Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1215
 | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1210 | ← | Archive 1213 | Archive 1214 | Archive 1215 | Archive 1216 | Archive 1217 | → | Archive 1220 |
Jonathan Baldwin Turner
Hi, everyone!! I hope all of you are doing well. I am a descendent of Jonathan Baldwin Turner, whom I believe is a strong advocate of the land grant system for universities and colleges. I have a number of sources that support this very thinking. I really need someone to just redo the paragraph with sources? about Jonathan Baldwin Turner's involvement in the story and impetus of how the concept became law. Besides redoing the paragraph and adding the correct sources for that particular paragraph, I have a few other ideas/thoughts I have for the page. Thank you and so appreciate any help, Creative Lizzie Creative Lizzie (talk) 00:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Creative Lizzie. Since you have a Conflict of interest as a descendent of Jonathan Baldwin Turner, I recommend that you make a formal edit request at Talk: Jonathan Baldwin Turner. Include your sources. Cullen328 (talk) 01:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for your information. I had no idea about the conflict of interest......so appreciate the knowledge! I saw an archived comment on a particular paragraph on JBT that said pretty much what I thought when I read it. Thx again and will follow up with TALK Creative Lizzie (talk) 01:21, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Creative Lizzie, I read that JBT died over a century ago. As a postface to your edit request, you might ask whether other contributors think that your chronological etc distance from JBT would make any COI less than acute and thus would permit you to write in the article directly. -- Hoary (talk) 02:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- HoaryCreative Lizzie (talk) Thank you for this idea! I appreciate the thinking. Jonathan is my 2nd great grandfather. Is there anyone who objects to me writing about him? I could see where you think I have a bias. My thoughts are that 3 men were really a team....Turner, Morrill and Lincoln who envisioned college/universities for the every day person. I am finding a lot of sources for Turner being the visionary and he did exchange letters with Lincoln. Turner also left his teaching position to lobby and promote the land grant system. Creative Lizzie (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Frederick James Eugene Woodbridge
n the article on Frederick James Eugene Woodbridge the following appears:
"They had 4 children, Frederick James Woodbridge, John Woodbridge, Donald Woodbridge, and Helena Woodbridge."
However, the John Woodbridge linked to could not be Frederick's child:
"
John Woodbridge VI (1613–1696) was an English nonconformist, who emigrated to New England. He had positions on both sides of the Atlantic, until 1663, when he settled permanently in New England. Could someone help? Leonard waks (talk) 16:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Leonard waks I've fixed it for you. See this edit ([1]) for how. It's a pretty simple fix that you can do yourself if you spot another problem like that in the future. -- asilvering (talk) 17:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks so much. Leonard waks (talk) 18:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
help editing
I have made changes to an article , and the changes are still pending. how long before the changes get approved?
https://ar.wikipedia.org/wiki/%D9%85%D9%87%D9%86%D8%AF_%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D8%A7%D9%8A%D8%B1?wprov=srpw1_0 Muhannad Al Sayer (talk) 18:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Muhannad Al Sayer: This page is for questions about the English Wikipedia. You need to ask someone on the Arabic Wikipedia, which operates by its own rules and practices. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
new page
Can anyone recommend a service to start new page at wikipedia?
Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:25, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Can you describe what you're looking for? I don't immediately understand but once I do I'd be more than happy to help! Dionysius Millertalk 19:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- thanks
- looking for help to create a page Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sugarpantsjohnson Welcome to the Teahouse. The only way to create a new page is to learn to do it yourself. Anyone offering to make a page about you or your company/band/product is a scammer. You’d be charged thousands for a draft article that won’t meet our notability requirements. Sorry. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sugarpantsjohnson Oh, and you might like to read this recent scam story. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- thank you so much for that nick
- so there aren't any services that are accredited?
- I'm trying to create a page or two for my wife and her company and feeling a tad overwhelmed at the process Sugarpantsjohnson (talk) 19:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, it is generally not acceptable to write an article for yourself, your business, or your family member as that is seen as a "conflict of interest". You can make a general request while making your conflict of interest clear. If you post the company's name and/or website on my Talk Page I can probably help let you know if the company meets Wikipedia's fairly strict requirements for a topic/company/person to get an article. Dionysius Millertalk 20:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Dionysius is in error. Itis not forbidden to try to create and then submit a draft about your wife and/or her company. Your COI (see WP:COI) means that you must declare your connection on your User page. Of greator importance, you cannot create content because you know it to be true. Instead, see WP:42 for an explanation of the nature of references you must have to verify every factual statement. WP:BLP also worth a look. David notMD (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I did say generally. The point is that it's easier with help to make such a decision with help when you have five day's experience. So, @Sugarpantsjohnson I'd recommend reading up on it at the sources kindly provided and asking experienced editors for advice. Dionysius Millertalk 20:52, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Dionysius is in error. Itis not forbidden to try to create and then submit a draft about your wife and/or her company. Your COI (see WP:COI) means that you must declare your connection on your User page. Of greator importance, you cannot create content because you know it to be true. Instead, see WP:42 for an explanation of the nature of references you must have to verify every factual statement. WP:BLP also worth a look. David notMD (talk) 20:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, it is generally not acceptable to write an article for yourself, your business, or your family member as that is seen as a "conflict of interest". You can make a general request while making your conflict of interest clear. If you post the company's name and/or website on my Talk Page I can probably help let you know if the company meets Wikipedia's fairly strict requirements for a topic/company/person to get an article. Dionysius Millertalk 20:02, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sugarpantsjohnson Oh, and you might like to read this recent scam story. Nick Moyes (talk) 19:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
How/who do I report users to?
Special:Contributions/Omarshahkeelmalik
Special:Contributions/Umermalikshahkeel
^It seems those two users above are only here to spam links to some online casino Kasperquickly (talk) 21:22, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Kasperquickly you're looking for WP:AIV. You might also want to enable WP:TWINKLE. This allows you to easily leave talk page warnings for spamming, vandalism, etc. -- asilvering (talk) 21:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I hasten to add - the warnings come first. AIV is the answer to your question as written, but you shouldn't go there right away. The guide linked at WP:AIV will tell you when bad enough is really bad enough. -- asilvering (talk) 21:34, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Authority control
please help me with Authority control databases with this page Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia :
https://id.oclc.org/worldcat/entity/E39QDDVwgGxK4vyYR9RqV6fkkf
Library of Congress authority ID https://id.loc.gov/authorities/names/n2024001790.html
VIAF ID: http://viaf.org/viaf/3630164423041120530007
Open Library ID: https://openlibrary.org/authors/OL9955863A/Aleksandar_Sasha_Trajkovski
and reference abou him:
д-р Александар Саша Трајковски - Македонско Научно Друштво - Битола (mnd-bitola.mk) Shviki (talk) 21:33, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Shviki, authority control doesn't work on draft articles. If the subject has a wikidata item, they will automatically connect once the article is in mainspace (ie, is no longer a draft). It looks like those appear in Aleksandar Sasha Trajkovski (Q109748846) already, so there isn't anything further you need to do. -- asilvering (talk) 21:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you.Will if I press submit, it will no longer be a draft, What else I need to give you as information for he writter _ Shviki (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Shviki no, if you press "resubmit" it will still be a draft, and it will return to the AFC queue for a reviewer to look at. I'll leave a note on the draft for you so that reviewers are aware of the info in wikidata. -- asilvering (talk) 21:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you.Will if I press submit, it will no longer be a draft, What else I need to give you as information for he writter _ Shviki (talk) 21:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Order by first or last name?
I've been using the Greatest Hits Volume One/Two/Three listings recently to find album articles, and the ordering is a bit of a mess at the moment, which I'd like to try and clean up. I've already done so for "Two", where the order was mainly alphabetical by artist's last name. For "One" and "Three", the order is currently mainly by artist's first name, however.
If it were, say, book titles and author names instead, by last name would feel like clearly the way to go. Here, the first/last pattern is only one among several, because of stage names and band names and the like. That muddies the waters, and makes me dislike by first name less than I otherwise would.
The only thing I feel definite about is that the pages ought to agree with each other.
MOS:LISTSORT is no help, and MOS:LISTOFWORKS doesn't quite apply, I think.
Any good precedents? Other thoughts?
- 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 14:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse! I recommend alphabetizing the same way you'd see in a record store: by artist's last name (e.g. Biily Joel would be under "J") or band name (e.g. Flaming Lips would be under "F"). GoingBatty (talk) 14:42, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Weighing in because the asker requested it on my talk page. My personal preference is to alphabetize by the artist name as it would be displayed in an article title if the song/album had its own article, so for individual artists it ends up being by first name. However, I've seen a few discussions about this topic and would say that the overall consensus skews toward sorting by last name, as GoingBatty said. In practice I usually just go with whatever sorting is already in place on the page, as the very small difference isn't worth the effort and possible conflict. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Consistency, no matter which way, would be quite a bit more user-friendly. An unreliably ordered list is a negligible improvement on an unordered list, and even for lists that fit on a single page, the result is that it's likely quicker to type the name into the CTRL+F box than to try and spot it directly. If, as you say, no consensus has materialized, though, I quite agree that there's little to be done. Thanks for the rapid response!
- - 2A02:560:5821:6C00:6C34:7F80:767:BA83 (talk) 20:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- If no one else can come up with any good precedents (I can't, and I'd generally agree with GoingBatty), you might try leaving a comment on the article talk page explaining your proposed edits. If no one gets back to you there within a week to complain, I think you're probably free to fix it up however you'd like without anyone objecting. -- asilvering (talk) 22:01, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Weighing in because the asker requested it on my talk page. My personal preference is to alphabetize by the artist name as it would be displayed in an article title if the song/album had its own article, so for individual artists it ends up being by first name. However, I've seen a few discussions about this topic and would say that the overall consensus skews toward sorting by last name, as GoingBatty said. In practice I usually just go with whatever sorting is already in place on the page, as the very small difference isn't worth the effort and possible conflict. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:44, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello respected, I know that you will help me with the page, and for that i am thankful from the bottom of the heart.
I ask you from the bottom of my soul to help me correct the page for a famous Macedonian doctor and writer. The page has been translated into 7 world languages, there is not only an English version. If you want to help me, I'll send you the page ?
Thank you Shviki (talk) 19:45, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Absolutely, I'd love to help out! You can send over any of the articles and I'll take a look! If you'd like I can just make it or we can collaborate. Dionysius Millertalk 20:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I am grateful, we have not only English version, we made seven languages worldwide for our famous writter.. Help me.<3
- Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia Shviki (talk) 20:15, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Admittedly, I'm not entirely certain that Trajkovski meets the high requirements for an article on English Wikipedia. I wouldn't say I know 100% he doesn't, but reading the Macedonian and Romanian (a language I understand) versions, I'm not confident.
- Two of the four sources are self published, one is a 404 error, and the last is three paragraphs from what appears to be a tabloid and smells paid for. At the very least, I'm not too willing to champion an article I don't see as within English Wikipedia's rules.
- I do encourage you to read some of this site's many guides, rulebooks, etcetera as to make a decision for yourself. I'm obviously not the end-all-be-all, so the decision rests in your best judgement and further requests made for advise and/or help. Dionysius Millertalk 20:46, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I will add that for Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski, what is needed is references that are about him. Referencing his publications does not contribute to establishing his notability for the English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @David notMD, that's not quite true. As a physician, he might be notable under WP:NPROF. As an author, we'd require references about his writings, not necessarily about him. -- asilvering (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Acknowledged. In the existing draft his potential for notability looks to be connected to his poetry. David notMD (talk) 22:09, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @David notMD, that's not quite true. As a physician, he might be notable under WP:NPROF. As an author, we'd require references about his writings, not necessarily about him. -- asilvering (talk) 21:41, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I will add that for Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski, what is needed is references that are about him. Referencing his publications does not contribute to establishing his notability for the English Wikipedia. David notMD (talk) 20:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- This References are not in Macedonian version, he had 7 versions of his page, we have poets with En wiki with only three book. If zou understand Macedonian, PLEASE read above
- д-р Александар Саша Трајковски - Македонско Научно Друштво - Битола (mnd-bitola.mk)
- https://bitolanews.mk/2023/08/29/%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%82-%d0%b0%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%81%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b4%d0%b0%d1%80-%d1%81%d0%b0%d1%88%d0%b0-%d1%82%d1%80%d0%b0%d1%98%d0%ba%d0%be%d0%b2%d1%81%d0%ba%d0%b8-%d0%be%d0%b4/
- https://markukule.mk/%D0%B4%D1%83%D1%88%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D0%BD%D0%B0-%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%88%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D0%BD%D0%B0%D0%B3%D1%80%D0%B0%D0%B4%D0%B0-%D0%B7%D0%B0-%D0%BD/
- https://biznisvesti.mk/nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-nashiot-poet-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
- https://mnd-bitola.mk/%D0%B4-%D1%80-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80-%D1%81%D0%B0%D1%88%D0%B0-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8/
- https://smart.sdk.mk/vesti/lekarot-aleksandar-trajkovski-objavi-dve-knigi-poezija/
- https://netpress.com.mk/lirski-elegii-na-aleksandar-tra-kovski-na-prodavana-vo-prodavnicata-na-kindl/
- https://smart.sdk.mk/vesti/knigata-lirski-elegii-na-poetot-i-doktor-aleksandar-trajkovski-prevedena-na-angliski-jazik/
- https://www.crnobelo.com/novosti/domasni/101678-makedonskiot-poet-i-lekar-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski-e-dobitnik-na-platinesta-plaketa-za-najubava-poezija
- https://novvavilon.medium.com/%D0%B8%D0%B7%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B5-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%BF%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B0%D1%82-%D0%BA%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%B3%D0%B0%D1%82%D0%B0-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D0%BF%D0%BE%D0%B5%D0%B7%D0%B8%D1%98%D0%B0-%D0%B1%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%BA%D0%B0%D0%BD%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%BE-%D1%85%D0%B0%D0%B8%D0%BA%D1%83-%D1%85%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%B8%D0%BA%D0%B8%D1%80%D0%B8-%D0%BE%D0%B4-%D0%B4-%D1%80-%D0%B0%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%BA%D1%81%D0%B0%D0%BD%D0%B4%D0%B0%D1%80-%D1%81-%D1%82%D1%80%D0%B0%D1%98%D0%BA%D0%BE%D0%B2%D1%81%D0%BA%D0%B8-c7923bf4a052
- https://bitolanews.mk/2023/08/29/%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d1%82%d0%be%d1%82-%d0%b0%d0%bb%d0%b5%d0%ba%d1%81%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b4%d0%b0%d1%80-%d1%81%d0%b0%d1%88%d0%b0-%d1%82%d1%80%d0%b0%d1%98%d0%ba%d0%be%d0%b2%d1%81%d0%ba%d0%b8-%d0%be%d0%b4/
- https://bitolanews.mk/2023/06/19/%d0%b0%d0%bd%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%be%d0%bc%d0%b8%d1%98%d0%b0-%d0%bd%d0%b0-%d0%bf%d0%be%d0%b5%d0%b7%d0%b8%d1%98%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%b0-%d1%88%d0%b5%d1%81%d1%82%d0%b0%d1%82%d0%b0-%d0%ba%d0%bd/
- https://www.crnobelo.com/novosti/domasni/99043-nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-makedonskiot-poet-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski
- https://antropol.mk/2023/06/19/anatomija-na-poezijata-shestata-kniga-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
- https://denesen.mk/nova-kniga-poezija-i-nagrada-za-poetot-i-doktor-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
- https://ohridsky.com/tag/d-r-aleksandar-sasha-trajkovski/
- “ДУШАТА НА ЧАРШИЈАТА” – награда за најдобра поетска книга за книгите “Лирски елегии” и “Поеми од Балканот” на поетот Александар Саша Трајковски - Маркукуле (markukule.mk)
- „Лирски елегии” на Александар Трајковски најпродавана во продавницата на „Киндл” | NetPress
- ПОЕТОТ И ЛЕКАР АЛЕКСАНДАР ТРАЈКОВСКИ ЈА ОБЈАВИ ШЕСТАТА КНИГА, „АНАТОМИЈА НА ПОЕЗИЈАТА“ - СМАРТ - СДК МК (sdk.mk)
- News Network : Нова книга и награда за поетот и лекар Александар Саша Трајковски
- Нова книга поезија и награда за поетот и доктор Александар Саша Трајковски (daily.mk)
- https://asantovski.wixsite.com/space-radio/single-post/%D0%BB Shviki (talk) 21:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- All info about him is here Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski - Wikidata Shviki (talk) 21:53, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
@Alalch E.: Thank you from the heart: This is the page Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia Shviki (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Publishing an article
Hi there, I am new here and am wondering if my draft article needs to be reviewed and edited before being publicly published?
