sources to this page as i am a newbie. If you think i need to delete something can you please point me out specifically. Just need little help to get this subject's page published. Thank You! Ashvik08122023 (talk) 15:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ashvik08122023: No, I will not be looking for appropriate sources for you. Finding appropriate sources is what you should do before writing the draft. Please read Help:Your first article if you have not already done so. If you find appropriate sources and decide to continue with the draft, then add those sources and then determine what unsourced information should be deleted. GoingBatty (talk) 15:35, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@GoingBatty , I have found reliable source online from Google Books , Academia , Media etc. and i have read that link before starting my article creation. I have appropriate sources but just need some help specifically in identifying any unwanted sentence in this article and point out poorly sourced sentence. Thank You! Ashvik08122023 (talk) 15:41, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ashvik08122023: You have not added any sources since the article was declined for not having appropriate sources. I believe the reviewer User4edits was trying to tell you that many of your sources are primary sources, and that appropriate sources are those that "show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject". Again, the process is

1. Find the appropriate independent published sources
2. Write the draft based on those sources (not your own knowledge)
3. Delete anything you wrote that is not based on sources (i.e. sentences that don't have a footnote)

GoingBatty (talk) 16:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ashvik08122023 Please see Reply to your message on my Talkpage. User4edits (talk) 04:52, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

draft article

while editing i got an alert as follows : m Draft:Keep Refrigerated ‎ just gonna hijack this draft for a bit current

(just gonna hijack this draft for a bit)

the use is listed as an editor - Antrotherkus

now the draft is locked, "This is actively undergoing a major edit for a short while. To help avoid edit conflicts," — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeff Gompertz (talk • contribs) 12:48, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Fixed via the Wikipedia Live Help Channel on IRC. —Scottyoak2 (talk) 13:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Can i help

I can do this Kal-ELRules (talk) 04:34, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Kal-ELRules: Welcome to the Teahouse! To learn how to edit, I suggest you start at Help:Introduction. Then you can find ways you can help at the Wikipedia:Task Center and Wikipedia:Community portal. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:53, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Kal-ELRules See WP:YFA for how to create and submit a draft to reviewer. David notMD (talk) 14:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Major revisions to existing article

If I want to make significant changes to how an article is structured, what's the best way to make a personal copy for myself to edit until it's ready? I've heard that the way to do it is to make a userspace draft as a subpage of your user page, but WP:USERFY says that copy-and-pasting articles is bad because it doesn't keep attribution. Is the ideal way to copy-and-paste it and say something in the edit summary like "copied from such-and-such, see there for attribution"?

As a slightly related question, once I've finished working on the copy, what's the procedure to get it merged back into the main article? IrisPersephone (talk) 06:49, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I also went through this process when I started making major edits, as described. This issue did crop up for me: I had a parallel draft copy of the article that I iterated on privately. When I copied my changes over, in addition to potential attribution issues it was also difficult for other editors to review what I had actually done, since the edits were so monolithic.

Moreover, if you do want to ensure attribution, the draft page has to remain in your userspace indefinitely, rather than you being free to delete it as you'd normally want for your userspace—which I see as an unnecessary logistical stumbling block.

My advice would be to make partial or limited use of draft pages as you wish, but always ensure that edits to the article itself don't require this attribution, i.e. they are done in logical, navigable chunks that appear like normal edits to others. This notion turns out to be more important than the concerns I had about leaving the article page in a slightly imperfect state while I was working on it.

Cheers, and good luck! Remsense诉 07:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for answering me! However, I'm not sure that editing in chunks would work in this specific case - the article is a list article (specifically List of architectural styles) and I was planning on re-categorising the list items as it's really jumbled currently. It's a long article so I didn't want to do it all at once, but obviously an inconsistently-sorted article is worse than a badly-sorted one. Do you have any suggestions for this specific case? Should I just edit it in one go and avoid copying it anywhere? IrisPersephone (talk) 07:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I would just make sure each individual edit can be easily looked over by others—which is much easier with list articles, luckily! :) Remsense诉 08:03, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

MAybe already answered, but I copy a section at a time into my Sandbox, work there, then paste it back. Repeat, repeat, repeat. This way, your entire effort is less likely to be reverted because someone took umbrage at part of it. David notMD (talk) 14:14, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Unnecesarry Watchpages

Whenever I edit any page, whether it is reverting any edit, warning user or else, the page gets added to watchlist for 1 month. How to 'off' this setting? ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-watchlist. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:21, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Or see Wikipedia:Twinkle/doc#Default watchlist options for edits made with Twinkle. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Or Preferences > Watchlist > Hide my edits from the watchlist. Shantavira|^{feed me} 14:25, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

"Hide my edits" doesn't prevent addition to the Watchlist. It only means the watchlist doesn't show your own edits to the page. PrimeHunter (talk) 14:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@PrimeHunter: I tried the twinkle one, as pages edit using those were added to watch list, and it helped. Thank you. ExclusiveEditor _{Notify Me!} 14:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

About cite the resources' author

If I cited the resources has more than one author, how to handle this situation? Thank you. Lizzy0213 (talk) 14:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Lizzy0213 Please see the documentation at {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}} and {{cite web}}, depending on what type of source you have. All these can use |last1= |last2= etc. to list the various authors, or you can use |vauthors= to create a full list in one Vancouver-style entry. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Article Rejected

Hi All, Nice to meet a community of Editors!

My rejoin eu party article was rejected, I think because there were not enough primary and secondary references. there are loads online and from newspapers about the party existing but I’ve no clue on the html jargon needed to input in. Can anyone help? Alexpkerr (talk) 15:59, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Alexpkerr Your draft was not rejected but only "declined" (i.e. it could be re-submitted if improved). The main issue is that you only quote one, unreliable, source. There need to be several meeting these criteria. Here is one to get you started. See this help page for details of how to do citations. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Alexpkerr I have removed the unreliable source and added 4 reliable ones for you. Theroadislong (talk) 16:57, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I need help with listing references for a page I have submitted

How do I properly list references for a page I have submitted? I provided links to a youtube video (interview) and a webpage of another interview. Drumandstage (talk) 17:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi there Drumandstage, and welcome to the Teahouse. I assume you're referring to Draft:Ron Wikso. As we have two optional editing tools, we therefore have two sets of guidance on how to add references. If you're using our Source Editor (where the edit tab actually says "Edit source", please see THIS PAGE. But if you're using Visual Editor, then please see THIS and subsequent pages. Note that you can easily switch back and forth between editing tools, as each has their advantages and disadvantages.

On the key point of 'Notability' you might wish to read THIS PAGE of guidance about notability for musicians, and this page about other notable living people.

I should also make you aware that we don't accept interviews with the subject of an article as being a proper RELIABLE SOURCE. Instead, we look for what other, independent media or music outlets have written about that person.

In the event that you happen to be writing a draft about yourself, please see COI and WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY for extra guidance in that area. I hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Local news

Are there any policies, guidelines, or essays on the use of local news stories in general. I know WP:AUD exists, but that seems to be for companies. I'm aware of WP:LOCAL, but that seems to be about geographic locations. Are there any that discuss whether or not regional or national coverage is required for establishing the notability of a subject? TipsyElephant (talk) 01:15, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Nothing immediately comes to mind. I would be wary of using local sources for GNG purposes simply because very few of them are likely to meet all the criteria. A small local paper may not have experienced teams or real journalists working for them for them to have an acceptable level of integrity and accuracy. A local paper of a small town may not be independent of any subject they cover, since everyone knows each other in small towns and everyone is likely to be closely involved with and affected by anything that goes on. They also have a hard time being objective, neutral or critical of anything local that they cover. Etcetera. So, evaluate case by case, but start with skepticism, I reckon. If you'd like to read the history of discussions on this and related issues, start at WP:TOWN maybe. Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:00, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Musical artist page

Hii team I’m fanindra bhardwaj i need artist page on Wikipedia please help me to create the article or page about Fanindra Bhardwaj Fanindra dev bhardwaj (talk) 18:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

You have written here [[23]] that “I need my artist page because I’m a musician artist band so i need this for my public presentation” that is of no concern to Wikipedia which only has articles about notable people. See WP:NMUSICIAN for the criteria. Theroadislong (talk) 19:13, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia has articles written about notable people (notable as defined by Wikipedia). It is not social media, where anyone can post anything. If in time you become a famous musician then people with no connection to you will write about you, and a person with no connection to you can decide to create an article about you. Right now, not. David notMD (talk) 19:47, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

My Submission

My submission was rejected. Will you please take look at my submission and tell me what I need to do to get this ready for Wikipedia? I prefer visual editor for your reply.

Dawn D. Bennett-Alexander

Copyright violating material removed
Copyright violating material removed

Since retiring Dr. B-A is still teaching the message of "[./Practical_Diversity_https://www.practicaldiversity.com Practical Diversity]" to professionals on a global scale. She has also begun writing cozy mystery fiction novels named "[./The_Quilt_Journeys_Mystery_Series_https://www.quiltedhearts.world/ The Quilt Journeys Mystery Series]" with her niece Renée T. H. Patterson. Vdolphinv (talk) 19:44, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to the Teahouse! The reviewer, Drmies left you at User:Vdolphinv/sandbox that begins This is a memorial of sorts for a living person, full of promotional/non-neutral/celebratory phrases...? The second sentence provides some instructions: the draft first has to show that the subject meets criteria for a standalone article ("notability" in Wikipedia parlance), either generally or specifically for professors. If there aren't secondary sources showing that, the time is not right for an article.