If so, is it possible to contact the user reviewing my article to contextualize my standpoint on it? I am concerned about a conflict of interest issue.
Many thanks Annalewis0022 (talk) 21:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Annalewis0022 what draft article are you talking about? I don't see that you've written one...? If you're worried about conflicts of interest, you should go through the process at WP:AFC. If you start your article through WP:WIZARD, it will go through AFC by default. Make sure to read the info at WP:COI if you haven't yet. -- asilvering (talk) 21:37, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have not yet drafted my article on Wikipedia, as I do not want it to be read yet. My concern is my article will be rejected without discussion as to why I suppose. Thank you for the links though! Annalewis0022 (talk) 21:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Your article might be declined through the AFC process, but it will not be rejected without any discussion whatsoever. (We use the word "declined" to mean "you can resubmit this", whereas "rejected" is "do not resubmit this", and is very rarely used.) AFC declines are very common - don't worry about it. Try to take the reviewer's comments into account before resubmitting. If you don't understand them, you can ask the reviewer directly or come back here for more help. -- asilvering (talk) 21:58, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have not yet drafted my article on Wikipedia, as I do not want it to be read yet. My concern is my article will be rejected without discussion as to why I suppose. Thank you for the links though! Annalewis0022 (talk) 21:54, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Annalewis, and welcome to the Teahouse, and to Wikipedia.
- My experience is that when new editors try to plunge straight into the challenging task of creating a new article, they often have a miserable and frustrating experience. Would you build a car as your first engineering project? Or give a public recital one day after beginning to learn a musical instrument?
- I always advise new editors to spend a few months making improvements to existing articles and learning about how Wikipedia works - especially about verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability, before trying it. Then, when they have some understanding of these ideas, they can read your first article and proceed. ColinFine (talk) 23:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Reliable source?
I've just started working on a draft article for Zach Panning and have found extensive sources from two websites that I'm not sure qualify as reliable citable sources. They are https://www.flotrack.org/, and https://citiusmag.com/ I feel strongly that they do qualify - they have staff, function officially within the track world, etc. but I just want to be sure. Wondering what you (all) think. AdmiralAckbar1977 talk contribs 23:16, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- AdmiralAckbar1977, the place to ask is WP:RSN. -- Hoary (talk) 23:26, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
how should i view the critism section?
Should i view it as either endorsing the critiques in question? As showcasing a list of critiques made by diferrent people on the matter discussed? How should i take critisism? 181.1.138.237 (talk) 23:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello. Are you referring to a particular article, or generally? Wikipedia articles summarize what independent reliable sources say about a topic. That something is present in an article should not be taken as an "endorsement" of anything. 331dot (talk) 00:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Help with updating dead name
Hi! I don't manage my Wikipedia artist page or have experience editing. I'm a nonbinary person who changed my first name from Lily to Lucky to better reflect my gender. Was curious if anyone is able to update the name here? A friend was able to change it in the body of the article but not the title.
Thanks in advance. I'm so grateful for any help!
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lily_Benson 2603:8000:D600:3510:4C52:6EEA:5E8:6F5 (talk) 00:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- We'd be happy to. Can you give us any kind of source we can cite for this change? (Not that I think this is likely, but for all we know you're a troll with a vendetta against the article subject or something.) -- asilvering (talk) 00:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
How to do Draft Submission for Review
Hi. I would like to do a draft submission for review, but am concerned by the process steps identified in ChatGPT 3.5. The steps they detail do not exactly coincide with what I am seeing on the Wikipedia user interface. In particular, I am concerned about the MOVE step and whether my document has been marked up correctly to ensure it doesn't get lost in limbo. Is there a straightforward process to do this detailing the exact steps? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 00:14, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I've added the information necessary to be able to submit the draft; this is provided if you use the Article Wizard to create a draft. 331dot (talk) 00:23, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, but can Article Wizard be used if the document for submission was not created using "Article Wizard" and already exists in my Sandbox? If so, how does one find the Article Wizard? Thank you. 24.224.87.173 (talk) 00:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- As I said, I added the information needed to submit the draft to it, you may submit it when ready. If you click the words "article wizard" in my message, it will take you there. You may also access it via Articles for creation. 331dot (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- When I clicked on the Article Wizard link it took me to an introductory Sandbox page, with all of the details that you have to practice and make edits....etc. I have been working in my Sandbox page for over a week. The document is 2 or 3 pages long. What I would appreciate is instructions on how to publish (or move?) this existing document to either the Main Space(?) or some alternate location where the document can be reviewed, if necessary.... Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 02:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't really understand what you are asking- I provided you with the information to submit the draft for review, I placed it at the top and you just need to click the "submit your draft for review!" button on the screen. You apparently figured out how to move it yourself- unless you are experienced in creating articles successfully, this is ill advised. As noted below, you should be working on the existing article. I might suggest that you use the new user tutorial to learn more about what it is that is being looked for. While you might stumble upon a video that accurately describes this, better to get it from the source directly. 331dot (talk) 10:30, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- When you reach the article wizard by clicking the link I provided, it takes you to a screen where you are given the opportunity to practice in your sandbox, or to begin the process of creating a draft by clicking "Next". You should do the latter if you want to move beyond practice. 331dot (talk) 10:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I received a message that my IP address has been blocked, with the reason being "Block Evasion: As before?" I 'm not sure what "before" is being referred to. And it's an interesting reason because I'm not very proficient at any kind of evasion... If just making entries on an unfamiliar user interface and believing guidance from conflicting instructional videos in YouTube constitute evasion, then I am perplexed as to the purpose of a 6 month blockage... Flightbook (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you can edit this page, you are not affected by a block. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Great. Thank you! Flightbook (talk) 22:43, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you can edit this page, you are not affected by a block. 331dot (talk) 22:36, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. I received a message that my IP address has been blocked, with the reason being "Block Evasion: As before?" I 'm not sure what "before" is being referred to. And it's an interesting reason because I'm not very proficient at any kind of evasion... If just making entries on an unfamiliar user interface and believing guidance from conflicting instructional videos in YouTube constitute evasion, then I am perplexed as to the purpose of a 6 month blockage... Flightbook (talk) 17:07, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- When I clicked on the Article Wizard link it took me to an introductory Sandbox page, with all of the details that you have to practice and make edits....etc. I have been working in my Sandbox page for over a week. The document is 2 or 3 pages long. What I would appreciate is instructions on how to publish (or move?) this existing document to either the Main Space(?) or some alternate location where the document can be reviewed, if necessary.... Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 02:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- As I said, I added the information needed to submit the draft to it, you may submit it when ready. If you click the words "article wizard" in my message, it will take you there. You may also access it via Articles for creation. 331dot (talk) 00:39, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, but can Article Wizard be used if the document for submission was not created using "Article Wizard" and already exists in my Sandbox? If so, how does one find the Article Wizard? Thank you. 24.224.87.173 (talk) 00:27, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
You have created an utter mess. First, the article Serafín García Menocal exists. You have created Draft:Serafin Garcia Menocal (Engineer) (and moved it to Mainspace without a review, and it was moved back), when what you should have been doing is editing the existing article. You also created a version of the draft at User:Flightbook/sandbox2 and at User:Flightbook/sandbox3. None of these are properly referenced. See Help:Referencing for beginners for how to embed references in the text so that the software leaves a superscript number there and puts the ref content under References. Once either your Draft or Sandbox content is properly referenced, copy that into the existing article. Once you have done that delete the two Sandbox and tag the unsubmitted draft for deletion by putting Db-author inside of double curly brackets {{ }} at the top. David notMD (talk) 04:19, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for your instruction, David. If I understood correctly, I will ultimately need to edit the prexisting stub on Wiki, rather than creating a second document by the same name. (Once I have corrected the referencing issue in my sandbox.) To add the new content to the existing stub I suspect that I will need to embed the narrow content from the preexisting stub into the broader context biography that I am attempting to create. Is that correct? i.e, It's not just a matter of copying it to the preexisting article since that would not be a readable, contiguous story? Thanks for any clarification. Flightbook (talk) 20:31, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- David, I have Read through the Help:References for beginners you sent me to and tried to practice the editing shown, but I can not seem to get past step 1. The RefToolbar shown in the above link doesn't match what shows up on my screen. My screen does not contain any RefToolbar with the >Advanced >Special characters >Help v Cite command. How do I get to this toolbar? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 22:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Flightbook Are you using Visual Editor instead? Just click the "cite" button in the top toolbar. -- asilvering (talk) 22:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi. Because my previous attempts to use the Source editor did not function as I expected, I am trying to go back to the Visual editor. In the Help:Referencing for beginners it shows a RefToolbar that include the command "Cite". On my window, the toolbar I see has a " " button that I believe inserts a citation.... but causes all of the problems I had before. Can you shed light on what my problem might be?
- Does "inline citation" mean that I have to be in Source mode to see the RefToolbar with the Cite command option? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 22:29, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks asilvering! It looks like the Cite button only appears when I am in the Source editing mode! I missed the box at the top of the page that states "This is a how-to-guide. This page assumes you are in the source editor." Ugh! Flightbook (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I thought that might have been the case. That box is more visible now, so hopefully it won't trip up anyone else. There is a cite button in Visual Editor too - actually, I usually use this one, since the automatic citation in it is faster (imo) than doing it in source editor. -- asilvering (talk) 00:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks asilvering! It looks like the Cite button only appears when I am in the Source editing mode! I missed the box at the top of the page that states "This is a how-to-guide. This page assumes you are in the source editor." Ugh! Flightbook (talk) 22:40, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Flightbook Are you using Visual Editor instead? Just click the "cite" button in the top toolbar. -- asilvering (talk) 22:12, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
Merging draft and article
Hello, I am looking for tips or guidance on comparing and combining an article draft with an article, via merger. The draft is at draft:Barry Gough (businessman) and the article is the same title, Barry Gough (businessman). Have already read up on WP:Merging but have not performed one before. Thank you for any advice. Matthewvetter (talk) 20:11, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Matthewvetter! In that circumstance, I would just copy any useful elements from the draft to the live article, and include in the edit summary something like
Merging in Draft:Barry Gough (businessman)
. Once that is complete, just turn the draft into a redirect by replacing the content of the page with#REDIRECT [[Barry Gough (businessman)]]. Hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Reference naming
Is there a policy on naming references? I assume nothing needlessly offensive but how about things such as deceptively labelling a reference in a style commonly used for books such as AuthorNameYearPageNumber when the source isn't actually a book. I noticed this on one article I was editing and it almost tricked me into thinking it was a reliable source when it wasn't. Traumnovelle (talk) 22:13, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Traumnovelle, if you're asking about the "whatever" within <ref name="whatever">, I see nothing wrong with an author's name, a year, and a page number, if these do in reality correspond to what's being cited. If OTOH it were, say, "NNabokov_New Grove_2001_12_237", suggesting (for some fluff written by some hack for an in-flight magazine) a nonexistent article by Nicolas Nabokov in the New Grove Dictionary of Music and Musicians, I'd strongly object to it. -- Hoary (talk) 22:49, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think Traumnovelle is talking about Sfn style short notes. There is indeed no reason not to use these for everything - Traumnovelle, if I'm correct and you meant short footnotes, I urge you to banish the idea that anything in sfn is a reliable source. It's more often used by more reliable editors, but it isn't any kind of comment on the sources themselves. -- asilvering (talk) 00:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- It wasn't the author's name and there were no pages as the source was a website. I removed the source already because it's unreliable and replaced it with a reliable one but I am wondering about what kind of standard we have for reference naming. I usually cite studies with citer but the reference names are long and complex so I usually shorten to something simple (although not that informative).
- The reference in question that was surreptitious was several years old and I doubt the editor is still active but I'm wondering about it in case I come across it in the future if mislabelling references in a deceptive manner would violate any sort of policy.
- Also to address asilvering, I'm not talking about footnotes. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:27, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think in that case if you were to notice a pattern it would just fall under the general "disruptive editing". You'd want to make sure first that there wasn't some good reason for it that you'd just managed to miss, of course, but I don't have any idea what good reason anyone would have for writing down the wrong author's name. -- asilvering (talk) 00:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'll keep that in mind if I come across it again, thanks. Traumnovelle (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Traumnovelle, Wikipedia policies are few (and near immutable). Wikipedia guidelines are many. Life's too short to keep searching among them. I'd like to recommend WP:DICK, which covers so much -- but I'm disappointed to find that our nervous or sensitive betters have done away with it. Anyway, it's good to hesitate before chastising other editors, let alone calling them dicks, as the history of these somewhat misleading references could be complex. As a ferinstance, editor A cites a page in a book. Later, editor B can't immediately find that book but can immediately find a web page that he or she rightly or wrongly thinks (i) is reliable and (ii) says what the book is cited for saying. Thinking that a web page will be more convenient for readers of the article, and that a reference name is just an arbitrary name -- think of the zillions named ":0"! -- and isn't even visible to the reader of the article, they change the content of the one informative REF tag but leave the name of the REF tags unchanged. As a later editor, I'd be annoyed by this, but I wouldn't call editor B a dick. (I wouldn't even mutter it under my breath. I'd just roll my eyes.) -- Hoary (talk) 00:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Citation and Numbering
Hi. I'm having trouble citing references in my Sandbox in the Source mode. I place the cursor in the location that I wish to reference, and press Cite in the tool menu. I then select the template, fill in the content and Insert press Preview. The document then shows the citation that I've typed in the Reference list, but with no number. In the main text there is also no number or indication that a citation has been made where I had the cursor. Would someone be kind enough to show me what I might be doing wrong? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 01:36, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Flightbook, I see no recent edits by you to anything that might be called a sandbox. After editing, press "Publish changes", and link here to the result of publishing those changes. -- Hoary (talk) 01:56, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Hoary. When I hit publish changes the numbering showed up in both places.... so some progress on that front. A couple of questions... 1) Do I need to erase all of the references that were previously listed below the Reflist to prevent duplication? I suspect this might be the case since I'm reentering everything with Cite and the appropriate template... 2) When you instructed above to "link here," how do I do that? What does it mean to link here? 3) Because I earlier erroneously MOVED my Sandbox to the Active area, when I now select Ssandbox below my name, It tells me it doesn't find me anywhere! To continue my editing I'm having to select User:Flightbook/Sandbox2. But the only way I can get there is to manually enter the above in the Wikipedia Search Box and wait for it to find the content before I can edit it. Thanks for your assistance. Flightbook (talk) 02:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Flightbook: I see this diff [2] for an edit you made after posting this question. The results look fine to me. Please clarify what problems you are seeing RudolfRed (talk) 02:14, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi RudolfRed. The reference entry problem is queried Hoary on appears to be solved. I think I just need to erase all the manual entries I had earlier made below the Reflist so that they don't show up as duplicates in the Reference section. I asked him a couple of additional questions related to accessing my Sandbox page, and what he meant by "linking to here." Thank you for your assistance! Flightbook (talk) 02:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Would it be okay to translate a Scots language page into English?