Furthermore, Bennett-Alexander may not want an article about herself on Wikipedia.

Also, a friendly reminder that if you have any conflicts of interest, please declare it in accordance with policy. If applicable, you can just write a sentence on your userpage to that effect. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 20:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Vdolphinv. Most of the article has copied this university webpage which is copyrighted. For legal reasons Wikipedia takes such copyright violation very seriously. The copied webpage is part of the public relations material of the university, and as a result is written in very promotional, unencyclopedic language. You must write everything in your own neutral words, even if your wrote the original webpage. It is fine to use it as a reference. StarryGrandma (talk) 20:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Sandbox Issue

Hi. I created a sandbox which shows my user name followed by Sandbox. I spent several days making entries, but when I attempted to Publish (or store) the work-in-progress, I keep getting the message "No stashed content found...." The message box that appears below that signage has some action links that appear to put you in a loop of creating a new sandbox, or editing the sandbox (which doesn't solve the problem). When I went to the help and clicked on it, it asked if I wanted to leave the page. (It looked like there was not other choice if you wanted help, So I did that.) Then when I tried to get back into the sandbox, the several days of work seems to be gone.

Did I create a fake sandbox originally? How does one create a real sandbox? Is there a way to recover my worrk? If it was a fake sandbox then why did it correctly display my user name followed by sandbox? Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 16:58, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Flightbook: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1214. Were you using the visual editor, and did you happen to leave it on for a very long amount of time? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:03, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

I was using the visual editor, and everything happened within the course of a day. I've been trying to make progress on this in my spare time for the last 3 or 4 days. One of the problems I'm having is trying to figure out where I am in the Wikipedia roadmap. I'm not sure I understand where the Sandbox resides in the big scheme of things, and why it doesn't let me publish (update) my work-in-progress. As I understand it, if I don't update, it doesn't count as an edit, and I will not be able to reach the metric needed for an eventual submission. Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 17:09, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Flightbook I'm really sorry you lost all your edits. As with all other word processors and computing tasks in life, it is advisable to save your work every 30 minutes or so, or at least at a point where, should the power go off, you wouldn't be pulling your hair out over how much work you've lost. Although when editing your Sandbox you will see a big blue 'Publish' button, don't be sacred of it. Within your sandbox (and other userpages) t's effectively just 'Saving' your work to that online page, and is not actually publishing an article at that point into the main part of the encyclopaedia. Confusing, I know.

By saving small amounts of your work as you go along, you'd easily reach the 'metric' of having an account that is at least 4 days old and has made 10 edits or more. That means you'd then be AUTOCONFIRMED, which lets you do stuff that a total newcomer is not able to, such as creating an article, or renaming a page. But, for new editors, it's still strongly advised to go through the Articles for Creation process which lets you submit a draft when you finally think its ready, and then to receive feedback on it. See also this page of advice. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:22, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, Nick. But my basic problem is that it would not allow me to publish at all... Ever. from the time I created the sandbox...despite trying to update and save the work every couple of hours, as you would with any word processor. 24.224.87.173 (talk) 17:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you try saving every 15 minutes and see if you're still having the problem? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 17:38, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Sure. I copied and pasted the Word version of what I had lost, and the publish feature seems to work now. I still do not understand what I was doing wrong. 24.224.87.173 (talk) 17:46, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, IP user and welcome to the Teahouse. The important thing to realise about that message is that it is a technical message in the software. You didn't do anything wrong, except possibly leaving unsaved edits in your browser for too long. ColinFine (talk) 19:53, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Colin. I am now having another difficulty I wonder if you can shed some light on. It appears that when i pasted the lost text from MS Word, I may have left out the tail end of my references. There is a standard box that appears at the bottom of my sandbox that I thought might be blocking me from seeing the missing references. And below that a greyed in link that says something like "edit references below this line." When i pressed that it did not make my missing references reappear. However, when i now insert a reference anywhere in the text the numbering is messed up. (Restarts counting from 1, rather than adding the new reference to the end of the list! How can i correct this enumeration problem? Thanks 24.224.87.173 (talk) 20:16, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I've no experienced with the Visual Editor ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Flightbook Maybe just a glitch (often worth re-startng one's computer if that kind of thing happens. I can't say I've heard others reporting that issue, unless using a VPN, or a browser with one built in, like Opera. But I'm glad it's working for you know. Good practice to keep a draft in a word processor, too, as you did! Nick Moyes (talk) 17:55, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Nick. 24.224.87.173 (talk) 20:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding images to templates

Hello, everyone! I'm trying to clear some backlogs, and I need to know how to add images to templates so I can attempt to clear Category:Wikipedia requested images of dinosaurs. 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 20:46, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi 8UB3RG1N3. It depends on the template. Do you have an example? The template page often has documentation showing image parameters, if they exist for that template. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:07, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, @PrimeHunter! Thank you for responding. I'm sorry, but I can't put a template here. Is it ok if I link an article with one of these templates? It's a taxonomy-related one, if that helps. 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 23:11, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@8UB3RG1N3: You could just write the name of the template. An example article is also OK if it's obvious which template it's about. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:24, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, I think the template name is Template:Automatic taxobox 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 23:26, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@8UB3RG1N3: See Template:Automatic taxobox#Add an image. It refers to Template:Taxobox#Images. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you!!!! 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 23:30, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Local Culture Photo

I would like to share with you my local culture photo how do I do that? 2600:8801:3500:9C60:9500:19B4:F99B:2CD5 (talk) 23:11, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP and welcome to the Teahouse! Thank you for volunteering to share your photos: I would like to direct you to Wikimedia Commons, where you can upload said photos (see Commons:Contributing your own work). Once you've uploaded the photos on commons, an editor can add them to a relevant article. Cheers, ayakanaa ( t · c ) 23:44, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

suspicious account

Hi Teahouse, I have recently run across an account that has made very few edits (9 edits. Account created on 26 January 2023), but all those edits are perfectly formatted with citations etc. I suspect this is a sockpuppet of another user, but do not have evidence to take it to Wikipedia:CheckUser. Nothing malicious had been done. Is there a very low-level way to flag this, or is it not really a problem and I should wait until there is an issue? Not urgent, and I realize I can just add them to my watchlist. Thanks in advance. WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 01:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

From what you say, there is no reason to even be suspicious—many users spend time editing as IPs before registering. Remsense诉 01:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

(edit conflict) WomenArtistUpdates, are they editing a contentious topic? Do their edits seem overly biased? If so, then it is likely a sock. Sometimes newbies actually know what they are doing, though, in which case you can ignore and move on. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

WomenArtistUpdates, before I started editing way back in 2009, I studied Wikipedia's policies, guidelines and procedures for many weeks, and added references properly from the very beginning. Cullen328 (talk) 01:55, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you Remsense, Sungodtemple, and Cullen328, Thanks for the sound advice. I shall ignore and move on :) Best, --WomenArtistUpdates (talk) 02:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

on not flashbanging myself

minor curiosity thing, only really important for the few seconds where i'll absolutely have to get my feet on other wikimedia projects

is english wikipedia the only project with a proper dark mode (give or take warning icons not being transparent)? during my few seconds on them, i didn't find the option around commons or br*zilian wp cogsan _{(nag me) (stalk me)} 01:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cogsan: You should be able to set up a dark theme across all Wikimedia wikis using your global.css (and sometimes global.js) files over at Meta-Wiki. If you're looking for the same one as the gadget on the English Wikipedia enables, there are instructions at User:Volker E. (WMF)/dark-mode – there are some other options as well at WP:DARK. Tollens (talk) 02:04, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Corrupted reference numbers

Hi. In the course of editing and pasting in backup text from MS Word that I had lost in my sandbox, reference numbers seem to have gotten corrupted. When I now enter a new reference somewhere in the middle of the text, it starts renumbering as (2) rather than adding the reference to the last one at the bottom (with a number that should be more like...(9). How do I correct this please? I use the visual editor... Flightbook (talk) 21:53, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Without looking at the Draft in question, it's difficult to be sure, but are you aware that the reference numbers are automatically generated and changed by the underlying software, not manually assigned? They are numbered in the order they (currently) first appear in the piece (bearing in mind that the same reference can be used more than once), and usually references in the Infobox (if there is one) are numbered first because the Infobox code usually comes first.

When you add a new reference somewhere in the piece, it will automatically be given the next number after the latest one preceding it, and all those first appearing after it will be renumbered.

Similarly, the list of references in the Reference section (which might be called something else) are ordered automatically in the order they are first cited in the main body, and (re-)numbered as appropriate. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.185} 90.199.208.215 (talk) 22:27, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Flightbook Looking at your sandbox, I noticed that the issue is that you're not using the reference templates at all. You've manually numbered the sources, so it doesn't update as you edit. On visual editor, you should get a "cite" button at the top, which is a convenient way to generate citations, and you can use <references> or Template:Reflist in the References section to generate a list. Also see HELP:CITE for how to use the footnotes used by Wikipedia. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 23:41, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I obviously made some major errors in using the user interface and will need to study it again before my next document. For the moment, I have figured out how to correct the jumble I created using the source code. I'm sure it's a lot more work than the Visual editor, but it appears to be straightforward.