Since the Scots Language is mutually intelligible with English, would it be appropriate for me, a non-Scots speaker, to translate a page from Scots Wikipedia into English?
The page that I thought I would like to translate is this one. All of the words seem to be cognate with an English equivalent, and the references seem adequate, so it passes that criteria.
Lastly, I would like to clarify that I would of course provide attribution to the original page in the edit summary.
Thanks, Slamforeman (talk) 20:45, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Slamforeman, most likely. If you need to, you can just machine-translate it and copyedit the result. Note that notability must still be established on English Wikipedia, since these are two separate Wikipedias. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:54, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Just a little interjection; avoid machine translations if possible (see WP:MACHINE...many languages require at least a basic understanding by oneself to do a good copyediting in their English version. Lectonar (talk) 14:44, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sungodtemple just to be clear, this is true even though WP:CXT disallows machine translation? I asked here to make sure that guideline does not apply in this circumstance. Slamforeman (talk) 21:01, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's a very short article with four sentences, most of which I can already understand. Common sense tells me it should be okay. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, that’s good to know. Thank you for your advice! Slamforeman (talk) 21:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- If it is common sense and you can find no real problems with it then be bold and WP:IAR! jayhawker6 (talk) 03:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, that’s good to know. Thank you for your advice! Slamforeman (talk) 21:28, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's a very short article with four sentences, most of which I can already understand. Common sense tells me it should be okay. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 21:20, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- Slamforeman, Thank you for your interest in WIkipedia and in translations. You might want to familiarize yourself with this controversy a few years back when an editor who did not speak Scots performed thousands of inaccurate translations creating massive inaccuracies in the Scots Wikipedia.[3], [4]. Given that history, it may be best to proceed with caution, and consider collaborating with other editors who do speak Scots. You might want to reach out to Wikiproject:Scotland for some advice. Netherzone (talk) 21:12, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- I’ve heard about that controversy, and I find it fascinating. I think that what happened there is unlikely to happen here because the controversy was that the user mangled the Scots Wikipedia with false words and incorrect grammar. Since I would be translating from Scots into English I would not be inserting false words into the article, and I try my best on the grammar aspect.
- Of course, should I need to, I will not hesitate to contact Wikiproject Scotland users for advice. But I think in this case, as Sungodtemple points out, the page is much too simple for that to be a worry.
- Cheers, Slamforeman (talk) 21:36, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
- You also have the advantage that several of the sources are in English. :) Netherzone (talk) 21:42, 3 February 2024 (UTC)
Slamforeman, one other thing: per Wikipedia's licensing requirements, translating or copying from other Wikipedia articles is permitted, but you are required to provide attribution to the original authors in the edit summary field and provide a link to the original article. See WP:TFOLWP for a boilerplate example you can copy-modify-paste into the edit summary when you save your English version of the article. Mathglot (talk) 06:10, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have done so; please see The Cundeez article. Thank you for the reminder, though. :) Slamforeman (talk) 06:13, 4 February 2024 (UTC)
Lack of notability on game studio draft.
Hi there,
Not long ago I create a draft article for Hypergryph, known for Arknights, but it got declined due to a lack of notability a couple of weeks later. I have placed a notice on the draft saying that it is "a work in progress open to editing by anyone" while I am still looking for sources. Here is the draft.
What can I do to find notability for my draft?
P.S. Speaking of, I play Arknights :) TriFusion (talk) 03:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think the problem you're running into is that almost all of the sources you are using are press releases or are about the media that Hypergryph has produced, not Hypergryph itself. This exact thing happened with Taiwanese mobile game company Rayark, Inc. Arknights and the various productions of Hypergryph like Prelude to Dawn are probably notable on their own, though the producing company has probably not received enough coverage to merit its own article. Reconrabbit 03:16, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Error
Please someone help me fix error (unknown to me) in my newly created draft- Draft:Kanak Bhawan TheProEditor11 (talk) 17:47, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @TheProEditor11 Welcome to the Teahouse. Could you be specific about what the errors are that you’re seeing? It generally looks ok to me, though some paragraphs need citations to support the stated ‘facts’. Nick Moyes (talk) 18:04, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I cleaned up the error, it was because they included the <reference></reference> code mid draft. @TheProEditor11there is no need for a reference list mid article. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also, section titles needed double =, as in == == which I fixed David notMD (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank-you so much for fixing the error! Really thankful! TheProEditor11 (talk) 03:21, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also, section titles needed double =, as in == == which I fixed David notMD (talk) 18:08, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- I cleaned up the error, it was because they included the <reference></reference> code mid draft. @TheProEditor11there is no need for a reference list mid article. McMatter (talk)/(contrib) 18:06, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @TheProEditor11: Reference #6 doesn't seem to support the sentences in the "History" section. GoingBatty (talk) 18:48, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right. Thank-you for noticing it! I will replace it with better sources! TheProEditor11 (talk) 03:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Creating a page
Hello, Wikipedians! I'm trying to create an article but I don't know how (; - w -). Could someone help me? 8UB3RG1N3 (talk) 01:39, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, 8UB3RG1N3, and welcome to the Teahouse! You'll probably want to create your article as a draft to begin with – to create the page itself you can use the article wizard to do so. I would also recommend reading Help:Your first article, which has some information that may be useful. Perhaps the most important thing to keep in mind while writing your draft is that reviewers will check that the content in the article is supported by reliable sources: it is typically far easier to make sure that the draft is this way by finding the sources you will use first, and starting to write after that, using only the information in those sources – even if you already know a lot about the topic. Tollens (talk) 03:05, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
I've been reading the village stocks...
and I noticed there are certain people who are "editors". Does that mean that only certain people can edit or that certain people have certain permissions to edit certain things? Cdominic8 (talk) 14:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Not exactly problem I know but I'm super new to editing so I don't know what I'm talking about :) Cdominic8 (talk) 15:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Cdominic8, welcome to the Teahouse. "Editor" is a general term for anyone who edits Wikipedia, rather than just reading it, which includes you and me and whole hosts of other folks. There are more specialized terms for those with certain rights or who do certain things - admin, reviewer, template editor, etc. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 15:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes we are all Wikipedians. Lectonar (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- In general, even people who have not created accounts can edit articles. Some articles are semi-protected or protected (a symbol of a lock appears at upper right), which requires an account and a history of editing first. David notMD (talk) 16:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes we are all Wikipedians. Lectonar (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Wiki User: SmartCake
I need help with a biography of a living person Smartcake (talk) 15:05, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Note: this appears to be about the contents of the since-deleted User:Zuleika Lee Castro. Victor Schmidt mobil (talk) 15:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)- The OP has now been blocked from editing, for various reasons. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Any advice for my draft? Should I submit it btw?
I've been creating a draft for the local mosque in my neighborhood (I had doubts about the idea at first but my school encouraged me to do it), but I don't want to submit unless I'm sure it'd get accepted because I don't want to tell my school that I suck at doing this XD. Here's the draft btw: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Al-Qaed_Ibrahim_Mosque Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 15:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Moe the Alexandrian: Welcome to the Teahouse! Did you upload copies of publications to amazonaws.com (which could be a copyright violation), or did you just find them there? (References do not have to be online.) I suggest using additional parameters in your citation templates to make it easier for people to find sources offline, such as
|author=,|publisher=,|year=, and|pages=. Good luck with the draft! GoingBatty (talk) 15:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)- Why thank you for the welcoming! No, I was just looking for sources really that's all, and I found a source, I didn't upload anything really. Also, thanks for the advice! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Alexandrian, and welcome to the Teahouse. Successfully creating an article is challenging, and anybody who thinks that not getting one accepted on the first attempt means the writer "sucks" is somebody whose opinion is worthless.
- It's not clear to me whether you mean your school officially suggested this, and will censure you if you are not successful, or whether you are talking about unofficial attitudes. If it is official, I suggest you look at WP:Education program and show it to anybody else who needs to see it. Otherwise, I suggest you ignore people's opinions, and concentrate on doing the best job you can in contributing to this amazing project.
- I'm not a reviewer, but it looks to me as if your draft should be accepted. It could do with more about the back-story - how the mosque came to be built, who was involved, etc - if you can find it; but I think it is a good start. ColinFine (talk) 16:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello again, and thanks for welcoming me! The school didn't officially suggest this, it was just the headmaster and a few of the workers who expressed delight about my idea, which is why they let me edit on the school computer. But yeah, I still don't want them to think I'm bad or it wouldn't be worth their time to give me the school computer to edit. Thanks a lot for your suggestion, I think I just saw a book on the detailed history of the mosque so yeah I'll be using that. Thanks once again! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 17:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have just accepted your draft which was excellent, well done. Theroadislong (talk) 17:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you kind sir, it is my first page ever. Hoping for much more in the near future, proud to be a wikipedian! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have just accepted your draft which was excellent, well done. Theroadislong (talk) 17:13, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello again, and thanks for welcoming me! The school didn't officially suggest this, it was just the headmaster and a few of the workers who expressed delight about my idea, which is why they let me edit on the school computer. But yeah, I still don't want them to think I'm bad or it wouldn't be worth their time to give me the school computer to edit. Thanks a lot for your suggestion, I think I just saw a book on the detailed history of the mosque so yeah I'll be using that. Thanks once again! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 17:03, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Links| Sources
Hello. I hope you can help me. I have several questions about the links and sources.
- If the article is written in English, and sources I refer to are written in another language, should I translate the text of the references in English?
- In which way I have to form references? What is the best way they look like?
- What information from source should included the text of references?
Lool forward for your reply. Thanks in advance.
Best regards Stephanie Boyko (talk) 18:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Stephanie Boyko: Welcome to the Teahouse! When using a citation template such as {{cite web}}, you can use parameters such as
|language=and|trans-title=to help those of use who don't read non-English languages. Fore more details, pleasse see the template documentation such as Template:Cite web. GoingBatty (talk) 19:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello
Is it a concern that the Whit Haydn article was heavily edited by an account named Whit Haydn? Most of the "Life" section of the article has no sources listed for the information in it. Can I remove the parts that have no sources? Oliver Phile (talk) 17:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Oliver Phile: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per the Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, you may revert unsourced additions by Haydn. Haydn should be submitting edit requests on the talk page instead of adding unsourced content to the article. I have updated {{Notable Wikipedian}} on the article's talk page. GoingBatty (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Ref # 9 includes a United States Social Security number. Is this a violation of Wikipedia rules concerning individual privacy or security? 76.14.122.5 (talk) 03:49, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps not if it's for somebody who, we're told, died 49 years ago. But that's an interesting reference. Do you know what "Source: Death Master File (public domain)" means? I certainly don't. -- Hoary (talk) 04:02, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's not legal nor appropriate for a Wikipedia page to contain the Social Security number of a deceased person. EagleSleuth (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @EagleSleuth: It may not be appropriate, but I am skeptical it's illegal. In some states it's publicly available; for example in Virginia your driver's license number is your social security number. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hoary The death master file is a database of all deaths recorded by the US Social Security Administration. I'm not whether it counts as being in the public domain. Although it is "publicly" available, I believe that it is only provided to people who have a legitimate need to access the data. 76.14.122.5 (talk) 06:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- My brother, who studied policy making, has explained that the Death Master File is indeed a database maintained by the US Social Security Administration, containing records of all deaths. While it may be considered publicly available, access to this database is typically restricted to individuals with a legitimate need for the data, such as government agencies or financial institutions. However, regardless of its accessibility, it's important to consider the privacy implications and ethical considerations of including Social Security numbers, even for deceased individuals, on a public platform like Wikipedia. EagleSleuth (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Well, of course, if your brother said so, Wikipedia would have to accept this as gospel. (Yes, I know sarcasm is the lowest form of wit, but you do realise that the word of an anonymous inexperienced contributor that someone else whose identity we don't know has said that something is a fact will in no way influence what does and doesn't happen here?) Deb (talk) 09:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- My brother, who studied policy making, has explained that the Death Master File is indeed a database maintained by the US Social Security Administration, containing records of all deaths. While it may be considered publicly available, access to this database is typically restricted to individuals with a legitimate need for the data, such as government agencies or financial institutions. However, regardless of its accessibility, it's important to consider the privacy implications and ethical considerations of including Social Security numbers, even for deceased individuals, on a public platform like Wikipedia. EagleSleuth (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's not legal nor appropriate for a Wikipedia page to contain the Social Security number of a deceased person. EagleSleuth (talk) 04:38, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also not sure if it's illegal, but in an article about a living person I would contact oversight about someone's SSN in an article. Could someone explain what the privacy guidelines are for dead people? HansVonStuttgart (talk) 09:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Our stringent policy about Biographies of living people can extend for months or perhaps a year or two after their death, primarily because of the very real potential of poorly referenced content causing harm to family and close friends shortly after a death. So, Toby Keith is covered by the policy, but not someone who died 49 years ago. On the other hand, I see very little need in any but in the most unusual situations to include a Social Security Number or any analogous personally identifying number from any country on this encyclopedia. Even if a person has died, they may have an estate with financial assets that is an ongoing legal entity for the benefit of the person's heirs, and that number if misused may assist criminal activity. This type of data offers no value to our legitimate human readers but may endanger the heirs if the legions of bad actors get their hands on it. Cullen328 (talk) 09:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks to all for your replies. I see that the ref that included the SSN has been removed from the article, although obvs it is still available in the history if someone wanted to go digging for it. (which is unlikely, imo) 76.14.122.5 (talk) 20:09, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
New editor; Help!
I just started editing for wikipedia and i don't know where to start. i'd like to edit or even make articles but i dont know how to find things in my range of knowledge. Rotprince (talk) 20:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Rotprince. Please take a look at Wikipedia:Community portal and Wikipedia:Task Center. Cullen328 (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Rotprince: Welcome to the Teahouse! Creating a new Wikipedia article 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. If you like, you can visit the Wikipedia:Task center to find ways you can contribute. When you have enough editing experience, then visit Help:Your first article for lots of information about creating new articles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 20:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Do Helicopters fall under the aviation category?
Just wondering because they are flying machines and Aviation is a general term, im currently editing 2024 in aviation and woud like to know so my edit doesn't get deleted, im rather new and havent done major edits like this before. Lolzer3000 (talk) 20:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Lolzer3000: See Aviation, or General aviation. Bazza (talk) 20:25, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Bazza 7 Thanks Lolzer3000 (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Lolzer3000, and welcome to the Teahouse. As far as I can see, your edit belongs perfectly well in that article - you've even backed it up with a reference: well done.
- But note that, if somebody disagrees that it fits, and reverts it, that is no reflection on you: that's how Wikipedia works! See WP:BRD.
- If there's another case where you are uncertain whether an edit is appropriate, the best thing to do is to ask first, on the article's talk page - in this case Talk:2024 in aviation. ColinFine (talk) 21:33, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Helicopters are definitely part of aviation. The search helicopter intitle:"in aviation" finds many other mentions in similar articles. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:10, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
How to provide proof of death for subject of wiki article?
Hello,
My father (Gene Merlino) passed away last month, and I edited his article to reflect his death and the date. The changes were rejected due to lack of verifiable information, which makes sense. The note says that only reports of his death in the media will be sufficient, which I don't think will be possible. I can provide a copy of his death certificate, if that will be sufficient.
Thank you, John Merlino Myrddin111 (talk) 00:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Was there a local obituary published in a newspaper or funeral home site that can be used as a reference source? Karenthewriter (talk) 00:18, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Very sorry to hear of your loss, @Myrddin111, and thank you for trying to update the article. In order for readers to be able to verify sources used on Wikipedia, they need to be public. So the only way for us to use a death certificate would be for you to publish it online (ideally from somewhere that proves your identity). As Karen said above, a local obituary (even if published only in print) or information about the funeral would be preferable. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Myrddin111: you have all of our sympathies. I found this blog entry which is an obituary. It may not be a traditional Reliable Source, but under the circumstances I will use it to update the article.--Gronk Oz (talk) 00:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Very sorry to hear of your loss, @Myrddin111, and thank you for trying to update the article. In order for readers to be able to verify sources used on Wikipedia, they need to be public. So the only way for us to use a death certificate would be for you to publish it online (ideally from somewhere that proves your identity). As Karen said above, a local obituary (even if published only in print) or information about the funeral would be preferable. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 00:45, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much! I have requested an obituary page to be dedicated to him on this site, and it should be available shortly. Myrddin111 (talk) 22:50, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Disputed inline template not working?
Greetings.
I have disputed a couple of subjects in an article. One discussion is from years ago; it's the disputation of a commonly repeated factoid that, even if sources suppport it, is unsupported by reality. It was too long as to make a note. Here is the link:
Talk:David_Carradine#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight (link not working here)
More recently, I disputed an assertion in the same article because it is not supported by the source given:
Talk:David_Carradine#Disputed:_Thai_police_suggested,_is_not_supported_by_the_source. (link working here)
The problem is, in both cases, that clicking on the template part "discuss" in the article, leads to the Talk page, but a message appears there saying "The topic could not be found. It could have been moved or deleted." But both posts are actually there, neither moved nor deleted. The recent one is still on the Talk page current page, and the old one is here:
Talk:David_Carradine&oldid=1053759681#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight (link not working here, working in this format:
[[5]])
but different versions of the links in the templates still lead to the same message; even putting the links here with the [[ ]] format is not quite working.
So, anyone can see what is the problem?
Thanks. Maykiwi (talk) 22:26, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Maykiwi! I fixed the second instance. The issue was that the {{Disputed inline}} template only wants the section name, whereas you had the "Talk:David Carradine" in there, creating a duplicate.
- For the first instance, it has been archived to Talk:David_Carradine/Archive_1#Disputed:_Americana's_"people's_prize"_at_the_1981_Directors'_Fortnight with no reply. Your post is extremely long, which I'm guessing is why it didn't get a reply. Try creating a new talk page section stating the issue more concisely. You could also try being bold and just editing the article directly to fix the issue, and then waiting to see if anyone objects.
- Hope that helps! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 23:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
on the border between "proper wording" and fancruft
is the extent to which articles on any given franchise use wording specific to that franchise a concrete guideline, up to consensus within that franchise's boundaries, or somewhere in between?
because from what i've seen, articles on pokémon stick pretty closely to the games' wording (give or take the possibility of a debate on whether pokémon should be labeled fictional characters or species), while articles on jojo's abnormal proceeding are a bit less fixated on that, such as not capitalizing dio's name in the context of his post part 2 counterpart cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 20:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, cogsan. Generally the answer to questions like this is: What do the independent sources on which the article is based say? ColinFine (talk) 21:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- from a quick look, the answer seems to be "follow the ingame wording religiously or you'll die" for pokémon, and "eh, you do you" for dio
- though it still seems consensus has been reached somewhere around here to keep the "io" lowercase, so i'll follow that
- thanks cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:35, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Cogsan: See Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction. I don't know anyhting about jojo. JoJo's Bizarre Adventure#Plot says: Part 3 ... Dio Brando (now referred to as only "Dio"). Are you saying he is referred to as "dio" at that point? If that's the case then it sounds like an error to claim "Dio" in qoutation marks, but I think it would be confusing if the article generally switched back and forth between "Dio" and "dio" depending on which part it referred to. Many of the 22 mentions aren't even about a specific part. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:47, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- dio, in the context of parts 1 and 2, is referred to as "Dio Brando"
- in part 3 onward, he's referred to as "DIO" (all caps, no last name)
- the difference, and what a "part" is... probably just don't matter, now that i think about it cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:24, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Cogsan: It was changed from (now referred to as "DIO") to (now referred to as only "Dio") in [6]. A Google search says you are right so I have changed it to (now referred to as only "DIO").[7] We often omit all caps from sources per MOS:ALLCAPS and here it would also add confusion so I haven't changed any other mentions. PrimeHunter (talk) 23:30, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Anyone know this quote?
Hello! I was wondering if anyone knew who said, ‘Beware the moment you think yourself wise, for you may have just become a fool.’ I searched Wikiquote and Wikipedia, but nothing turned up.
Also, follow-up question: the Teahouse probably isn’t the best place to be asking something like this, as my question does not concern how to use Wikipedia, but I asked here because I didn’t know where would be the appropriate place. Can someone inform me as to where it is, please?
Thanks, Shadestar474 (talk) 23:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, Shadestar474, please ask this at Wikipedia:Reference desk/Miscellaneous. -- Hoary (talk) 00:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, @Hoary! Shadestar474 (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Using images from te.wikipedia.org
I'm trying to use this image from Telugu version of Wikipedia for Kokkiligadda Rakshana Nidhi article with no success. Is there any way around? Or does it need to be uploaded again? RWILD✉ 23:55, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- No, RWILDONLINE. It's (conventionally) copyright, and thus may not be uploaded to Commons. The subject is alive, and thus "fair use" for the photo's appearance in an article about its subject cannot be claimed, and thus it may not be uploaded to en:Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 00:05, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Welcome to Teahouse! Adding to what @Hoary said, if it was allowed to be used on English Wikipedia, it would have to be re-uploaded via WP:NFCC (Fair Use according to English Wikipedia). It is probably in violation of Telugu Wikipedia Fair Use policies too, but that is beyond our scope here as English Wikipedia editors. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 00:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- And adding to what Shushugah said, WP:NFCC says that among the requirements is "No free equivalent. Non-free content is used only where no free equivalent is available, or could be created, that would serve the same encyclopedic purpose." A free (as in libre, or "free speech") photograph of a living person could be created. Look, RWILDONLINE, this fellow Kokkiligadda Rakshana Nidhi has "served" for a decade, but what, if anything, has he done? What has he proposed, opposed, delayed, improved, accelerated, innovated, etc? The article doesn't even start to hint, so he comes off like a nobody. What he has done is, I'd say, far more important than whether he's plump or slim, full-bearded or clean-shaven, etc. -- Hoary (talk) 00:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Reusing references question
Hi. I need to reuse a reference in a document but need to know the exact keystrokes to use. In the Wikipedia instruction page it says
"Often, you will want to use the same source more than once in an article to support multiple facts. In this case, you can click Named References in the toolbar, and select a previously added source to re-use.
However, when I click Named references in the toolbar, the box is blank. (There is nothing to select). If my cursor is on the location where I want the reused reference to be inserted, what are the keystrokes needed after that? Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 00:51, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Without knowing what article and ref you are referring to I can't be sure, but it is likely that there are no named references in the section (article?) you are attempting to edit. If so you need to add a name to the ref definition you wish to reuse by changing <ref> to <ref name="some name"> . Any further uses of that ref can then be made by simply adding <ref name="some name"/> (note the addition of the "/") without the ref definiton. Meters (talk) 01:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for your guidance. I'm still not sure where the refname definition statement goes in the text, because I don't name anything anywhere in the document... As an example in the following text:
- Gustavo Garcia Menocal was a Representative in Congress from the Province of Matanzas, and Lieutenant Colonel in the Cuban War of independence.[1] His uncle, Mario Garcia Menocal, was the third President of Cuba.
- I would like to reuse reference [1] after the last sentence in the paragraph (word Cuba).( When I copied and pasted from my Sandbox to this box it replaced the real number of the citation with a [1], but I don't think that would change anything for example purposes....) Where does the ref name="some name"/ statement go? Thanks for any guidance. I cant type the exact symbols showed above because it launches a popup trying to create a reference here, Flightbook (talk) 01:58, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
References
- ^ "Cuban Government Matters". The Cuba Review (Cuba Periodicals): 10.
- You have used plain <ref>. Give it a name, e.g. <ref name="govt_matters">. Then you can reuse it, as I showed you (below) how I might reuse <ref name="on_bullshit">. -- Hoary (talk) 02:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you all. Problem solved. Flightbook (talk) 02:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Just type the stuff in. For the first reference: <ref name="on_bullshit">{{cite book | first=Harry | last=Frankfurt | title=On Bullshit |location=Princeton, New Jersey |publisher=[[Princeton University Press]] |date=2005 |isbn=978-0691122946}}</ref>. For any subsequent reference: <ref name="on_bullshit" />. (A wonderful little book, by the way.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Hoary. Ha, ha,,,,Pending feedback from others I'll do the experiment and see what happens! Flightbook (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. That worked!!! Flightbook (talk) 02:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks, Hoary. Ha, ha,,,,Pending feedback from others I'll do the experiment and see what happens! Flightbook (talk) 02:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Terry Collins
When you click on the link for the 2023 Sanford Fleming Award winner, it takes you tu the Mets Manager,not the linguist winner. 50.35.115.201 (talk) 02:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- It appears there is not yet an article for the correct Terry Collins. I changed it to a red link, maybe someone will create one. RudolfRed (talk) 03:00, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
PLEASE, can you help me with the page. Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski – Wikipedia. The page has been translated into 7 world languages, there is not only an English version. This is link for reviewers: subject is Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski (Q109748846) Thank you <3 Shviki (talk) 15:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Shviki: Welcome to the Teahouse! I see you're working on Draft:Aleksandar Saša Trajkovski. Articles on the English Wikipedia should be written based on multiple independent reliable published sources that provide significant coverage of the person or topic. Maybe some of the articles on the other language Wikipedias have references you can reuse in this draft. The "Membership" section should have sources or be removed. For each non-English reference in the draft, you could add
|trans-title=and|language=. Good luck with the draft! GoingBatty (talk) 15:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)- More citations are needed for this page 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 15:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Teahouse Hosts are here to advise, but not to be co-authors. David notMD (talk) 16:04, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- More citations are needed for this page 𝑭𝒊𝒍𝒎𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔𝒔 (talk) 15:59, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
Shviki According to the article editing history you are not the person who created the draft and have not made any edits to the draft other than to submit it to AfC (Declined). You action is unfair to the creating editor, as that person may intend to further improve the draft before submitting it. David notMD (talk) 16:08, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I completely apologize David, I have no wikipedia experience, so I cannot edit the page, I just wanted to help make an article with an English version for our doctor and the greatest modern Macedonian poets. Notice an apology once again. Shviki (talk) 17:07, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Shviki The draft is not locked, so I believe you can edit. My comment was specific about not submitting it. David notMD (talk) 03:50, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Need advice
I am waiting for the reply from a user for weeks, where the user left a messege "replying soon" and haven't made a reply yet. What should I do here. I am not sure if this is the appropriate place for asking about this. Imperial[AFCND] 10:55, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- Please name the article, article talk page or editor talk page involved. David notMD (talk) 12:32, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- This happened at Talk: Lalitaditya Muktapida. Imperial[AFCND] 18:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- While making no comment about the lengthy discussion on that Talk page, I see that you have just now reminded the editors who were participating in the discussion that you felt a reply was still necessary. They both continue to be active editors, so you should hope that they rejoin the fray. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- May I know that if I edit that article, will that be a violation of regulations? Imperial[AFCND] 05:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @ImperialAficionado if they are not responsive, I think it could be a good idea to just write to them on their talk page politely reminding them if they can participate in the ongoing discussion.
- ANLgrad (talk) 00:02, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- May I know that if I edit that article, will that be a violation of regulations? Imperial[AFCND] 05:55, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- While making no comment about the lengthy discussion on that Talk page, I see that you have just now reminded the editors who were participating in the discussion that you felt a reply was still necessary. They both continue to be active editors, so you should hope that they rejoin the fray. David notMD (talk) 19:58, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- This happened at Talk: Lalitaditya Muktapida. Imperial[AFCND] 18:08, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Another question about uploading own work to Wikimedia Commons
I wants to upload some of my work to Wikimedia Commons for knowledge, For Articles.
I have acquired knowledge of How to upload an article to Wikipedia. i don't know how to use CC Licence. So please respond Akhinesh777 (talk) 04:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Akhinesh777: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can go to commons:Special:UploadWizard and follow the prompts. GoingBatty (talk) 04:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Category and subcategory
Hello! Is it okay to have a page in both a category and its parent category? I made a category called Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra under the category Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra. Should I have people who are in it in both? Thank you! Tuxedoed (talk) 22:19, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Tuxedoed: Welcome to the Teahouse! Per WP:CATSPECIFIC, an article would be in Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra or Category:Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra, but not both. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 22:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Tuxedoed, to answer your first, general question: Sometimes. See Wikipedia:Categorization#Non-diffusing_subcategories. Such a category will be so labelled. Thus when you're about to categorize somebody as Category:Finnish women conductors (music), you'll read there, or anyway you should read there, that "This is a non-diffusing subcategory of Category:Finnish conductors (music). It includes Finnish conductors (music) that can also be found in the parent category, or in diffusing subcategories of the parent." And therefore you categorize her as a (gender-irrelevant) Finnish conductor (of music) as well as a female one. -- Hoary (talk) 23:58, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @GoingBatty Thank you so much for the answer and the welcome!!! Tuxedoed (talk) 00:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Tuxedoed, at the top of Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra there is no template pointing out that it is a non-diffusing category. (Compare what you see at Category:Finnish women conductors (music).) -- Hoary (talk) 01:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Hoary! Is there a template for a diffusing category? I think this category is non-diffusing because it's separated into former musicians and current musicians, but it might not be. Tuxedoed (talk) 01:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have never seen such a template. And I have no reason to think that Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra is non-diffusing. -- Hoary (talk) 01:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Hoary! Is there a template for a diffusing category? I think this category is non-diffusing because it's separated into former musicians and current musicians, but it might not be. Tuxedoed (talk) 01:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Tuxedoed, at the top of Category:Former Musicians of the Philadelphia Orchestra there is no template pointing out that it is a non-diffusing category. (Compare what you see at Category:Finnish women conductors (music).) -- Hoary (talk) 01:09, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
How can I create a new article about a filmmaker or actor
How can I create a new article about a filmmaker Shailendra Pandey who is a established Filmmaker, Media Person. I am not able to understand what is wrong in my draft, I gave articles and IMDb link for reference. ShamshanKali (talk) 07:37, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- IMDb is not a relaible source for reference. Only one reference which is also unreliable cannot be used to create article. Find more sources and create article (Articles for creation). Also, check our notability guidelines (criteria) to confirm if the person on whom you are creating article is actually notable or not! Thanks! TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:47, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Request for Assistance with Deleting a Draft
Recently, I created a draft for an article about an Oppenheimer actor which was subsequently declined: Draft:Troy Bronson Actor After reviewing the feedback and considering the best approach to address the issues, I decided to start afresh and created a new draft that better aligns with Wikipedia's guidelines and standards: Draft:Troy Bronson 2024
Given this context, I would like some assistance in deleting the original draft. I believe removing this draft would help avoid confusion and ensure that the focus remains on the improved version!