The one problem I haven't gotten to yet is that one reference appears below the blue box at the bottom of my Sandbox page, and was renumbered "1" by the Visual editor! I am hoping there's a straightforward way to find and get rid of this in text editor.

Thank you! 24.224.87.173 (talk) 02:08, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

It pops up at the bottom because it's the only reference made using the <ref> format while the rest are manual. Once the rest are fixed it should appear fine. Cheers, ayakanaa ( t · c ) 02:41, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Great. Thank you! Flightbook (talk) 03:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I would like some tips on how I could further improve my draft.

The subject of the article is Crystal Ann Tymich, a missing person since June 30th, 1994.

Draft:Crystal Ann Tymich Goldside852 (talk) 04:06, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Goldside852, the notability of Tymich is not well-established. It seems like she was notable for only one event, which means that English Wikipedia probably should not have an article on her. You should provide reliable, independent sources with significant coverage, showing that she had a long-lasting impact and is thus notable (WP:10YEARS). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 04:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Whoops! I suppose I should make an article on something else. Anyway, thank you for your help! Goldside852 (talk) 04:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Sockpuppetry Content Deletion?

Hi Teahouse,

I have a question regarding this page in its current form. A user had in the past couple of days added significantly to this article. Without enough references, yes, but still what appeared to be substantive & constructive editing. The account was then flagged & suspended for sockpuppetry, and their edits were deleted. Is it policy to delete a sockpuppet's work? Sure the account was itself breaking the rules but aren't the edits it made somewhat separate from that, given they are constructive? I don't see anything on Wikipedia:Sockpuppetry that outlines this consequence directly, but maybe I'm missing something. I would like to reinstate what was written, including the photos uploaded, if possible, but I wouldn't want to interfere with any guidelines. Thank you in advance! SSR07 (talk) 03:45, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Per WP:BRV:

Anyone is free to revert any edits made in violation of a ban or block, without giving any further reason and without regard to the three-revert rule. This does not mean that edits must be reverted just because they were made by a banned editor (changes that are obviously helpful, such as fixing typos or undoing vandalism, can be allowed to stand), but the presumption in ambiguous cases should be to revert.

Later, in WP:PROXYING:

Editors in turn are not permitted to post or edit material at the direction of a banned or blocked editor (sometimes called proxy editing or proxying) unless they are able to show that the changes are productive and they have independent reasons for making such edits. Editors who reinstate edits made by a banned or blocked editor take complete responsibility for the content.

I have many times reviewed sock edits, found them to be worth keeping, restored them, and taken responsibility for them. You can too; just exercise some extra caution. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:51, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@SSR07: Reverting material added in violation of a ban or block is permitted, without needing any other reason (see WP:BANREVERT), but there's no requirement to do so. If you would like to restore the content, you can, but you will be responsible for the content as if you had written it yourself, as with any revert that adds content – you should make sure it conforms to the relevant policies (WP:V, WP:NPOV, etc.). Tollens (talk) 03:57, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Not sure why the comment above didn't appear until after I hit reply. Apologies for the extra ping. Tollens (talk) 03:59, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

In addition to what Firefangledfeathers and Tollens mentioned, the specific account that you mentioned above is a sockpuppet of someone who was blocked for extensive copyright violations and who has an ongoing CCI where even more violations have been uncovered. So please take extra care before reinstating any of their edits. (Personally I would not do so in this case, given the reason for the previous block.) DanCherek (talk) 04:00, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @SSR07: the text in the revision you point to has citations; I reckon you'd be fine to restore it, make sure the source backs it up, and rewrite it to ensure it's not a copyvio from some other source. – SJ + 04:36, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

How to change username style

How do I change the username style like other users such as Liz? 0x16w (talk) 04:34, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @0x16w and welcome to the Teahouse! I believe you're referring to signatures, which can be customized (there's even a tutorial, WP:SIGTUT). Cheers, ayakanaa ( t · c ) 04:52, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! 0x16w (talk) 04:54, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

WP: Scholarship, what's with this secondary source preference?

I am a professor who conducts research and publishes in academic journals. The WP preference for secondary sources, such as a reviewer's piece on a published article or book, makes no sense to me. The research community disseminates knowledge by publishing primary research. Journal manuscripts typically include a findings or results section followed by a discussion section. When we cite a paper, the material we are sourcing usually comes from those sections. Reviews and editorials are typically excluded as references. The WP caution about predatory journals is great, but the majority of academic journals are not predatory.

On the other hand, review articles can be published anywhere--including predatory sources and DIY websites-- and are sometimes solely intended to discredit research findings simply because a "reviewer" has an opposing view. Transgenic plant research and vaccine trials are two examples that come to mind. Also, unpublished dissertations and theses are accepted sources in science, including use of their results and findings in meta-analysis and systematic review, so it doesn't follow that these sources are discouraged as references here.

Bottom line, I'd like to contribute to WP but this secondary source guidance is troubling.Could someone clarify this guideline, please? Clatlas (talk) 22:39, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Clatlas. When you write The research community disseminates knowledge by publishing primary research, you are correct, but Wikipedia is not "the research community". Academics publish new research findings. Wikipedia summarizes existing widely accepted knowledge, and is quite deliberately a lagging indicator for new discoveries. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, a reference work, which is a tertiary source. Wikipedia is the #7 website worldwide and by far the most comprehensive reference work in human history primarily because of our core content policies. The reasoning for the strong preference for secondary sources can be found in the core content policy WP:No original research and the shortcut to the specific section about primary sources is WP:PRIMARY. You will see there that the use of primary sources is not forbidden, but they should be used with great caution. Cullen328 (talk) 00:27, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Clatlas, I second what Cullen328 said. In addition, you mentioned meta-analyses and systematic reviews, and these are by no means discouraged as references here; they are the gold standard for many topics; see for example, WP:MEDRS. Not only are they by definition secondary sources, they are among the highest quality sources available for use here, because a well-done meta-analysis or systematic review will attempt to be as comprehensive as possible within the constraints of their selection criteria, and thus tend to give a proportionate view of the universe of reliable secondary sources about a topic. This is invaluable for giving an impartial view of what the majority and minority views are among reliable scholarly sources, especially when the total number of sources is vast, and where Wikipedia editors might be tempted to cherry-pick only those secondary sources that agreed with their viewpoint, a meta-analysis or systematic review would combat this tendency and provide a solid mooring for assigning due weight to differing views. WP:MEDRS in particular relies on this for editing biomedical topics.

As far as poor sources, there are a number of ways we deal with this: see for example: Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard, Original research noticeboard, Perennial sources, and The Wikipedia Library, for starters.

One thing that often trips up scholars with publications to their credit is the very different environment at an encyclopedia, which is a tertiary source. Your journal publications are primary (unless they are reviews); your college textbook on Intro to Klingonomics is secondary, but Wikipedia is tertiary: we would rely on your textbook (and other reliable secondary sources) but avoiding primary sources as much as possible. The same originality and groundbreaking new theories that won you the brilliancy prize or Nobel in Klingonology, will eventually get you booted off Wikipedia for engaging in original research if you keep it up. Bottom line: Wikipedia tends to avoid the bleeding edge of new research; we follow, we do not lead, and we never engage in original research, which when spotted is removed instantly. I hope this helps, Mathglot (talk) 05:20, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Melbourne Shuffle Inventor controversy

I have come across some Indonesian websites saying the inventor of the Melbourne Shuffle has been found but the English Wikipedia is blocking attempts to add him. Here are the sources from another Wikipedia.

https://el-espanol.news/wp-content/uploads/2024/01/IMG_7344-scaled.jpg

https://radarkaur.disway.id/read/651452/menyelami-gerakan-halus-wing-chun-kung-fu-sifu-maurice-novoa-maestro-di-balik-fenomena-melbourne-shuffle

https://beritasidrap.com/read/1558/terungkap-asal-mula-melbourne-shuffle-perpaduan-seni-bela-diri-dan-revolusi-tari Naga Bintang Biru (talk) 04:25, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Naga Bintang Biru: Welcome to the Teahouse! There have been some attempts to update the Melbourne shuffle lately that have been reverted. The best place for you to discuss this is the article's talk page, Talk:Melbourne shuffle. Thanks, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 05:45, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

News articles written by contributor Editor/ freelancer generally considered reliable?

FYI

 – Moved to new section. ayakanaa ( t · c ) 05:50, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

"Are news articles written by contributor editors or freelancers generally considered reliable sources for inclusion in Wikipedia articles when published by reputable news websites?" like can we use it as a source in wikipedia if it is written in a neutral point of view? Syed Sadique Hussain (talk) 05:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Syed Sadique Hussain, welcome to Wikipedia! Yes, usually freelance articles published in reliable sources can be cited (some examples of reliable sources are in green on the page linked). In these situations, the articles need to have the same journalistic standards as non-freelance articles. For example, National Geographic's pieces are all written by freelancers, but because of the stringent editing process, it is a reliable source.
Some exceptions to this are Forbes contributor articles and The Guardian blogs. These should rarely be cited as editorial quality of the contributor pieces is lower. Hope that helps! — Frostly (talk) 06:05, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

re: Rollback appeal

My publication was rolled back on spurious grounds. Brief history first.