~~~~ EagleSleuth (talk) 03:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have placed a tag asking for it to be deleted. You can use the tag
{{db-author}}in the future. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 03:44, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- EagleSleuth, there is no article titled Troy Bronson. If there were such an article, about a trombonist, physicist, landscape gardener or whatever of that name, then "Draft:Troy Bronson (actor)" would have been a good title. But as it was, "Draft:Troy Bronson" would have been good. The title "Draft:Troy Bronson Actor" would never be required. If you decide that you don't like a draft that you created, simply delete its content and start afresh. Asking for it to be deleted while you restart elsewhere is a waste of people's time. (And there are no circumstances in which "Draft:Troy Bronson 2024" would be a suitable title.) -- Hoary (talk) 04:12, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is no "Draft:Troy Bronson" anymore because i got help deleting trough live-help, the new one up for review is Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, are you suggesting to change it's title? ~~~~ EagleSleuth (talk) 04:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Do not exist: Draft:Troy Bronson and Draft:Troy Bronson (actor)
- Exist: Draft:Troy Bronson 2024
- Explanation: The existing is indeed about a guy named Troy Bronson from Oppenheimer who happens to be an actor. EagleSleuth (talk) 04:17, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Turns out there already is a Draft:Troy Bronson. But this will probably die of old age (six months) soon. Simplest is just to ignore it: If a reviewer is impressed by Draft:Troy Bronson 2024 they'll be able to rename ("move") it when they promote it. -- Hoary (talk) 05:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up I've been pouring effort into Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, hopefully it doesn't fade. Here's hoping it catches a reviewer's eye for all the right reasons before it gets a chance to 'die of old age.' Appreciate the advice on the renaming process too! EagleSleuth (talk) 05:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- EagleSleuth, drafts only 'die of old age' after they have lain entirely unedited for a continual 6 months. It certainly won't expire while it is awaiting a review after having been submitted for one. Incidentally, you can continue to improve it during the wait, as well as after it has been Accepted or Declined. Do not be disheartened if it is Declined – that just means "needs further improvement" (usually in areas that will be specified). Only if it's Rejected should you give up on it, and I'm sure from a cursory glance that it won't be. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.208.215 (talk) 07:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the heads-up I've been pouring effort into Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, hopefully it doesn't fade. Here's hoping it catches a reviewer's eye for all the right reasons before it gets a chance to 'die of old age.' Appreciate the advice on the renaming process too! EagleSleuth (talk) 05:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Turns out there already is a Draft:Troy Bronson. But this will probably die of old age (six months) soon. Simplest is just to ignore it: If a reviewer is impressed by Draft:Troy Bronson 2024 they'll be able to rename ("move") it when they promote it. -- Hoary (talk) 05:20, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- There is no "Draft:Troy Bronson" anymore because i got help deleting trough live-help, the new one up for review is Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, are you suggesting to change it's title? ~~~~ EagleSleuth (talk) 04:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
I would not be concerned about the existance of Draft:Troy Bronson. It was created in 2022 and the creating editor has done no editing on anything since then. It will be deleted by an Administrator for lack of activity. If your effort succeeds, it can be moved to the name without the 2024 when approved. David notMD (talk) 13:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'd want to suggest that one for speedy deletion because Draft:Troy Bronson is a new one that has been improved and is awaiting approval; nevertheless, I'm not the author. How can I go about doing that? Also, thank you for your support and thorough explanation of the draft process. Your feedback is very welcomed and encourages me to continue improving the post. I look forward to making it better! EagleSleuth (talk) 20:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- EagleSleuth, you can just forget about Draft:Troy Bronson. Your own creation is Draft:Troy Bronson 2024; and, if this oddly titled draft is good enough to be promoted to article status, it will be renamed "Troy Bronson" (sans "2024"). However, your recent removal of the "failed verification" template that GoingBatty very rightly placed within it, your use of an obvious PR puff, and your hagiographic description of Bronson in the draft's talk page all suggest that this draft has little chance of being accepted. -- Hoary (talk) 23:48, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I've just been looking at (deleted) John Gowans Actor. It has some similarities to Draft:Troy Bronson 2024, which might interest one or more among Fram, Deb, and Jimfbleak. -- Hoary (talk) 00:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
I need a help to create article for my online magazine called InfoKosova
Hi there, i am Besnik Emrullahu and i need a help for creating article for my online magazine InfoKosova, i dont want to use this article for advertising or something els, just to have an article on wikipeda. How is this possible. you can contact us on info [at] infokosova [dot] net BesEmr (talk) 10:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- BesEmr Hello and welcome. First, please declare your conflict of interest, see WP:COI for instructions. If you derive an income from your magazine, the Terms of Use require that to be disclosed, see WP:PAID. We won't communicate with you via email- Wikipedia matters should be discussed on Wikipedia for openness and transparency if at all possible.
- Things do not merit articles just because they exist. (that, despite what you say, would be a form of advertising/promotion) Any article about your magazine must summarize what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about it, showing how it meets the special Wikipedia definition of notability. Put another way, we want to know what sources wholly unaffiliated with your magazine say is important/significant/influential about it- we don't want to know what it says is important about itself. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 10:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- i want to find someone to writte article, i dont want to writte article for my magazine, i have many strong sources that mentioned InfoKosova. BesEmr (talk) 10:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, BesEmr. Sources that "mention" InfoKosova are not enough. Are there places where people who have no connection with your or your magazine, and have not been prompted or fed information by you, have chosen to write at length about the magazine, and been published in reliable sources? If the answer is yes, then an article on your magazine is possible, though I doubt whether you will be able to find somebody to write it. If the answer is No, then no article is possible, and you should not spend any more time on this.
- You clearly want there to be an article about your magazine. You have not given us any reason to think that Wikipedia wants an article about your magazine. WIkipedia does not have, or want, articles about everything. ColinFine (talk) 11:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- i want to find someone to writte article–In any case, please do not attempt to hire anyone to write the article for you! Please see Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Scam warning. If anyone wants to write an article for you for money, they're most likely to be scammers. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 11:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- i want to find someone to writte article, i dont want to writte article for my magazine, i have many strong sources that mentioned InfoKosova. BesEmr (talk) 10:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Troubles with publishing an English translation
Hello, I would like to ask for an advice: I would like to publish either an article in English or an English translation of a page/article that I have already published in Slovak. But when I try to create a new article in English, it says I don't have enough credible sources (although they are the same ones that were sufficient for the article in Slovak, and there are no other sources available for the article). And when I try to create an English "translation" of the article, it says that I am not an experienced editor and thus cannot publish such a translation. Could you please give me an advice on how I can publish the article in English or its English translation? I will be very grateful for any advice. Have a nice day. Edu.2022.wiki (talk) 12:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @edu.2022.wiki: you have already asked this at Wikipedia:Help desk § Troubles with publishing English translation; please don't post the same question at more than one venue. ltbdl (talk) 12:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Each language Wikipedia-though connected- is a separate project, with their own editors and policies. What is acceptable on one version is not necessarily acceptable on another; as you have found, the English Wikipedia tends to have stricter standards than others like the Slovak Wikipedia. Whether you do a direct translation or write from scratch, the topic must receive significant coverage in independent reliable sources that can be summarized in an article, showing how the topic meets our definition of notability. If you do not have any more sources, the topic would not merit an article here at this time- even if it is considered acceptable on the Slovak Wikipedia. 331dot (talk) 12:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Any help?
Any help? use this section! Shalomie 👩🏿🦱 (she/her/hers) •~Talk~• •Contribs• 16:19, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello Shalomie, I am unsure what you are asking. Do you have a question about editing Wikipedia? Please clarify. TypoEater (talk) 16:48, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello Shalomie. What's your question? ColinFine (talk) 16:51, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes! This teahouse is to help other editors but What's your question Shalomie? TheProEditor11 (talk) 12:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Page Rejected
Sir i am Music Artists and I try to make my organisation Wikipedia Page ( RT Pathik) . I have all References like Amazon music Artist page, Spotify Artist Profile many Artist verified Account. Also I have own YouTube channel with same name and it was 31k+ subscribers. Also we have Own Android app on Google Play Store with same name But still my page it's Rejected I provide all links in references RT Pathik (talk) 07:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello and welcome to the Teahouse, RT Pathik. Articles on Wikipedia must meet our notability guidelines. There are a couple ways this can be accomplished, however, for purposes of brevity and ease of explanation it may be best for you to just review WP:MUSICBIO and determine if you or your band meet any of these twelve criteria. Unless you do, it's unlikely your submission will be approved no matter how many YouTube subscribers you have. If this is bad news, I'm sorry to be its bearer. Chetsford (talk) 07:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @RT Pathik: You seem to be under a misconception that Wikipedia can be used as a publicity medium. No, it emphatically cannot.. Bottom line, if you don't meet any of the criteria in WP:MUSICBIO, there cannot be an article about you. If you cannot find reliable independent sources that comply with WP:Golden Rule, there cannot be an article about you. You have made repeated attempts at this, and it is becoming WP:TENDENTIOUS and may lead to your account being blocked because you are evidently not here to build an encyclopedia. If you are interested in Wikipedia, then try to improve other articles rather than write about yourself. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- And now indefinitely blocked. David notMD (talk) 14:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @RT Pathik: You seem to be under a misconception that Wikipedia can be used as a publicity medium. No, it emphatically cannot.. Bottom line, if you don't meet any of the criteria in WP:MUSICBIO, there cannot be an article about you. If you cannot find reliable independent sources that comply with WP:Golden Rule, there cannot be an article about you. You have made repeated attempts at this, and it is becoming WP:TENDENTIOUS and may lead to your account being blocked because you are evidently not here to build an encyclopedia. If you are interested in Wikipedia, then try to improve other articles rather than write about yourself. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
creation
Can we create article here without submitting to AfC (without posting a request)? I am asking because whenever my article is created after submitting it, I get a notification about the creation and the notification also says - "Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer". If yes then HOW? TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @TheProEditor11: Until you get a draft article submitted via AFC and approved for publication, it is a good idea to continue using AFC. You already have a couple of drafts approved, so if you want, create articles but be careful. One good reason to use AFC is that AFC gives you time to make improvements. If you try to create an article directly in article space, without experience, it is almost guaranteed that the article would be deleted.
- Note that I am an administrator and even I occasionally use AFC to get another set of eyes on a draft before publishing it in article space. It helps ensure that what goes into article space is good enough. AFC takes a long time, but there are no deadlines here, so you shouldn't be in a hurry to publish anything. ~Anachronist (talk) 07:31, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- You are right! It is better to use AfC. I just wanted to know if it is possible also.. That's why I asked! I myself have created two articles (by AfC obviously) and I find it better. Only one thing is that it takes time but in both of my cases, It took only 1 day. There was no backlog while I created my 1st article (hence took one day) and in the 2nd one, there were almost 1620 pending submissions (but by luck, it also took 1 day). TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, TheProEditor11. What you may do, given your experience, is to create a Draft, and develop your article in draft, and then move it to mainspace yourself, instead of putting it through AFC. (You'll want to remove the AFC header if there is one, when you do that). ColinFine (talk) 11:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank-you for replying! Yes it is also a good option! TheProEditor11 (talk) 11:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Be aware that direct-to-mainspace articles are subsequently reviewed by New Pages Patrol. Articles may be converted to drafts or nominated for deletion. David notMD (talk) 14:27, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank-you for replying! Yes it is also a good option! TheProEditor11 (talk) 11:29, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, TheProEditor11. What you may do, given your experience, is to create a Draft, and develop your article in draft, and then move it to mainspace yourself, instead of putting it through AFC. (You'll want to remove the AFC header if there is one, when you do that). ColinFine (talk) 11:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- You are right! It is better to use AfC. I just wanted to know if it is possible also.. That's why I asked! I myself have created two articles (by AfC obviously) and I find it better. Only one thing is that it takes time but in both of my cases, It took only 1 day. There was no backlog while I created my 1st article (hence took one day) and in the 2nd one, there were almost 1620 pending submissions (but by luck, it also took 1 day). TheProEditor11 (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Referencing problem.
Hi. I'm the process of editing a document, replacing each incorrectly written citation so that the wiki program knows they are there. Up to now things were going well. The program was renumbering the changes I entered in proper sequence and at the bottom of the page they were showing up correctly below the References line. On attempting to enter citation number 5 (which was the first time a book was being cited, rather than news), the program enters the citation but renumbers it "one," and all previous citations shown in the Reference list disappear. Can anyone tell me what is causing this and how to fix it? (On occasion I have been getting a "Reload" pop-up on my screen that I have been ignoring, since I don't know what that will do...) Thanks. Flightbook (talk) 17:15, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Flightbook. The usual reason for things disappearing from a page on editing is that something before them is not being closed properly, so it's swallowing the rest (as far as the parser is concerned). It's hard to say more without seeing what it is you are doing specifically. ColinFine (talk) 17:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- You appear to be creating two new versions of an article that already exists here Serafín García Menocal]], you can improve that one rather than create a new one. Theroadislong (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, Theroadislong. Sometimes when I ask for help I get multiple responses and suggestions (a great thing!), but I'm not sure if my reply to one is seen by all the others. So I wanted to make sure you saw my reply to the concern that there is another (stub) Biography on the person that I'm writing on. 1) I don't know if any real-time edits I make to the existing stub will be visible to the outside world while I'm still wordsmithing... 2) I haven't figured out how I will merge the much broader biography into the existing stub with the same title. I'm concerned about the granularity. If the finished Biography winds up being 2 pages long it, it would be awkward to have the material in the stub content taking up 1/3 of it. (It is like the hypothetical situation of having a 2 page Biography on Thomas Edison, and having 1 of the 2 pages dedicated to his 4-H club activities....) Flightbook (talk) 18:54, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Colin, That's possibly what's going on. I always like to Preview the changes before publishing and messing something up. Perhaps I need to publish each change before moving to the next one. Theroadislong suggested that I Publish now so that they can see what is going on. I will try that and see what happens. Flightbook (talk) 18:22, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- You appear to be creating two new versions of an article that already exists here Serafín García Menocal]], you can improve that one rather than create a new one. Theroadislong (talk) 17:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Flightbook, I assume that this is about User:Flightbook/sandbox2. I see that you've redone 1..4 as proper references. If you've done anything to citation 5, you haven't saved your change, so I can't see what you did wrong. Maproom (talk) 17:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Wow! Once I hit Publish the whole problem disappeared! Thanks, Everyone! Flightbook (talk) 18:23, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. The problem has disappeared. I am working on Sandbox2, since everything that was in Sandbox was moved and there's nothing there... I don't know how to access or change anything in Draft, but at some point I will need to replace the flawed copy in Draft with the completed Sandbox2 content.