In November I published a substantial amount of content. The topic is an accomplished scientist and inventor named Eric Lerner. The material was all highly referenced from scientific journals (IDEAL sources according to Wiki sourcing guidelines).

At the end of January I attempted to re-write the intro section. I was in the process of adding footnotes and editing it down to meet Wiki length guidelines. But the whole section I published was summarily Rolled Back, though some was later restored.

Then someone named BROC took down the ENTIRE publication saying that he " reverted the page back to an earlier version from September 2023. You added a lot of unsourced or primary sourced..."

Primary sourced material is IDEAL material... and furthermore, I DID have a secondary source to some claims as well as citing the scientific literature. I've responded to BROC... but now I have to appeal to someone. I'm burning hours with someone who is ROLLING BACK material from primary sources that is fully in compliance with WIKI standards.

In addition, The Sept 2023 version contained many errors or misstatements or linked references that didn't work.

HELP! Posa51 (talk) 22:10, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

@Posa51: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you're discussing this on Talk:Eric Lerner, which is the right place to have this discussion per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle. The fact that you've only edited the Eric Lerner article over four months (and your passion about the reversions) makes me wonder if you have an undisclosed conflict of interest. On Talk:Eric Lerner, you wrote "Writing a Wiki article shouldn't be root canal." It can feel that way sometimes, when there are multiple people involved trying to come to a WP:CONSENSUS, and you only to each other except on wiki. When you find yourself WRITING IN ALL CAPS, it might be time to take a break. Large edits can come with large reversions. It seems counterintuitive, but making small incremental progress can be more successful when trying to build consensus than large edits. When you see an error or misstatement, you may find it helpful to discuss those one at a time on the talk page (with supporting references). When linked references don't work, editors may be able to find archived versions at the Internet Archive or other locations that can be added to the citations. If you can't find one, then that's another thing that can be discussed. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 00:07, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

1) I was for many years a science writer... as a journalist I like to get facts correct; and having understood the significance of Lerner's work and having put in many hours documenting my Wiki publication I am a more than a little miffed at having it summarily rolled back.

2)What I am finding is that self-assigned editors actually don't know Wiki standards. Ironically, Broc sent me to the Identifying reliable sources (science) page.

There it states what and Ideal source is:

"Scientific information should be based on reliable published sources and should accurately reflect the current state of knowledge. Ideal sources for these articles include comprehensive reviews in independent, reliable published sources, such as reputable scientific journals, statements and reports from reputable expert bodies.."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(science)

So according to Wiki standards listed above, the Journal of Plasma Physics, is an Ideal source. That Journal was the referenced source. And yet you want to continue arguing and arguing. Furthermore I also had a secondary source too. Posa51 (talk) 06:45, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Posa51: Nope, I don't want to argue. I'm giving suggestions (without commenting on the suitability of any source you provided), with the understanding that you will choose whether to take my suggestions. For example, I suggest providing the details of the Journal of Plasma Physics source and your secondary source on Talk:Eric Lerner to make it easier for other editors to read them. GoingBatty (talk) 07:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Actually the source for the claim that Lerner's experimental fusion device established a world record for highest temperature in such a machine was the journal "Physics of Plasmas"...

A scientific journal that Wiki says:

"...is a peer reviewed monthly scientific journal on Plasma physics published by the American Institute of Physics, with cooperation by the American Physical Society's Division of Plasma Physics, since 1994."

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

That makes it an ideal source. Posa51 (talk) 07:29, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Posa51. You said that "Primary sourced material is IDEAL material", but actually, that's not the case. reliable, independent, secondary sources are ideal: so no journal articles, and nothing written by Lerner. In contrast, primary sources may be used in a limited way and come with a basketful of constraints and caveats, one of which is you cannot interpret anything you've read in the source, but must leave that to secondary sources. You can use bald statements of fact from the primary source (where the research was carried out, who is the lead author, when it was published, size of the population involved) but no interpretation or summarization of anything about the actual research topic—i.e., nothing about the most important aspects from the paper; that leaves you either quoting a brief passage from the paper word for word without comment, or searching for some other source that discusses their publication.

Finally, I would worry about whether there are sufficient independent, secondary sources with significant coverage of Eric Lerner to establish WP:Notability and a separate, standalone article about Lerner, apart from the existing article about Plasma cosmology which is clearly notable and has a page; it could be that Lerner is not notable (notability is not inherited) or only marginally so, and the content should be merged into a section at Plasma cosmology. Mathglot (talk) 05:43, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

1) I was for many years a science writer... as a journalist I like to get facts correct; and having understood the significance of Lerner's work and having put in many hours documenting my Wiki publication I am a more than a little miffed at having it summarily rolled back.

2)What I am finding is that self-assigned editors actually don't know Wiki standards. Ironically, Broc sent me to the Identifying reliable sources (science) page.

There it states what and Ideal source is:

"Scientific information should be based on reliable published sources and should accurately reflect the current state of knowledge. Ideal sources for these articles include comprehensive reviews in independent, reliable published sources, such as reputable scientific journals, statements and reports from reputable expert bodies.."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources_(science)

So according to Wiki standards listed above, the Journal of Plasma Physics, is an Ideal source. That Journal was the referenced source. And yet you want to continue arguing and arguing. Furthermore I also had a secondary source too. Posa51 (talk) 06:46, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Mathglot gave you some excellent advice on Talk:Eric Lerner. The editors here are trying to help you without intervening in your dispute. If talk page discussion does not satisfy your concerns, please see available dispute resolution measures.

You came here to ask advice, you have been given it, you will either follow it, or not. You seem very personally invested in this topic, if you have a conflict of interest that needs to be disclosed(you were asked this above but do not seem to have responded); I would concur that if you are writing in all caps and attacking other people for allegedly being self-serving, it's time to take a breather and step back. 331dot (talk) 09:40, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Creating an article.

I made an article and it got declined for having bad references but it´s hard to find good sites since what I´m writing about is fairly new.https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Milkor_380&action=submit Yeieh (talk) 12:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Milkor 380. Your first ref, which provides verification for the specifications, is the company's own website. The other is Janes, which appears to be based on an interview with the company. What is needed is independent published reviews about this drone, perhaps after actual sales and implementation. David notMD (talk) 14:19, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Yeieh, and welcome to the Teahouse. If you can't find good (i.e. substantial, reliable, and indepedent) references about a topic, that is a good indication that the topic may not at present meet Wikiepdia's criteria for notability, and you should give up on this draft, at least for the moment. Also "fairly new" immediately points to it being WP:TOOSOON. ColinFine (talk) 19:48, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much, I really appreciate it! Yeieh (talk) 10:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

What to include in talk pages for major edits

Hi, I am currently in the process of proposing major edits to talk pages, and I have made these edits on my sandbox page. Yet when proposing them, should I insert the edits directly into the talk page, or merely describe them? A brief example, I wish to replace the collage image in the section in the Dictator article with a multiple image template, with two different proposals. These proposals have already been prepared in the sandbox, but should I just describe the changes I'm proposing in the talk page, or should I insert them for them to see?

Thanks, @Grettoonist (talk) 12:20, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Grettoonist, you can just link people to your sandbox. It's usually better to show exactly what will be placed in the article rather than describing it, with the latter opening up room for speculation. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 13:58, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, thanks for letting me know! @Grettoonist (talk) 14:59, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

AD or CE?

Hello everyone,

I'm a bit confused about when to use "BC"/"AD" or "BCE"/"CE" when referring to dates. In Italy, we usually use "BC" (a.C.), but I noticed that on Wikipedia, sometimes "BCE" is used instead. Could someone please explain to me when it's customary to use each one?

Thank you, Mariamnei

Mariamnei (talk) 15:59, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@mariamnei: it really doesn't matter, but don't switch between the two in one article. see here for more. ltbdl (talk) 16:09, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, @ltbdl! I'll take a look at the link you shared. Mariamnei (talk) 16:14, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't know the copyright info of a file, nor do I know how to include it.

Sorry if this is a bit of a stupid question, but I uploaded a file, didn't include the copyright info, and now I need help before it's deleted in a week. File:DogMan.jpeg Goldside852 (talk) 16:49, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Goldside852 see Template:Non-free use rationale (or Template:Non-free use rationale book cover in your case). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 16:53, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright, check it out now! Hopefully it won't be deleted. Goldside852 (talk) 17:01, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Goldside852 Irrespective of whether it survives deletion, you should remove it from your Draft. Under Wikipedia's WP:NONFREE guidelines, such images are only allowed in accepted articles in mainspace. The presence or absence of the image will not affect the acceptance of the draft, which will mainly be whether the book is notable enough. Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:27, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

Editor apparently dodging a question

I'm in a midst of a discussion/dispute with a long-time editor. From my point of view, he appears to be dodging the question, i.e. not willing to answer the central question clearly. I have repeated the question 3 times.

Without a clear answer, the discussion doesn't make any sense to me. Either I'm not understanding something, or the other editor is being unfair.