- A bigger challenge later on will be how to merge the much broader biography into the existing stub with the same title. I'm concerned about the granularity aspect... If the Biography winds up being 2 pages long it, it will be awkward to have the stub content taking up 1/3 of it. (It is like the hypothetical situation of having a 2 page Biography on Thomas Edison, and having to include 1 page on his 4-H club activities....) But I guess I will have to deal with that when I'm further down the road. Thank you! Flightbook (talk) 18:34, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Flightbook It is not usually recommended to usurp an article like that, it would have been better to have made incremental changes to Serafín García Menocal. Theroadislong (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think that I will ultimately have to do that once my draft biography is complete. (I'm trying to put together a comprehensive biography in the workbook just so that I (myself) can summarize the big picture of the man's life and present accomplishments that might be important to the reader). It will be a challenge to integrate the broader life-story into the existing stub, but I will give it a try if I get that far... I don't have any intention to usurp a good article. But it does make my effort to convey the big picture more difficult. Flightbook (talk) 19:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Flightbook As you are working on your Sandbox2 to properly reference, continue that. DO NOT bother to copy that content into your draft. Instead, you need to copy the content into the existing article. (And delete your draft.) David notMD (talk) 03:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, David. Sounds like good advice! When I start to work on the existing article, is it necessary to basically retype everything in such the the new text gracefully wraps around and adds to the content that is already there? Or do I copy the entire new text in all at once (as a single document) and then try to fix all of the problems that creates? I suspect that there would be chaos from the overlapping (and conflicting) reference numbers, etc. Thank you. Flightbook (talk) 16:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Flightbook As you are working on your Sandbox2 to properly reference, continue that. DO NOT bother to copy that content into your draft. Instead, you need to copy the content into the existing article. (And delete your draft.) David notMD (talk) 03:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think that I will ultimately have to do that once my draft biography is complete. (I'm trying to put together a comprehensive biography in the workbook just so that I (myself) can summarize the big picture of the man's life and present accomplishments that might be important to the reader). It will be a challenge to integrate the broader life-story into the existing stub, but I will give it a try if I get that far... I don't have any intention to usurp a good article. But it does make my effort to convey the big picture more difficult. Flightbook (talk) 19:31, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Flightbook It is not usually recommended to usurp an article like that, it would have been better to have made incremental changes to Serafín García Menocal. Theroadislong (talk) 18:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
italics in quoted journal article in citation
I want to add a citation from a journal so am using the "cite journal" template. I have:
periodical = Mammalian Species
and that appears in italics. I also have:
title = Lepus arcticus
and that appears in double quotes. That's a genus/species so should be in italics. I thought I read that you should not have something in both quotes & italics. Is that right? Or it ok to have:
title = ''Lepus arcticus''
so it appears in both quotes & italics.
Sunandshade (talk) 07:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Using {{cite journal}} for your citation is the right move; trust the template to do the right thing. The only time I'd add italics to a title is when a title, as given in the journal, was in standard font except for a portion of it that was in italics, for a reason that matches the reasons for italics as given by our WP:Manual of Style. Mathglot (talk) 09:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- The link you gave said to put genus & species in italics, which is as expected. But it didn't address the case where it was also in double quotes. But you say to use italics when italics is in the title which is the case here so I guess you're saying to use italics within the double quotes. Sunandshade (talk) 09:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- You don't add double quotes, the template does. If italics are needed per MOS, then you can add them. Here's an example from the article Academy Awards, where you have parameter
|title=''Parasite'' Makes Oscars History as the First Foreign-Language Film to Win Best Picturein citation Farhi (2020). HTH, Mathglot (talk) 09:26, 8 February 2024 (UTC)- I think we are saying the same thing. I'm adding double quotes since italics are needed. Sunandshade (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Possible terminology problem here: a quotation mark character is the single punctuation character (also called double quote) represented by two small vertical strokes, like "this". You said you were "adding double quotes since italics are needed", but that's not right: one must add two single quote characters before and after text when italics are needed, not double quotes. I think you understood that, but just got the wording wrong, because if we are talking about Best & Henry (1994) at Cecotrope, you did it right. Mathglot (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. I know it's good to use the correct terminology so I appreciate the info. And yes, that's the citation I was asking about. Sunandshade (talk) 17:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Possible terminology problem here: a quotation mark character is the single punctuation character (also called double quote) represented by two small vertical strokes, like "this". You said you were "adding double quotes since italics are needed", but that's not right: one must add two single quote characters before and after text when italics are needed, not double quotes. I think you understood that, but just got the wording wrong, because if we are talking about Best & Henry (1994) at Cecotrope, you did it right. Mathglot (talk) 09:55, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think we are saying the same thing. I'm adding double quotes since italics are needed. Sunandshade (talk) 09:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- You don't add double quotes, the template does. If italics are needed per MOS, then you can add them. Here's an example from the article Academy Awards, where you have parameter
- The link you gave said to put genus & species in italics, which is as expected. But it didn't address the case where it was also in double quotes. But you say to use italics when italics is in the title which is the case here so I guess you're saying to use italics within the double quotes. Sunandshade (talk) 09:21, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Move debate
When I am debating for an article to move, which comment do I reply to? The particular article is this one and I want to participate in the move request debate, but which comment should I reply to? I already made one mistake and had to fix it. WikiHmmmm... (talk) 17:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- You can reply to the first overall user-written comment with your oppose/support stance with an explanation as you see fit.
- For generic debate you can reply to whichever user-written comment which you are making a point in relation to. Dionysius Millertalk 18:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Create reflist in different groups.
Hi, Is it possible to separate the refs related to the sfn format from other refs? For example, here all sources are placed in a reflist (normal references and sfn) and the sourcing was not done in a neat and clean way. How to put sfn at the beginning of the reflist and other references after it? Pereoptic Talk✉️ 10:00, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Pereoptic: Welcome to the Teahouse! You could replace each instance of
<ref>with<ref group="groupname">and then add{{Reflist|group=groupname}}above{{Reflist}}. GoingBatty (talk) 14:32, 7 February 2024 (UTC)- @GoingBatty: Thanks for your help, isn't there another way? In the way you suggested, the volume of the article will be too large. Pereoptic Talk✉️ 17:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Pereoptic: If you want the references in two groups, you need to specify which references are in the first group and which are in the other group. There may be other ways, but they'll be similar. GoingBatty (talk) 20:10, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @GoingBatty: Thanks for your help, isn't there another way? In the way you suggested, the volume of the article will be too large. Pereoptic Talk✉️ 17:39, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Notability for a doctor
Hello, I am new here and want to create a page for this doctor/researcher who really helped me. I was diagnosed HIV positive and she was the first doctor I met and really changed my life. So as a thank you I want to create a page for her. I don't know her personally and I don't think she would recall me at all, and it doesn't matter either. I have edited wikipedia before and added more information for some pages I was interested so I know how it works but never created a page. This article talks about her work https://www.austinchronicle.com/news/2019-11-29/kind-clinic-leader-recognized-for-her-hiv-work/ and this is her google scholar https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C44&q=Cynthia+Brinson&btnG=&oq=Cynthia. Can someone help me understand if she would be notable? If yes, I will try to create draft and submit. Thank you Newhere134 (talk) 19:48, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Newhere134. One of the journal articles she co-authored has been cited over 1000 times and several others have been cited hundreds of times. The Austin Chronicle coverage looks solid to me. Try to find more like that. The shortcut to the relevant notability guideline is WP:ACADEMIC. I suggest you begin a draft. Cullen328 (talk) 20:23, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Newhere134, and welcome to the Teahouse. I'm glad for you that Dr Brinson was able to do so much for you I see that Cullen has looked at the sources and concoudes that she's probably notable in Wikipedia's sense, so it's probably worth going forward.
- But I would like to caution you about your purpose. You say you want to create a page for her as a thank you. That is understandable; but it is not always a good idea. The problem is that once you have created it, neither you nor she will have control over its contents. If, for example, at some time she became involved in a public controversy and uncomplimentary things got published about her, that may get added to the article. Please have a look at an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing before you go any further, ColinFine (talk) 20:56, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Snow White cast
Please, add Emilia Faucher as young Snow White and Alan Tudyk as the Magic Mirror in the cast of the Snow White (2025 film) article. Sources: [8]https://snowwhitemuseum.com/about-the-film/sequels/snow-white-2025-disney-remake/ [9]https://youtube.com/watch?v=jcze6-WBDUE?si=9um51gld2Y60zAzm [10]https://thedisinsider.com/2024/01/17/emilia-faucher-to-play-young-snow-white-in-the-rachel-zegler-led-remake/ 152.230.125.226 (talk) 22:53, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse! If you can't edit the article directly, then the best place to make the request is the article's talk page: Talk:Snow White (2025 film). You could also use the Wikipedia:Edit request wizard if you like. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 23:01, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I already added the request in the talk page, now I hope that someone adds the information in the cast section 170.247.206.227 (talk) 21:03, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
on EXTERMINATION
i'm planning on proposing the deletion of a lot of pokémon-related redirects in a while (read: once i looked around enough articles). some are implausible typos, some might be vandalism, and some are vandalism
is there a way to propose them en masse, as opposed to tagging each one and potentially clogging the page, or manually editing the page to add them? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:52, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Cogsan! I'm not immediately seeing an easy way to do that at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion. I'd ask at the talk page of that project, where editors are more likely to be able to help.
- Also, mass nominations in general aren't something to do when you're just wading into an area — have you familiarized yourself with RfD's guiding principles and participated in some other discussions there? {{u|Sdkb}} talk 21:49, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- to be fair, i'm about to wade into the rfd scene
- i'm already... more than a little familiar with pokémon articles
- for now, i asked about it there
- thanks cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 22:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Main namespace sandbox
Hello, I have noticed that some templates don't work on the main namespace. Can there be a "fake" main namespace page dedicated specifically to sandboxes? 2003 LN6 14:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @2003 LN6: the current tech is not suited for this. ltbdl (talk) 14:16, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @2003 LN6: Welcome to the Teahouse! What's an example of a template that wouldn't work at Wikipedia:Sandbox? Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 15:40, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @User:GoingBatty I've heard that userboxes and other templates like CSDs don't work in the main namespace. 2003 LN6 16:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @2003 LN6: A userbox would work in your user sandbox (e.g. User:2003 LN6/sandbox). Maybe a better question is: What do you want to test in a sandbox that isn't working for you, and where did you perform your test? GoingBatty (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @User:GoingBatty: I wanted to test out CSDs and some of them like G1 and G2 did not work in the Wikipedia or User namespaces. 2003 LN6 22:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @2003 LN6: CSD templates absolutely work in the Wikipedia namespace. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 22:18, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @User:GoingBatty: I wanted to test out CSDs and some of them like G1 and G2 did not work in the Wikipedia or User namespaces. 2003 LN6 22:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @2003 LN6: A userbox would work in your user sandbox (e.g. User:2003 LN6/sandbox). Maybe a better question is: What do you want to test in a sandbox that isn't working for you, and where did you perform your test? GoingBatty (talk) 18:54, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @User:GoingBatty I've heard that userboxes and other templates like CSDs don't work in the main namespace. 2003 LN6 16:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Declined Wikipedia Page
My page was declined, can I have some help SparkleOtter (talk) 22:26, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @SparkleOtter! The references you added to the draft article do not appear to be to reliable sources. Please review the reliable sources guideline and the general notability guideline to get a sense of what we're looking for. If such sources do not exist, then there is unfortunately no way to create the article at present. Best, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 22:42, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Archive link behaving weirdly
I was going through the refideas at Talk:She-Ra and the Princesses of Power, and when I attempted to add an archive link for this citation, it didn't seem to work. The archived content appeared normally, then it redirected to this link. This does not seem ideal for readability. This happened with both the previous most recent archiving and my own attempt to archive it. (Also when I attempted to archive it, the banner at the top is green in the archive, as opposed to yellow in the actual article? No idea why.)
This isn't happening with the two oldest archivings ([11] [12]), so in the end it should be fine, but I'd still like to know why this is happening. Is it something about Syfy.com as a domain? If anyone knows, please tell me.
Thanks. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 02:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Can I edit in English Wikipedia?
Hello, my name is Hanoifun. I was a member in Vietnamese Wikipedia before I got banned from a Vietnamese Wikipedia administrator who accused me of sockpuppetry few days ago (even though I am not a sockpuppetry, I was like a noob when I edited Wikipedia page about 2 and 3 years ago) (reason I got banned written in Vietnamese). I think maybe he had some confusions and thought I was a professional sockpuppetry and tried to hide identity before socking. I want to edit in English Wikipedia, in Vietnam topic, add some information and make people know more about Vietnam country and Vietnamese culture. And I also want to prove to Vietnamese Wikipedia that I am not sockpuppetry and at that time, I was a beginner, not good in edit Wikipedia and maybe too childish (like I did spam in some page to buff my contribution, used Google to translate some pages at that time). Can I edit in English wikipedia? Thank you! Hanoifun (talk) 13:01, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun: Bans and blocks (in most cases) only apply to individual projects, and we have no policies which prevent you editing here just because you're blocked elsewhere. Your edits may receive increased scrutiny, and your edits on other wikis can be examined for recent misbehaviour - if for example there are indications that any problematic behaviour is likely to occur here. At this time I see nothing to say you should be blocked and can't edit here. -- zzuuzz (talk) 13:21, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Zzuuzz Well, I'm so happy that I can edit there! Thanks! Hanoifun (talk) 13:29, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun Just be aware that the rules on English Wikipedia are not necessarily the same as on other projects, and that we hear our rules and policies are generally much more strict and stringent too. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes Oh, thank you! I know that English Wikipedia is more strict than some other Wikipedia, so I have to learn more and more. Can you tell me some important rules, policies and some faults the beginner can easily have (Though I'm old in Vietnamese Wikipedia)? Regards! Hanoifun (talk) 08:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun I've added a set of links on your Talk Page that you should find useful. The best way to learn how things work here is to edit in areas you are familiar with and keep an eye on the Teahouse to see what other new users are asking. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:32, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun I suspect en.wiki is fussier on Notability, and our demand for Reliable Sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:56, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes Well, okay, thank you! I often use sources from reputable newspapers to edit (like The Guardian, The New York Times in English and Lao Dong news, Vnexpress News in Vietnamese). But do I have to add sources for all edits? Like when I translate some information in Vietnamese Wikipedia to English or just update the population of a town like some other Wikipedia. Hanoifun (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun You don’t need to cite a source if the statement you’re making is unlikely to be challenged (e.g. “the sky is blue”, but if you’re updating a population of a town then, yes, you should show the source of your information. If you’re translating, either consider leaving out UNVERIFIABLE content, or add a
{{cn}}template at the end. We are a lot fussier these days than we used to be, because we want this encyclopaedia to be high quality, and based solely on reliable published sources. Nick Moyes (talk) 03:19, 8 February 2024 (UTC)- @Nick Moyes Thank you very much! I will try my best to edit Wikipedia, but as a beginner, I may make some mistakes while editing. If you notice any errors, please point them out so that I can correct them. Thanks! Hanoifun (talk) 04:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun You don’t need to cite a source if the statement you’re making is unlikely to be challenged (e.g. “the sky is blue”, but if you’re updating a population of a town then, yes, you should show the source of your information. If you’re translating, either consider leaving out UNVERIFIABLE content, or add a
- @Nick Moyes Well, okay, thank you! I often use sources from reputable newspapers to edit (like The Guardian, The New York Times in English and Lao Dong news, Vnexpress News in Vietnamese). But do I have to add sources for all edits? Like when I translate some information in Vietnamese Wikipedia to English or just update the population of a town like some other Wikipedia. Hanoifun (talk) 00:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Nick Moyes Oh, thank you! I know that English Wikipedia is more strict than some other Wikipedia, so I have to learn more and more. Can you tell me some important rules, policies and some faults the beginner can easily have (Though I'm old in Vietnamese Wikipedia)? Regards! Hanoifun (talk) 08:35, 6 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun Just be aware that the rules on English Wikipedia are not necessarily the same as on other projects, and that we hear our rules and policies are generally much more strict and stringent too. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:26, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Zzuuzz Well, I'm so happy that I can edit there! Thanks! Hanoifun (talk) 13:29, 5 February 2024 (UTC)
Question about Copyright
I visited the Creative Commons website and received an Licence Text Code and HTML. Do i have to copy these? And. How exactly use CC licence?
I saved the License Text Code in a PDF file, i don't really know how to use CC Licence
I have asked another question earlier about Copyright Akhinesh777 (talk) 04:10, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Akhinesh777: You do not need to copy the license text code into a PDF. Simply go to commons:Special:UploadWizard and follow the prompts, and then choose the appropriate license when prompted to do so. GoingBatty (talk) 04:24, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello @GoingBattyit looks like you're American, hey i really don't know how to use CC licence. I know how to upload to the Wikimedia Commons
- I'm fear of getting blocked here that's why I'm talking about CC licence. it's my own work but if Wikipedia remove this work from Wikimedia Commons for ( Copyright Infringement ) then i will be blocked for sure.
- Thanks for the response, I have talked with my mentor on Wikipedia and he said that he don't know anything related to Copyright that's why I'm asking this multiple times
Akhinesh777 (talk) 06:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Akhinesh777, do you want to upload a photograph or a drawing or similar? If so, then it's normally best to do so as a JPEG or PNG file. (See Allowable file types for a fuller list.) If you want to copyleft something and then to upload it as a PDF file, then is this "something" within the scope of Commons? -- Hoary (talk) 07:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- hello @Hoary Ok i will upload my work to the Wikimedia Commons. I would save the License Text Code in an PDF file if it's important Akhinesh777 (talk) 08:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- It is not important. What is important that you know the name of the license. It will say so usually, e.g Creative Commons Share-Alike, Public-Domain, CC 2.0 SA-ND etc.. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 09:08, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- It has to be your own work, not someone else's. And you may only choose a license from the available options, you may not devise a license having your own terms. tgeorgescu (talk) 18:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- hello @Hoary Ok i will upload my work to the Wikimedia Commons. I would save the License Text Code in an PDF file if it's important Akhinesh777 (talk) 08:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
adding a redirect
I've read the help files about adding redirects but still had some questions. Apparently every redirect needs a new page. I read the new page help article but it seems to discuss when to make a new page (& when not to) but I couldn't see where it talks about how to actually create the new page.
Once I create the page with the name of the redirect (e.g., Bunny), I know it should contain one line, e.g., #REDIRECT [[Rabbit]]. This is an example that has already been created. I will not be creating it.
In this example, I see the Bunny page also has other info, e.g., "Redirect category shell ...". Do I need to add that also? Looks like if I also want to add the plural, I need to create another new page, right?
I also saw this: (2 curly braces) redirect | Cottontail (2 curly braces). Can that be used instead? I said (2 curly braces) so it would not convert so it will show what I typed. This is used in the Rabbit article using "Bunny" as the redirect.
Finally, do I have permission to do this? Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 20:06, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sunandshade: Welcome to the Teahouse! Yes, you may create appropriate redirects, and Help:Redirects details how to do so. {{redirect}} is a template placed on the target page, not the redirect page, and Template:Redirect has more information. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 20:36, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'm understanding redirects a bit more. I created "soft feces" to redirect to "cecotropes". Here's what I used after the REDIRECT line. Double curly braces removed so you can see what I typed. Is that correct?
- Redirect category shell|
- R from alternative name
- R from printworthy
- Also, I wanted to add "cecal" as a redirect to this article, but it's already redirected to the "cecum" article as an adjective. But I want to use it as a redirect as a noun. How can I do that? Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 09:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Article Rama
Re Article Rama 2402:1980:8464:422:0:0:0:1 (talk) 04:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you have a question, then what is the question? -- Hoary (talk) 05:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia has an article about Rama. Shantavira|feed me 09:22, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello!! I have some drafts that I recently created and submitted for review. However, they are taking a longer time than expected to be reviewed. Is there a way to expedite the review process? Also, how can I check for any grammatical mistakes in my articles? Kemilliogolgi (talk) 07:20, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Kemilliogolgi. You can expedite the review process by only submitting well-written and well-referenced drafts about clearly notable topics. A look at all the messages on your talk page indicates that you are submitting drafts with lots of problems. Read all the links on those messages. Cullen328 (talk) 07:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Kemilliogolgi Reviews are conducted in no particular order by volunteers, doing what they can when they can. There isn't a specific way to ensure a speedy review other than doing as Culllen328 advises. 331dot (talk) 09:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Black now, not dark blue
I have no idea where to take this question so I thought I'd try here. Visited links I now see as black and not dark blue (versus light blue for unvisited links). Wow, I don't like that. Anyone know if there's a setting so I can change it back? (I also don't like the orange and blue for diffs but that's not nearly as bad) Masterhatch (talk) 23:20, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Masterhatch: According to the discussion at WP:VPT there was a recent change that caused this on mobile. A ticket is open for the developers to look into it. RudolfRed (talk) 01:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, so it's not just me. Extremely irritating! Please don't fix, if it's not broken... Maresa63 Talk 03:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing me to WP:VPT. Masterhatch (talk) 03:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @GOLDIEM J: there are quite a few editors with similar problem. —usernamekiran (talk) 11:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Non-free image for userboxes
Hi all, I want to know can non-free files used on templates, especially userboxes. I've created {{TGGC member}} and used w:File:Emblem of the Turkish Gendarmerie.png, a non-free emblem in an... userbox and I think it's applicable for illustrate the emblem, after reading its rationale. Is it legal? Kys5g talk! 08:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Kys5g, and welcome to the Teahouse. The answer is, No.
- WP:NFCC item 9 says:
Restrictions on location. Non-free content is allowed only in articles (not disambiguation pages), and only in the article namespace, subject to exemptions
. (The exemptions are not relevant to your question) ColinFine (talk) 10:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Non-free images in userboxes
Can i use non-free images in a userbox? (E.G Album covers) Powder9157 (talk) 21:07, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Powder9157: Welcome to the Teahouse! No, you may not use non-free images in a userbox - see WP:UBCR for details. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:15, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- No, you can't, I've asked the same question and use of it depends on non-free content policy and created
{{TGGC member}}and{{TGGC officer}}, using a non-free emblem on w:File:Emblem of the Turkish Gendarmerie.png and a bot removed the image. Kys5g talk! 11:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- No, you can't, I've asked the same question and use of it depends on non-free content policy and created
Edit summary format of edits made by automated or semiautomated tools such as bots or scripts
Is there any specification of format of an edit summary format of edits made by automated or semiautomated tools such as bots or scripts?
When I filter edits, I can specify whether it was made by a human or a bot. However, I am curious how does Wikipedia know that?
Is there any specific text that the bots leave in the edit summary in order these bot edits are classified as such?
I wanted to be able to classify these edits myself. However, I didn't find any rule such as one similar to other rules (WP:BOTEDITSUMMARY might have been an example) or a specification.
However, I've noticed that automated or semi-automated tools add # character to the edit summary.
Where can I find more information on that requirement (if any) for edit summary format for bots? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 19:29, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: Welcome to the Teahouse! I believe the watchlist marks an edit with (b) to indicate it was made by a bot if the user has a bot flag. There's nothing special about the edit summary that does this. GoingBatty (talk) 19:57, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- My question is that when a bot makes an edit summary, this edit summary is a string. I was interested in the format of this string, in particular whether the # character has any meaning. By displaying as "(b)" that you mentioned Wikipedia somehow already parsed this edit summary to figure out that it was bot. So I was interested to read about the format and the requirements, if you are aware. Thank you for your quick reply! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: There is nothing in the edit summary string that causes the (b) to be displayed in the watchlist. Bot owners should follow Help:Edit summary just as everyone should for manual edits. GoingBatty (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- How does the Wikipedia then distingushes between the bot edits and human edits if there are no differences in the edit summaries left by the bots and left by the humans? Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:39, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- I read that page before writing at the teahouse, but there was no information that I searched. I also checked the page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Edit_summary_legend but also didn't find anything there :-((( Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:43, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: As I wrote above, I believe the watchlist marks an edit with (b) to indicate it was made by a bot if the user has a bot flag. GoingBatty (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- OK, thank you, that makes sense! Thank you for your explanation! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 21:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: Yes, a bold b and bot filters on edit lists are entirely determined by whether the account has been assigned a bot flag by a bureaucrat. Unauthorized bots without the flag are sometimes discovered and blocked. If you want to make your own bot then see Wikipedia:Bot policy. Some bots make an edit summary containing "#" before the name or shortened name of the bot like in [13]. Such edit summaries were coded by the bot operators and I don't know any features which use the "#". Edit summaries are automatically shown in parentheses and my example says "(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5)". That gives a misleading impression that "#IABot (v2.0.9.5)" is added after the edit summary. The bot operator was a little tricky and the edit summary without the surrounding parentheses is actually "Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5".[14] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- Great explanation, thank you! Very helpful! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 22:42, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: Yes, a bold b and bot filters on edit lists are entirely determined by whether the account has been assigned a bot flag by a bureaucrat. Unauthorized bots without the flag are sometimes discovered and blocked. If you want to make your own bot then see Wikipedia:Bot policy. Some bots make an edit summary containing "#" before the name or shortened name of the bot like in [13]. Such edit summaries were coded by the bot operators and I don't know any features which use the "#". Edit summaries are automatically shown in parentheses and my example says "(Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5)". That gives a misleading impression that "#IABot (v2.0.9.5)" is added after the edit summary. The bot operator was a little tricky and the edit summary without the surrounding parentheses is actually "Rescuing 1 sources and tagging 0 as dead.) #IABot (v2.0.9.5".[14] PrimeHunter (talk) 22:40, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- OK, thank you, that makes sense! Thank you for your explanation! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 21:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: As I wrote above, I believe the watchlist marks an edit with (b) to indicate it was made by a bot if the user has a bot flag. GoingBatty (talk) 20:46, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: There is nothing in the edit summary string that causes the (b) to be displayed in the watchlist. Bot owners should follow Help:Edit summary just as everyone should for manual edits. GoingBatty (talk) 20:28, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- My question is that when a bot makes an edit summary, this edit summary is a string. I was interested in the format of this string, in particular whether the # character has any meaning. By displaying as "(b)" that you mentioned Wikipedia somehow already parsed this edit summary to figure out that it was bot. So I was interested to read about the format and the requirements, if you are aware. Thank you for your quick reply! Maxim Masiutin (talk) 20:06, 7 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maxim Masiutin: are you thinking about special:tags? —usernamekiran (talk) 10:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, thank you, I saw that page. Have no idea how to make use of that. Maxim Masiutin (talk) 11:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Hyperlinks
Just noticed that hyperlinks will turn black after being clicked once instead of the usual purple. I don't know if this is to do with Wikipedia or MediaWiki, but I wanted to raise the concern as I feel this could be a counterproductive feature, as it effectively makes hyperlinks invisible after being clicked. GOLDIEM J (talk) 10:52, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @GOLDIEM J: Hi. Everything looks normal to me. What skin/theme are you using? Maybe the settings of your browser changed? Or maybe there's a black hole in the proximity? —usernamekiran (talk) 11:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Usernamekiran: I access Wikipedia using Google Chrome on iOS. I don't know much about settings beyond that, but I certainly haven't changed anything manually. GOLDIEM J (talk) 11:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- This is a known bug on mobile right now and is being worked on. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 12:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
i need your help
i am creating an article on a notable producer who has produced songs for musicians who have a wikipedia page some of this musicians he has produced for are very notable in nigeria what can i do to get this page approved i am been told to site his notability but he is so notable for producing for this music artistes and their songs are on various websites and streaming platforms please help me "Icon240$%" (talk) 01:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Promotional account, already blocked at Wikinews [15]. 2601:19E:4180:6D50:65F5:930C:B0B2:CD63 (talk) 02:02, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Help in verification
Hi, this was my first time dealing with a clarify word issue/template on Wikipedia. Here is my edit: [16]. Please look into it and let me know if I did right or wrong. Thank you in advance 456legendtalk 03:25, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- can someone please help me with this. 456legendtalk 02:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Heyo, 456legend! I'm not familiar with the topic area nor have I reviewed sources, so I can't give you an assessment on your diff's accuracy, but I'd say it certainly clarifies things. If you are wondering whether or not you can remove the maintenance template, I'd say go ahead. So long as you lack a conflict of interest in the topic area and you are reasonably certain the article no longer has the cited issue, you can remove any such template. See WP:WTRMT for further details. At worst someone will disagree with you and revert (which given this article's activity I somewhat doubt), in which case you can either discuss on the talk page or let the revert stand.
—Sirdog (talk) 05:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Heyo, 456legend! I'm not familiar with the topic area nor have I reviewed sources, so I can't give you an assessment on your diff's accuracy, but I'd say it certainly clarifies things. If you are wondering whether or not you can remove the maintenance template, I'd say go ahead. So long as you lack a conflict of interest in the topic area and you are reasonably certain the article no longer has the cited issue, you can remove any such template. See WP:WTRMT for further details. At worst someone will disagree with you and revert (which given this article's activity I somewhat doubt), in which case you can either discuss on the talk page or let the revert stand.