I'm talking about the last few replies here.

What should I do now? Z80Spectrum (talk) 22:40, 1 February 2024 (UTC)

Just wanted to let you know I'm writing a reply to the conversation on the talk page to answer your concerns. Dionysius Miller^talk 00:12, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you you have been so helpful - GREAT. Ann 2A00:23C5:3F19:9601:7C0F:C45D:D2C3:30E2 (talk) 15:07, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm glad if I have succeeded to clear up the confusion. I don't know what is "Ann". Z80Spectrum (talk) 15:32, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh that was an unrelated issue where I updated a BLP article in response to the subject's request. It's a little confusing to anyone other than us two given its placement. Sorry for that confusion. Dionysius Miller^talk 15:41, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Greatly appreciated. Ann AnnQoLAge (talk) 17:42, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

@Z80Spectrum As an administrator who has tried (in the limited time available to them) to wade through that battleground talk page and other posts from you, my view is that:

a) it was wrong to delete a proposal to split or merge an article. That should be reinstated and discussed (preferably without the wall of words with which you and others seem to manage to create, nor the accusations of liars and scammers I've seen from you elsewhere.

b) Although I know little about computer graphics, I believe they were quite right in removing all your lengthy discussion and personal research from the talk page. Wikipedia is not a 'how to do it' platform. It looks like an old thread from 2021 got answered at huge length by you and an IP with detailed WP:OR, and this strayed well into WP:NOTFORUM territory. If you believe it is relevant to any discussion here on Wikipedia, as opposed to on Commons, then why not put it in one of your user sandbox pages and simply link to it? That would have avoided a lot of kerfuffle and hot air that you have so successfully managed to generate or contribute to.

c) there are 13 'citation needed' templates in that article. I suggest you would be better off addressing finding sources to support existing content, rather than going down a rabbit hole of seemingly highly technical personal investigation and research which is out of scope of this Project.

d) {{cot}} and {{cob}} templates sometimes have their uses on talk pages, too, though not to collapse detailed investigative chit-chat which is better off being kept to other more specialised, dedicated forums. Nick Moyes (talk) 00:38, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

My question here was about another editor either not understanding my question, or dodging my question. I wasn't asking you to produce an opinion about entirety of this complex case in a small amount of time.

I.e. you haven't answered my question. Z80Spectrum (talk) 03:46, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

The other editor has been responding to you, please assume good faith and keep in mind that no one is required to respond to your exact specifications. MrOllie (talk) 04:01, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Of course, but I felt that the situation needs clarification, because the reply was missing the point by a substantial margin.

So, I clarified in order to better explain my question, and to avoid future misunderstandings. Z80Spectrum (talk) 04:08, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Article Editing

Hello folks I am trying to edit an article for school assignment would you please guide me on how to find a list of articles that need to be edited. Abdallah2211 (talk) 10:37, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your willingness to help, Abdallah2211. It's rather hard work, so choose a subject area that's of interest to you. (However, don't depend on your knowledge when you correct or add factual material. Instead, rely on, and cite, reliable sources.) Now surf around articles in that area of interest to you until you land on an article that has a template at the top warning of one or more defects in the article. It shouldn't take you long to find such articles. Try editing one of these. (Although a huge number of articles that don't have warning templates also have serious defects.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:43, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. Abdallah2211 (talk) 18:55, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Abdallah2211: Welcome to the Teahouse! If you like, you could review the CleanupWorklistBot listings for the areas of interest to you to find articles that have been tagged for needing updates. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:47, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much for your help. Abdallah2211 (talk) 19:03, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

@Abdallah2211: You can also try the Task Center Polyamorph (talk) 14:57, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

thank you for replying Abdallah2211 (talk) 19:44, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

Usually, a teacher who assigns Wikipedia editing also lists articles the students can select from. Not for your assignment? David notMD (talk) 20:06, 2 February 2024 (UTC)

no we are free to chose Abdallah2211 (talk) 18:08, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello Abdallah, and welcome to the Teahouse. I hope your teacher understands that there is no guarantee that any changes you make will necessarily be kept, and so they will assess you on your editing and not on the results of your editing.

If you think this might not be clear to them, please show them WP:Education program/Educators. ColinFine (talk) 19:41, 3 February 2024 (UTC)

Abdallah2211 Many articles need improvement. (Some should be nominated for deletion. Some are so controversial that they are locked against editing by new editors.) I recommend you select an article because it is about a topic you know something about - review the article to find what can be improved or added - then do so, adding references at the same time as you add content. Consider practicing in your Sandbox until you think it is good enough to be pasted into the article. David notMD (talk) 21:24, 4 February 2024 (UTC)

How To List Illustrator in Citation

I want to cite a book that has both an author & an illustrator. How do I enter the illustrator's name? Below, I listed her (Vey) as the 2nd author, but that's not quite right (using source editor). I read the help page for citations but I did not see it addressed. Partial citation:

cite book |last1=Moore |first1=Lucile |last2=Vey |first2=Evonne

Sunandshade (talk) 02:31, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Sunandshade, you can put that information in |others=. From {{cite book}} :

• others: To record other contributors to the work, including illustrators. For the parameter value, write Illustrated by John Smith.
• Note: When using shortened footnotes or parenthetical referencing styles with templates, do not use multiple names in one field, or else the anchor will not match the inline link.

Umimmak (talk) 02:41, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

That worked great. Thanks a lot. I now have (partial citation):

cite book |last1=Moore |first1=Lucile |others=Illustrated by Evonne Vey

Sunandshade (talk) 02:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Photo Licensing

I have a photographic portrait of the subject of my biographical article, provided by a descendant of the subject, that I would like to include in my article. It is probably a commercial photograph, taken around 1943, but there are no identifying or copyright marks on the front or back of the photograph. I have no idea who the photographer is. How do I proceed with this? Draft: Anna Istomina 57.140.161 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Anna_Istomina Boat Scherzo (talk) 00:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Boat Scherzo: The image is in the public domain (assuming the photograph was published in Canada or the United States, which seem to be the most likely cases based on the draft). Images published in Canada before 1949 are in the public domain, and images published before 1977 in the United States with no copyright notice are in the public domain as well. You should be perfectly OK to use the image without any sort of restrictions. Tollens (talk) 02:54, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Graphic imagery as the leading visual

Greetings. I am commenting to impart a thought I've held for my many years on this site. Is it absolutely necessary to include graphic images (open body parts, etc.) as the first image in an article? I enjoy perusing articles discussing physiology or anatomy but admittedly have a weak stomach when it comes to blood, viscera, etc. In addition, I have scrolled through unsuspecting pages and accidentally moused over a link to a medical article, prompting a pop-up of a "gory" photo accompanying a summary. For this reason, I don't believe it's fair to tell a wary reader to stay away from medical articles.

I imagine I'm not alone here, and it would be fantastic if Wikipedia were to implement a censor warning or the like on pertinent imagery. Zyploc (talk) 01:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The concern you have is a common one, but the solution you propose is an absolute non-starter. It is 100% reasonable that an article called 'X' will start with and possibly have several other pictures of 'X'. And it's a widely-known slippery slope or form of cultural bias what one thinks someone else will find disturbing in any of various ways. So WP:NOTCENSORED is the stanard. But there are some personal settings you can make that hide images in general in certain contexts. See Help:Options to hide an image for some ideas. DMacks (talk) 04:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The best solution would be to not have preview images of internal organs. I think that is definitely a starter... Zyploc (talk) 05:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm afraid DMacks is right and it's definitely a non-starter. But on any individual article, you might be able to go to the Talk page and argue for a less stomach-churning image. In a lot of cases, it's frankly not the best possible image we have and shouldn't be there. The lead image ought to be clear and useful, and something super gory is only sometimes going to be the most clear and useful option. When it is, though, you're totally out of luck, sorry. -- asilvering (talk) 05:56, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

But I do understand the rule. Feel free to just send the link to that page next time Zyploc (talk) 05:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Usage of new pictures in an article.

Hello,

While looking for pictures to use in my expansion of the article for the ship MV Rapana I came across this website, which seems to contain multiple pictures of the ship which would be useful in the article (as it show the ship before its conversion).

After reading WP:IUP, I decided to try and look for the source of these pictures. I managed to find one picture used in these (Newspaper 1 Newspaper 2) old Dutch newspapers articles. I also found this separate picture of the ship in another page, which I believe could also be useful.

Since neither of the pictures provide an author (and one of them is embedded in a newspaper), I am unsure as to their suitability for use in Wikipedia, and would like the input of more experienced Wikipedians on this issue.

Thanks! SpanCan (talk) 04:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

SpanCan, "old Dutch newspapers" is not so helpful. I clicked on the links and found that they are to material published in 1935. commons:Template:PD-anon-70-EU may be applicable (depending on such matters as whether the photographer is named, and if so then when the photographer died). Please read commons:Template:PD-anon-70-EU/doc to determine whether it is applicable. If you have further questions about this, or other questions about copyright status or applicable templates, please ask them at commons:Commons:Village pump/Copyright rather than here: you'll be more likely to get knowledgable answers if you ask over there. -- Hoary (talk) 09:00, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, I apologize for not being specific about the age of the newspapers. Even still, thank you very much for your help. SpanCan (talk) 12:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Massive changes to an article

the article for the Nokia phone series is written very much like an advertisement, with a tag marking it as so for a long time. Other people have worked to make it a bit better, but because it is so widespread, the entire article (or most of it) would have to be changed. Before I would rework the article completely, I wanted to check to see if there was anything I had to do or request before making these changes, because the last thing I would want on my hands is an edit war Random IP User (talk) 01:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Nope! You're allowed to WP:BEBOLD and edit the article yourself. Elli (talk | contribs) 01:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you！ Random IP User (talk) 14:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you join this discussion?

Can you join this discussion on a suggested edit to Wikipedia:Copying text from other sources?

Thank you! User579987 (talk) 04:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @User579987, what's your question? Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 16:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Need advice About Corporate Notability for Wiki Page Submission

I received the below comment for my wiki page submission for my company page, "Odessa":

Comment: This draft is written from the viewpoint of the company, focusing on what the company says about itself. Corporate notability is based on what independent reliable sources have written about the subject. Not every business corporation is notable, and this draft does not establish corporate notability. You may ask for advice about corporate notability at the Teahouse.

Could you please advise the suggestion to resolve the same?

Mentioning the submitted content below for your reference:

"Odessa, established in 1998, is a software company headquartered in Philadelphia, USA. It is focused on providing software solutions for the asset finance and equipment leasing industry. Odessa opts for a customer-centric approach for its product, namely Odessa Platform, which can be customized to suit their clients on a requirement basis. Odessa Platform caters to end-to-end leasing requirements including but not restricted to lease and loan origination, portfolio management, lease accounting, asset and equipment finance, and so on. Company Overview[edit source] Odessa was founded by Madhu Natarajan and Jay Mehra. As of May 1, 2023 co-founder and Chief Executive Officer, Madhu Natarajan transitioned into the role of Executive Chairman with Eric Bernstein taking his place as the Chief Executive Officer. Simultaneously, co-founder and Chief Technology Officer Jay Mehra transitioned to the role of Vice-Chairman with Odessa's Managing Director in India at the time, Roopa Jayaraman stepping into the role of Chief Technology Officer. Additionally, the company has also promoted Sumit Maheshwari for Senior Vice President of Finance to Chief Financial Officer. Awards and Recognitions[edit source] ELFA - Operations and Technology Excellence Award, 2014 Best Tech Work Culture, Timmy Awards Inc. 5000 Monitordaily, Most Innovative Companies: Reinvention Affiliations[edit source] Odessa is a member of leasing associations such as: Equipment Leasing and Finance Associations (ELFA) Leaseurope Certified Lease & Finance Professional (CLFP) Foundation ^ ^ Jump up to:a b ^ ^ "Odessa and CLFP Foundation Collaborate to Drive Innovation in Certification Program". Odessa. 2020-02-25. Retrieved 2023-08-28."' LeasingExpert (talk) 05:12, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@LeasingExpert, have a look at WP:NCORP. -- asilvering (talk) 06:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

LeasingExpert, your editing history (limited to a draft on a single company), your username, and your description of the draft as "my company page" combine to give the impression that you are an employee of or intern at the company. Please read Wikipedia:Paid-contribution disclosure before editing any further, and read it carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 08:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Confirming names of officers of the company and minor awards do nothing to confirming notability. David notMD (talk) 17:42, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

What sites to use for album review?

I am make a draft for Dirty Shine and one of the biggest things about it was its critical acclaim. However, all of the reviews are from sites not on Wikipedia:WikiProject Albums/Sources. Do I just not include reviews or can I do something else? Thanks! Rockboy1009 (talk) 17:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Rockboy, and welcome to the Teahouse. WP:A/S says This list is not exhaustive. Additional websites and print sources may also be used, provided they meet the criteria at Wikipedia:Reliable sources and WP:MOSALBUM#Critical reception. However, if you can't find any reviews that are in a source mentioned there, that is certainly a reason to be cautious.

Reviews are the most common kind of source for an album, but sometimes there can be other sources. But, particularly for such a recent release, reviews are probably all there are. If you cannot find adequate sources, then do not spend any more time on the draft, because it will not be accepted. It may simply be WP:TOOSOON. ColinFine (talk) 17:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Help with a page

Hi, I would like help in writing a Wikipedia page. Recently I received a notice about deletion criteria... WOW, I would like to ask if someone could advise on the sandbox page? I have removed all the links and phots after receiving the wiki speedy deletion notification... Could anyone help or give advise on this page? thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 03:25, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Link: User:Yumesaki Himeji/sandbox

I will leave it to the more experienced people here to give you exact guidance, but my biggest concern is that you have provided no references for the information in your article. Wikipedia needs reliable sources independent of the subject to support anything written about them. Reconrabbit 03:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

WOW, OK.... Now I am confused. Sorry. We had a meeting and reviewed the page content with links, and publications... But, then Wiki notification stated that the article maybe Promotional??? WOW... We believe the information was correct and factually addressed with links to universities etc. The article has taken a lot of time we admit, but that was because we had to wait for confirmation and additional information. We think (pretty sure) Government publications are a high standard of proof. In addition, A MOVIE has the subject (person) in it, with a photo from the National Government NHK TV productions... All excellent references. But, we still received the wiki notification for speedy Deletions.. So, we just spent maybe 2 hours deleting all the photos and references for the page information.... a lot of time and work has gone in to this project, so we honestly are trying to understand W Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 03:59, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Who exactly is "we"...are there multiple people involved? Is Chayne Ellis involved? DMacks (talk) 04:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Writers (Japanese) in our Japan group, When a project (Any Project) is started which has a written component, WE, meet and talk about how to portrait the information. WE, also read rule of Wikipedia to help minimize errors such as todays notification for deletion from WIKIPEDIA. WE, honestly believe that the reference comply to the Wikipedia page rules. So, we have deleted all reference (please see deletions) because we have no idea what or which was the problem. So, now following the Wikipedia help links, WE are here... Asking for help and a clear identification of what are the problems with page content... Thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:17, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes, Dr. Chayne Masaki-Ellis is involved. Copies are to his email address. Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:20, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Note. Dr. Chayne Masaki-Ellis has a long history (over 20 years in Japan) and has had a significant contribution to the Japanese Medical practice which was focused on prevention, intervention and education. This has been the focus for 20 years, however, the UK Government has also started this similar system. There are several websites including dept of defence, New Zealand Police (in uniform) with his photo in Tokyo and publications. Please advise how to process. Thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:25, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

You can contest the Speedy deletion. If you do not, it will soon be gone without a trace. David notMD (talk) 04:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Each account is for one person. More than one person can work on the same draft, but each must have their own account. "We" is forbidden. David notMD (talk) 04:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Given that you confirm Masaki-Ellis is involved, the creator of this draft must declare at conflict of interest on the User page. See WP:COI, This does not prevent a person with a COI creating and submtting a draft. David notMD (talk) 04:23, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Sentences such as "Ellis's dedication to fostering interfaith dialogue and promoting global understanding is evident in his invaluable work with the Oomoto International department. His exceptional contributions to the field of religious studies and cross-cultural communication have garnered widespread recognition and deep respect within academic and spiritual communities alike, for which Ellis received an award for his outstanding dedication." are promotional, and are valid grounds for Speedy deletion. I strongly recommend letting the Speedy deletion go forward and start over, with all factual statements verified by valid references (see WP:42). David notMD (talk) 04:27, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

This is unfortunate, WE !! think that any person who has dedicated 20 years of his life on the prevention of cancer should be recognized, and it was a foreigner that help the change. However, if wiki deletes the page, it is excepted. However, we will try again. Thank you Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 04:30, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Chayne Masaki-Ellis may have had a career that justifies a Wikipedia article. However, the person(s) trying to create the article do not understand Wikipedia guidelines and rules. David notMD (talk) 04:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your comment, yes, it would be true that WE (Japanese) do not fully understand the vast rules, regulations and by-laws on how to use Wikipedia, even in Japanese. However, our culture is to do our best to ensure WE don't offend or cause trouble to anyone. "I" am the writer and "I" will be held responsible for my actions. Not the other 12 people assisting me in creating this page or helping me to understand Wikipedia procedure. However, Mr. David, I along we the other 12 people are not professional Wikipedia editors that has a high editorial skills like you. This project is not common, however, the Japanese society give credit were credit is due. Thank you for all of your kind assistance and advise. Yumesaki Himeji (talk) 05:18, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

You don't need to know every rule, and policy to just start editing on Wikipedia.

When I started, I barely knew what notability, or an infobox was. - Dents (talk2me 🖂) he/him btw!!! 08:07, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Yumesaki Himeji, start by reading Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, thoroughly. {The poster formerly known as 8781.230.195} 90.199.208.215 (talk) 18:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

You may also want to read WP:PUFFERY. Understanding that page may help you write more neutral content in the future. CodeTalker (talk) 19:34, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Sources list template

The Après moi, le déluge sources list is a template. Is there a way edits (titles, publication details, page numbers, URLs, etc.) for all the items can be made using VisualEditor rather than Source Editor?

I'd be happy to know if there's a more appropriate page for this question. Mcljlm (talk) 16:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mcljlm, you can edit links with using Visual Editor by change its name or author. However, you cannot change links as the viewer missing its link by yours because you changed the link. In Source editor, find the links that start with "www.", "https." etc. Do not change the link in both editors without finding yourself on Google. Consult WP:LINK for more. Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 16:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

If you want to add a wikilink, go to the upper center, see these link sign, thats where you add som wikilink. Highlight the words ^{(or anything)}, click the "Link" button and you can select from Wikipedia or external (by inputting the URL). I hope this helps! Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 17:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Shonyx, I think you've entirely misread the initial question - and this response makes very little sense. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@57.140.16.1, thanks in advance. Shalomie 👩🏿‍🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 17:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Mcljlm you should be able to edit the underlying templates in Visual Editor. Click on the Sources section and 'edit' in the top right. For each citation template under the Sources header, you can edit the details of the citation, which should show up once saved. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:15, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mcjlm: Although your English is not very excellent, I believe you are asking how to edit citations. Please refer to Wikipedia:Citation templates and also see Wikipedia:Template Documentation for details on each type of citation template. Because the source editor is more convenient, faster, and doesn't lag when editing citations, it's preferable over the visual editor.

@Shonyx:, you're not really providing a helpful response to the query, as the IP suggested above. The user wants to know how to edit the citations in the sources section. 20 upper (talk) 17:16, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I asked about using VisualEditor since earlier today I tried for over an hour to change a title and add an Internet Archive link using Source editor but access-date=, |via= and |url= as well as the URL kept appearing in the preview. A few hours ago I was able to change the URL but was able to substitute one for the other in the box using VisualEditor.

BTW "not very excellent" doesn't sound idiomatic to me. English is my mother tongue. Mcljlm (talk) 20:09, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Page history

Generally when I clicked on a revision history on a page (e.g. [24]), I would get to see the changes made and what the whole page looked like after the changes (so [25] + [26]) - now I only get to see what changes were made to the page, and not what the page looked like after the changes, when clicking on a revision history. Any idea of how to fix this? BeanieFan11 (talk) 22:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

It is a bug. There is some discussion happening at VPT. I am working on a bug report over on Phabricator as well. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 22:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

can I use information from Wikipedia for my own published texts

Can I use information from Wikipedia for my own texts I intend to publish? Ronnybaraf (talk) 17:52, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ronnybaraf: Welcome to the Teahouse! See Wikipedia:Reusing Wikipedia content. GoingBatty (talk) 18:33, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Reliability of Wikipedia may also be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 22:14, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

hello happy monday + a question

hello everyone! hope you're doing good! where is the good articles link? I have asked this same question on "Any good articles out there?". Thanks! =D Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 21:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jude marrero: Welcome to the Teahouse, and happy Monday! See Wikipedia:Good articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a ton! =D Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 21:28, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The handy shortcut is WP:GA. Cullen328 (talk) 23:03, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

New logo of Deadpool 3 and title confirmed

There is a new logo of Deadpool 3 (an upcoming Matvel Studios movie), upload it please [27]https://www.instagram.com/p/C2-bvyqvFkt/?igsh=MWJsZHZoNnhua3Bwdg== And also, the title is confirmed by the director himself [28]https://people.com/ryan-reynolds-and-hugh-jackman-will-save-the-whole-marvel-universe-with-deadpool-3-says-x-men-director-8553683 152.230.125.226 (talk) 23:06, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

You are welcome to suggest this at the foot of Talk:Deadpool 3. -- Hoary (talk) 02:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse! The People article you mentioned states "Though Vaughn referred to the movie as Deadpool vs. Wolverine, it does not yet have an official title — Marvel's official website still refers to it as Untitled Deadpool Movie." Based on that sentence, I don't think it's reasonable to claim what the official movie title is. GoingBatty (talk) 06:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

I added myself to a Wikipedia article and it became the wrong person.

Hello. I entered myself on a Wikipedia page about Evergreen State College alumni. I put my name in the Music category with some information about myself. It shows up on the page but when I click my name, it links to another person with the same name. I have no idea how to fix this. Notefarmer1 (talk) 03:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

A subsequent edit removed your attempt to add Bob Phillips to the list. Do not try again. People in Notable people or Alumni lists all have existing Wikipedia articles about them, which is why the names show up as blue. If there had not been an existing Bob Phillips who is not you, then what you added would have shown up as red and warranted being reversed. David notMD (talk) 04:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

David notMD, Thank you for your explanation. I couldn't figure out how to remove it. Don't worry, I won't try that again! How was I to know you have to have your own Wiki page to be added to one? I guess you don't get to be recognized unless you already are recognized. That's true in many aspects of life. I actually got to that Wiki entry looking for a drummer who played on my recordings while I was a student there. Notefarmer1 (talk) 05:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Notefarmer1, if Wikipedia did not have that standard, messy, inaccurate alumni lists would totally dominate articles about colleges and universities. Can you imagine how many con artists would just love to be listed as graduates of Oxford, Harvard, Cambridge or Yale? Cullen328 (talk) 07:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

I can understand that. But why was it not mentioned in the process of adding information to a Wikipedia entry? Had I known this policy, I wouldn't have tried to add myself to the list. Notefarmer1 (talk) 09:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Don't worry. That's how Wikipedia works. We all learn by making mistakes and being corrected. No editor is expected to be familiar with all Wikipedia policies, as there are many, but you will find the relevant ones here and here Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for that response. Notefarmer1 (talk) 10:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Redirects related question

I recently came across an article with the name Dave Wiskus while adding the listas parameter to articles from the list of articles missing the listas parameter. I found out later that the article was a redirect to Nebula. Is this a normal thing on Wikipedia? Just curious. Yuthoob (talk) 11:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

@Yuthoob The redirect page explains the situation fairly well. Wiskus was the founder of the streaming service and its CEO, so he is mentioned on the target page. He doesn't meet the notability guidelines for people WP:NBIO but could do so in future, in which case the redirect would become his biography. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

How to check block reason

Hello teahouse members, how do I check the block reason of an IP? My school is range blocked and I would like to know why (vandalism if i were to guess)

98.42.148.45 (talk) 07:00, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The vast majority of rangblocks of school IP addresses are because of vandalism. Cullen328 (talk) 07:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

The edit history of the IP address may give some clues. If vandalism, expect to see many reversions. If copyvio or grossly insulting content, the edits may have been WP:REVDELed and no longer visible. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

If the school IP adress(es) is/are currently blocked and you know the IP, you can use Special:BlockList to find, amongst other things, the block reason for any blocks affecting that IP. Victor Schmidt (talk) 12:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Reporting an administrator / moderator

Hello all.

How am I able to report a moderator / administrator? I am having a particular issue with a user called MrOllie, who is repeatedly reverting edits due to "blatant promotion," despite some edits only being adding an infobox (all the information in which can be found in the existing article, or in the references already cited).

From background research, I can see that they have a prolific history of reverting edits for nonsense reasons, usually having to do with sources (you can find many of these by googling the username).

Thanks in advance. Adeuchar (talk) 13:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, Adeuchar, welcome to the Teahouse. If you have a problem with an administrator, especially if your problem involves regular edits as this does, you can report them to any applicable noticeboard just like you would any other editor, the default usually being WP:Administrators' noticeboard/incidents for acute problems or WP:Administrators' noticeboard for more chronic issues.

If you decide to do this, be sure you read the instructions very carefully (they should appear in a big red box on the editing screen for each page), and be aware that there is no immunity for the original posters on those pages; your behavior can and will be scrutinized as well, and if other editors come to the conclusion that MrOllie's concerns are justified, it may well be you who receives the consequences. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Forgot to ping Adeuchar Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 13:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

This one is the top-to-bottom promotional bad edit. Other edits may have been caught in the crossfire. Or, you are getting reverted because you are directly editing the article instead of making requests on the talkpage as WP:PAID advises. I advise taking the advice. Admins are not going to take your side. MrOllie has not done anything over the line to deserve admin involvement. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Additionally, you appear to be evading a block. So, it's likely this account will be blocked soon too. I advise you go back to the original account and make an unblock request. The article is likely to be protected against editing by all but the most experienced editors, soon. You have no recourse but to follow policies. Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Unique section names

I'm currently trying to reorganise a list article (specifically List of architectural styles) into being sorted by geographic area first and then era underneath it. However, I'm at a bit of a loss as to what I should name the location-independent third-level era section headings (i.e. "Modern day" or "Prehistoric", as opposed to "Medieval period" or "Three Kingdoms era").

MOS:HEADINGS states that for technical reasons, you should always make sure that section names are unique in the entire article to ensure that links to that section from other articles go to the right place. However, it also says that headings should not refer to higher-level headings, which leads into a catch-22: How can I unambiguously refer to the same eras in different geographic areas without referring to the area in question in the section title? Doing so would also be clunky from a readability standpoint. Is there a way around this on the technical level to ensure that the link still goes to the right place?

IrisPersephone (talk) 18:40, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

It’s more important that each heading be unique. If the best way to do that involves using slightly longer heading phrases or having them be somewhat redundant by including some higher-level text, that is okay. Better to avoid actual breakage that interferes in reader usability at the expense of style and linguistics. DMacks (talk) 18:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

That's helpful, thank you. IrisPersephone (talk) 18:49, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@IrisPersephone, fwiw, I don't think "Three Kingdoms" is really "referring to higher level headings" in the spirit of that guideline. -- asilvering (talk) 19:47, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

I gave that one as an example of a "location-dependent" header that wasn't problematic (because it could only refer to one area when taken out-of-context, as opposed to "Modern era" which could refer to anywhere). The issue I was having was that I couldn't refer to all eras using descriptive titles like that, leaving me unsure what to call the rest without breaking that guideline. However, since it's more important to have unique headers, it's likely best to say something like "Modern Chinese architecture" and accept the fact that wording refers directly to the location heading above. IrisPersephone (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Ah yes sorry, I misread you. Agree that "Modern Chinese architecture" is probably the best fix. You could also use specific years in the instances where that's applicable, but that might look pretty wonky if most of the headings are era names. -- asilvering (talk) 21:35, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

The "way around this on the technical level" would be to add an unambiguously-named {{Anchor}} to each ambiguously-named section, and rely on those for stable linking. The disadvantage of adding hidden infrastructure like that is that editors who want to link to the article with the anchors from another articles may never notice that it exists, and so won't be in a position to make use of it.

- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 14:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Question about Archiving web/news references.

Hey there. I've returned after a month of inactivity and I have a question about "Archived links".

I'm currently updating an airline article that I've started: (Toki Air), and already found some dead links. How do I archive the reference links, as many other notable articles all have web sources that are archived. Any help will be appreciated. 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 02:51, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Midori No Sora, go to the Wayback Machine and feed each link to it. If a link is dead: You're likely to get a set of hits for each of a number of years. If an access date is provided in the WP article for the dead link, start by trying a Wayback scrape that's close to that date. If none is provided, start by trying the earliest scrape. Consider the possibilities that (i) the article lives on at its old address, but now behind a paywall; (ii) the article lives on, but at a new address. With the latter possibility in mind, try googling for the title, etc, of the article. If the link in the WP article is still working, then find the most recent scrape at Wayback and add that. If Wayback has nothing for a page that's accessible via a working link, then get yourself a user ID for archive.org (if you don't already have one), log in, and ask Wayback to archive that page. (It will usually do this, but won't do so immediately. Read the small print and be patient.) -- Hoary (talk) 08:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

There is also a tool that automates this process: [29]. Ca ^{talk to me!} 12:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you @Hoary and @Ca! 🛧Midori No Sora♪🛪 ( ☁＝☁＝✈) 15:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding International Peace Organization

I am trying to post information about an international peace organization that hosts a Peace Symposium in the spring and a Peace Walk and Peace Expo on September 21 (International Day of Peace). The organization qualifies for inclusion on a page that lists peace prizes given by organizations, List of peace prizes and peace organizations. I have news articles to support these events. I would appreciate some guidance on how to proceed. JasonMIIPH (talk) 15:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

@JasonMIIPH All the organizations in that list have existing full articles in Wikipedia (i.e. are bluelinks). That is the requirement for inclusion, hence you would first have to draft an acceptable article about the new organization, showing how it meets the WIkipedia definition of notability. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

.... and your userpage is not a place to draft such a description of the organization which you seem to be associated with. See WP:COI and WP:PAID. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Jason and welcome to the Teahouse.

The combination of your user name and your wording in the paragraph above read to me as saying "I represent MIIPH and I am trying to use Wikipedia to promote it". I realise that that is probably not what you think you are doing, but that is how it comes across.

I see that your user page appears to be a misplaced attempt to write an article (your user page should be primarily about you as a Wikipedia editor: a limited amount of information about you outside your Wikipedia work is permitted, but a promotional piece about an organisation is not. See WP:UP

I also see that you were asked a year ago to clarify your relationship with MIIPH, but you have not done so. If you are not connected with it, then say so; but if you are, then you need to be aware of what it means to edit with a conflict of interest. If you are in any way employed or paid by the Organization, you must make a formal declaration as a paid editor.

Most list articles in Wikipedia are not lists of items (people, organisations ... ) but lists of Wikipedia articles about such items. WP:WTAF says to write the article first, (and get it accepted into the encyclopaedia) and only then add it to a list article.

Unfortunately, writing an article from scratch is not easy, and it is much harder if you have a conflict of interest (because it is likely to be harder for you to forget everything you know about the subject and write a summary of what the independent sources say).

My advice to new editors who want to do this is always to put it aside, and spend several months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to some of our existing articles - learning in particular about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view and notability. ColinFine (talk) 16:17, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Further, the first source cited on your user page is based on an interview with Jason Dean, coordinator of MIIPH. This means that it is not an independent source, and can be used only in very limited ways - see PRIMARY. In particular, it cannot contribute to establishing that the organization meets Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

If you are Jason Dean, as I guess, then before you do anything else, you must make the mandatory declaration of yourself as a paid editor.

Then, if you wish to pursue this, (and assuming you do not intend to take my advice and learn the craft of editing before you do so) you need to find at least three reliable, independent sources that talk in some depth about the organization (see WP:42), and then, as I said, forget everything you know about the organization, and summarize what those sources say. ColinFine (talk) 16:24, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Addressing repeated rejections of my Wiki submission

Hey there! I submitted a new article for an AI security company that has over 20 citations--largely news publications and scholarly research which are all independent. I am still having trouble getting this approved and would greatly appreciate some expert help on this! Draft:Robust Intelligence Emanton (talk) 22:46, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Emanton. Your draft over-relies on the company's own website and other non-independent sources. An acceptable Wikipedia article about a company needs to be based on summarizing what reliable sources completely independent of the company say about it. Also, your draft is not currently submitted for review. I recommend a re-write first. Cullen328 (talk) 22:59, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Also, your draft has been declined not rejected, and those are very different outcomes. Cullen328 (talk) 23:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hey Cullen, thanks for the helpful feedback. Only a few of the citations link back to the company website, the rest are all publications or research. Do you recommend entirely eliminating citations back to the company website? Thank you! Emanton (talk) 23:02, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Your research papers are linked from arXiv. We discourage links to arXiv because the papers hosted there have not undergone peer review like at a reputible journal. At this point in time, I think it is too soon to determine if your draft is notable enough for an article. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 23:07, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Emanton. Non-independent sources (such as the company's website) can be used in a limited way to support non-controversial factual data such as places and dates - see WP:PRIMARY. Where a source is being used in that way, it's fine. Otherwise, get rid of it, and of any information which is supported only by it.

Note that an article based on an interview or press release is generally not regarded as independent: if it is clear that the writer has done some independent research on the company, then that part of such an article may possibly be used. ColinFine (talk) 23:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)

@Emanton, it's fine to use the company website. The main purpose of citation on Wikipedia is verifiability, and that's definitely a verifiable source. Your trouble is that the AfC reviewers are also looking to see that the topic meets notability guidelines. For you, the relevant guideline is WP:NCORP. That's a pretty tough one to meet. -- asilvering (talk) 17:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Stub Conflict

Hi. I would like to add a comprehensive biography that can be found on wikipedia by simply typing the person's name. The problem is that a Wikipedia stub already exists using that person's name and contains a very narrow and incomplete fact related to that person. When I published the biography, I appended (Engineer) after the person's name, as was instructed in various Wikipedia videos. The result is unsatisfactory in that unless a user appends the suffix "(Engineer}" to the query, only the incomplete and unsatisfactory stub shows up... Is there a way to get rid of the stub so that I can eliminate the suffix from my title? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

You have created an utter mess. See reply to your previous query, earlier today. David notMD (talk) 04:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

People coming to the Teahouse for help are often very aware that they have created an utter mess. Please don't WP:BITE. -- asilvering (talk) 17:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

See #How to do Draft Submission for Review (but before that, #Corrupted reference numbers, and before that, #Sandbox Issue). -- Hoary (talk) 06:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Flightbook, the solution to a poor quality stub article, in particular Serafin Garcia Menocal, is to expand and improve and upgrade the stub. Writing a second article about the same topic is not permitted. Can you imagine how strange it would be if this encyclopedia had three separate biographies of Abraham Lincoln? It simply would not work. Cullen328 (talk) 08:03, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, Cullen328. What you say makes sense.My query was due to some language in the Wikipedia "stubs" definition section that suggested that weak and incomplete stubs could be removed. No offense was intended. Flightbook (talk) 16:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

IMDB Film Title

Hello dear Helpers, I'm just creating a wikipedia article about myself HERBERT FORTHUBER actor. I have problems how to put in my filmography (referred to IMDB). I tried several versions, but non of them seems to work.

Here are two titles as examples: James Bond: Quantum of Solace IMDB-Link: https://pro.imdb.com/title/tt0830515?s=08c6bfac-d0f2-4acc-2419-6f66f56263f4&site_preference=normal

Fifty Fifty https://pro.imdb.com/title/tt27458299?s=42c6bfaf-d163-f3a4-d451-9540cb837b9f&site_preference=normal

It would be great if you could help me. All the best Herbert Forthuber Forthuber (talk) 17:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)

@Forthuber Sorry, I think you're going to want to reconsider. I've left you a message on your talk page. -- asilvering (talk) 17:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)