Important Message
i think i did a mistake, i created an new article about the Redmi Note 13 and received an Warning message stating that page will be redirect to List of Redmi products article. Please do not redirect the page i created. It's about a Smartphone and it should be an article rather than being redirected to another article Akhinesh777 (talk) 07:57, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- That warning is for the reviewer. If your article is accepted, they will need to get that redirect deleted before moving it to article namespace. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 08:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- However, while waiting for the draft to be reviewed, Ahkinesh777, I suggest you find some independent sources about it. At present, as far as I can see, it hasn't got a single one. {{UD/WINI}}
- My guess is that it is WP:TOOSOON for an article about this phone, and you should leave it for several months to see if anybody writes a substantial review in a reliable source. Otherwise you are wasting your time. ColinFine (talk) 10:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- So, i let the article abandoned. I would create another article instead of this Akhinesh777 (talk) 13:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
An message for everyone, i did a mistake
Soory, i did a mistake. It's not Vandalism and do not block me i apologize for everything that i did wrongly
I accidentally removed the links in the Redmi Note 12 Article. I thought that article is about Redmi Note 13 Akhinesh777 (talk) 13:49, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Akhinesh777, the nice thing about page history being public is that it's extremely easy to undo mistakes. So no worries, and carry on! Cheers, {{u|Sdkb}} talk 14:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Newspapers.com
Can it be used as a source? GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 11:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @GabrielPenn4223 It's a little like asking if YouTube can be used as a source, but many of the newspapers on it will in general be WP:RS for a lot of stuff. Context matters. Newspapers.com is not the source per se, it's just where you found the sources. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:53, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- WP:PAYWALL may be of interest. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 11:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @GabrielPenn4223 And there's Wikipedia:Newspapers.com for both more specific information about getting free paid access via Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library (once an editor reaches the requirements: 500+ edits, 6+ months editing, 10+ edits in the last month, no active blocks) and how to cite it. One thing of note about Newspapers.com is that, in general I believe, you can use their clippings [17] feature to share content that you may be able to see that otherwise is behind a paywall (like this example: Potatoes) but be aware that requires a newspapers.com account and it leaks your newspapers.com account name; even with that limitation, it's moderately well used on Wikipedia in terms of the number of links in articles. Skynxnex (talk) 15:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also, what is the point of this:[18]? Are you trying to get blocked again? Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 12:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- No this is not vandalism, it's an actual metric-related phrase often used in schools GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 12:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- While King Henry actually didn't die from drinking chocolate milk; It's a metric-related phrase often used in education. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 12:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you say so. Never heard of it, and the article doesn't mention it. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, I've learnt something today:[19] I apologize for my comment. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @GabrielPenn4223, I hope you don't mind:[20]. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 13:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- While King Henry actually didn't die from drinking chocolate milk; It's a metric-related phrase often used in education. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 12:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- No this is not vandalism, it's an actual metric-related phrase often used in schools GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 12:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Help get article approved
Draft: Mohit Joshi, was declined after 3rd edit, please guide me through on how I can get it approved. Tanmay.s.15 (talk) 04:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Tanmay.s.15, at the top, you can see "This submission's references do not show that the subject qualifies for a Wikipedia article—that is, they do not show significant coverage (not just passing mentions) about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject (see the guidelines on the notability of people)." Perhaps part of this is (or parts of it are) difficult to understand. If so, which part(s)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hoary (talk • contribs) 05:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Help me get approval for a biographical article
Draft:Mohit Joshi , This is the 3rd time my article was declined, please guide me through to get it published. Tanmay.s.15 (talk) 15:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Tanmay.s.15 Welcome to Teahouse. On 17th of October and again on 18th of October, reviewers declined the article (with opportunity to improve it) and explained to you that you are not using WP:RELIABLE sources. I see you have made genuine effort to include sources since then. So please submit it again. But remember, WP:TEAHOUSE is not the place to request a fast-track approval. Be bold and submit it for review. ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Why was I rejected for a biographical submission of a person?
https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Draft:Haden_Christian_Yonce&action=edit Yoncehc (talk) 14:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Because your draft is nonsense. I have tagged it for speedy deletion. Theroadislong (talk) 14:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- It's wasn't nonsense, but I have nevertheless deleted it as not being appropriate for Wikipedia. We are not a free webhosting service. Nick Moyes (talk) 15:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Links invisible
Is it just me or are some hyperlinks in articles like this example, suddenly invisible in black with the rest of the normal text instead of the obvious blue? Bzik2324 (talk) 06:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- It may be just you. Or you may have your user preferences to use that color for visited links. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:38, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anachronist so how do I fix it? It was never like that before. Bzik2324 (talk) 06:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Bzik2324: Actually it turns out it isn't just you. See the section above: #Black now, not dark blue. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- See Phabricator:T356928 ~ 🦝 Shushugah (he/him • talk) 15:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Bzik2324: Actually it turns out it isn't just you. See the section above: #Black now, not dark blue. ~Anachronist (talk) 06:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anachronist so how do I fix it? It was never like that before. Bzik2324 (talk) 06:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, teahouse. Today my questions are as follows: 1. Is Wiki-tan public domain? 2. If I were to, per se, draw an image of Wiki-tan cosplaying as Abraham Lincoln and place that image on the Wikipedia page of Abraham Lincoln under the "in popular culture" section, would this be allowed? Should I BEBOLD and do it? Best regards, UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 14:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @UnexpectedSmoreInquisition - please don't actually do that. Pop culture sections attract enough cruft as it is; fan illustrations, unless they're notable in themselves in some way (i.e. they've been covered by reliable sources), would aggravate the problem. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 14:43, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sungodtemple and ip: Thank you both for your takes. I wasn't really planning on going through with the Abraham Lincoln thing (until, perhaps, April Fools day....) Cheers! UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @UnexpectedSmoreInquisition My personal view is that this is a serious encyclopaedia which ought, after 21 years, to have fully come of age and to be seen as acting responsibly for all those who use it. I don't feel any joking or mischief within mainspace is at all appropriate, and should be kept wholly within userpages and behind the scenes admin-type pages (if it has to be anywhere).
- But then I'm an old grump! Nick Moyes (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- We do have guidelines more or less to that effect. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 15:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Understood. I'll try to stay on track and keep the DOFing to a minimum. And I'll try really, really hard to remain serious on April Fools day. No vandalism* (*this kind of stuff) in mainspace. However, I will probably still participate. Have a good day, UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 16:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sungodtemple and ip: Thank you both for your takes. I wasn't really planning on going through with the Abraham Lincoln thing (until, perhaps, April Fools day....) Cheers! UnexpectedSmoreInquisition aka USI (talk) 15:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- UnexpectedSmoreInquisition WP:WIKITAN is likely CC-BY-SA 3.0, since most of Kasuga's drawings of Wikipe-tan are uploaded under that license.
- For #2, I would advise against it (per the comment above). There isn't a popular culture section in the first place. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:44, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Blocked User
Hey there, I was blocked on the basis of suspecsion but I was not a sock. I tried to contest my block but administrators once blocked me did not show interest in unblocking me. I was so disappointed as all my articles probably 100+ I created were deleted. Now that I want to create new articles, I'm afraid they'll waste. What am I supposed to do? AsiaTV45 (talk) 16:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- You're not supposed to create yet another account. 331dot (talk) 16:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- You are supposed to figure out a way to get unblocked. This account will be blocked soon too. Go back to your original account and find a way to get unblocked. Then, the community will listen to what you have to say about your articles. Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
ARchive and auto-archive on my talk page
I was not planning to archive anything on my talk page, but I think it might be a good idea now. It can take a long time to scroll down and read everything now. Can one of you instruct me on how to set up an archive that instantly archives all of what is currently there and then will archive all going forward monthly after that? Iljhgtn (talk) 16:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Iljhgtn - the simplest way is explained at Help:Archiving (plain and simple), or if you want to customise it, please see Help:Archiving a talk page - best wishes - Arjayay (talk) 16:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Closing moves
I want to close the rename request of Talk:Jupiter_(god)#Requested_move_7_February_2024 since they want to close it ASAP but WP:RMCLOSE tells me not to if I ever opened a request (which I made a few RM). So it means that people that have participated in /opened an RM are precluded from closing it? JuniperChill (talk) 15:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @JuniperChill and welcome to the tea house. A couple of points: deciding to close a move request before the 7 day period should normally be done by an editor with existing experience closing RMs. So, I'd leave weighing the participants in the RM to someone else (assuming the participants are the "they" in your question). Secondly, I think you may be misreading WP:RMCLOSE slightly. The bullet points you mention,
You have ever opened a request to move the page
andYou have ever supported or opposed a request to move the page
, are about the page in question for the RM and not just any requested move anywhere. I don't see any place you've edited anything related to Jupiter (god) so I think by the criteria, you'd be uninvolved and "allowed" to close the RM. So, you're able to close it but I'd advice leaving it to another editor (but please pay attention to how it's close to help you learn so in the future you'd feel comfortable closing such requests if you're interested.) Skynxnex (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC)- I chose to withdraw my plan to close the Jupiter move article move before @Skynxnex's comment. Yeah, I misread it thinking that it says "You have ever opened a request to move a page", not "the page" Because I started an RM to move some railway companies to their local name Talk:Swedish Rail Administration to Banverket.
- But yes, it seems unusual for someone with 200 edits to close an RM, let alone one that is not 7 days old. JuniperChill (talk) 17:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- It may be a bit early for you to start closing discussions, @JuniperChill. I would suggest you participate in some of them first, then do a few closes in your mind and see whether they match the actual closes that experienced editors do. Only after you are certain you will get your closes right almost all the time should you start actually performing them.As for your specific question, you are not supposed to close discussions that you maybe biased as to the outcome or if you are likely to be seen as having bias by others. You can not close the RMs that you open or the ones you participate in, but you can close RMs that others have opened and discussed in. If you have never edited that article substantially, nor others articles about Jupiter, nor expressed opinions in previous discussions anywhere about whether articles like it should use "god" or "mythology" or something else in the title, then you are allowed to close that discussion. Hope that's clear. You should read WP:RMCLOSE multiple times and carefully, before you start closing RMs. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Question
Do you have something like it:WP:Lavoro sporco/calcio this here on en wiki? Thank you so much 14 novembre (talk) 17:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Something like what @14 novembre? 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- This 14 novembre (talk) 17:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @14 novembre we have Category:Association football and Category:WikiProject Football. Frietjes (talk) 17:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Frietjes Thank you so much. Is there something where there are requested articles on this topic? 14 novembre (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @14 novembre you could try Wikipedia:Requested articles/Sports/Association football (soccer) or start a thread at WT:WikiProject Football. Frietjes (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Frietjes Thank you so much, that is waht I was looking for. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 17:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @14 novembre you could try Wikipedia:Requested articles/Sports/Association football (soccer) or start a thread at WT:WikiProject Football. Frietjes (talk) 17:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Frietjes Thank you so much. Is there something where there are requested articles on this topic? 14 novembre (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @14 novembre we have Category:Association football and Category:WikiProject Football. Frietjes (talk) 17:23, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- This 14 novembre (talk) 17:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Pages that have multiple wikiprojects on their talk page not in a banner shell
I think when there are multiple "wikiprojects" on a talk page, it is customary to wrap them up in a "banner shell" for ease of viewing etc.? Is there a way to pull a list of any/all pages that have such wikiprojects listed that are not already wrapped in a wpbs? Iljhgtn (talk) 16:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn There are two bots going around doing this. They will likely be done by the end of the year. I would suggest leaving it up to them. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- oh i did not know that. interesting. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn I, on the other hand, am close to breaking point waiting for my watchlist to finally clear. It's as though I am being deliberately targeted. There are seven million articles on Wikipedia and somehow these bots seem to find 100+ from my watchlist every day. Anyway, check out cewbot and qwerfjkl (bot). I think the first one is adding banner shells and the second one is consolidating article ratings. I wanted to complain somewhere but people were already having a fistfight over at WT:BRFA, so I am sucking it up. Hehe, Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry UTBC. Have you tried excluding the tag 'talk banner shell conversion'? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I saw various workarounds suggested at BRFA. I haven't tried any of those. I am just waiting. Maybe I will. At this point, I am more curious just how long the bots manage to keep finding articles on my watchlist. I've only got about 12K pages watched. But, thanks FFF. Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry UTBC. Have you tried excluding the tag 'talk banner shell conversion'? Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 17:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn I, on the other hand, am close to breaking point waiting for my watchlist to finally clear. It's as though I am being deliberately targeted. There are seven million articles on Wikipedia and somehow these bots seem to find 100+ from my watchlist every day. Anyway, check out cewbot and qwerfjkl (bot). I think the first one is adding banner shells and the second one is consolidating article ratings. I wanted to complain somewhere but people were already having a fistfight over at WT:BRFA, so I am sucking it up. Hehe, Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:47, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- oh i did not know that. interesting. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
hi! what's tips you have for new editors?
- D
RSTWolf (talk) 17:10, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @RSTWolf There's a welcome message on your talk page to get you started. For my tips, click on my signature >> Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Citing sources
While citing sources, will that be an issue if I didn't put citations on each and every line? I mean, if a single source covers the entire context for paragraph, a single citation be enough? Imperial[AFCND] 17:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- No 14 novembre (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @ImperialAficionado it is not an issue. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 17:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @ImperialAficionado I am not sure what you got from the exchange above, so I am answering again: All claims you make in an article need to be supported by sources but you don't need inline citations for every sentence. It is perfectly fine to put one citation at the end of the paragraph if it covers everything in the paragraph. When you are making extraordinary claims about living people, it is advisable to put your citations as close to the claim as possible. So, in those cases, it may be necessary to cite the same source multiple times in the same paragraph. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:11, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Gujarat model Hindu fascism and xenophobia is infiltrating Wiki
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1179632059
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1179632059
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Diff/1179632306
curious man123 has been repeatedly editing wikipedia with xenophobic motives for the creolised Indo-Portuguese Damanese people; who are a small minority after Gujarati population has largely displaced them in their home territory: Damaon town and Dio island.
Hindu fascism or Hindu Nazism against minorities is popular particularly in Gujarat because of the 2002_Gujarat_riots and also in Maharashtra because of Hindu Maharashtri supremacists of Shiv Sena. Damaon is a small territory engulfed and surrounded by these two large states and the ideologies of their administrations.
Curious man123 claims that mentioning Indo-Portuguese era names Damaon and Dio is a crime against common usage wiki rules? Is that so? Are minority usages supposed to be suppressed and censored by the "common" or majority usages on wiki? What wiki rules apply to the user and the edits linked above? 2409:4071:6EB0:F388:E0B1:261E:1B88:E18B (talk) 17:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- No idea. 14 novembre (talk) 17:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @14 novembre please don't reply to the posts to say you don't know the answer. Not making the reply at all is much better. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Usedtobecool ok 14 novembre (talk) 18:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 18:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Usedtobecool ok 14 novembre (talk) 18:14, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @14 novembre please don't reply to the posts to say you don't know the answer. Not making the reply at all is much better. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Are you basing your complaint entirely on the reverts they made and the edit summaries they used. They are not being unreasonable, they are just disagreeing with you. You should not jump to conclusions that they are fascist just because they disagree with you. You should contact them on their talk page or start a discussion on the articles' talk page and try to persuade them to your point of view. See WP:BRD for how it works. Just for your information, you may get broader input at WT:INDIA. If it helps, editors by and large on Wikipedia, are not xenophobic or fascist. Anyone who outs themself as such get promptly removed. So, it's best to start with an assumption of good faith. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
IP editor, Teahouse hosts cannot help you with deep seated ethno-nationalist and religious disputes, but I would caution you against using highly charged and accusatory language. Discuss the issues first in a calm and dispassionate way on the talk pages of the relevant articles. If that does not work, there are several forms of dispute resolution available to you. Cullen328 (talk) 18:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Linking translates pages?
Hello!
An article I wrote, Hans Geissel was just published. I also wrote the translated version in the German Wikipedia: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hans_Geissel.
Should the two articles be linked via the language-menu? How can I do that?
The "add language" section seems to be mostly for creating a new translation rather than linking an existing one. Dediggefedde (talk) 15:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Dediggefedde, where is the "add language" section? I was just looking around and I accidentally linked the German and Polish articles to English. So, that's been done. Do you see on the left side bar of the article, under "tools", the link for "wikidata item"? Wikidata is what links all the languages. So, you should edit the Wikidata item to add all the articles in various languages that there are. Also, on the left side bar of the article, at the bottom, under "languages" was the button that lets you search for other articles to link to. It also does the same thing, ie. edit the wikidata item. Feel free to ask again if you don't find those options. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:19, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Usedtobecool Thank you a lot for linking the pages! And thanks for explaining about wikidata.
- My page layout seems to be a bit different. The "tools"-Menu is on the right side. There is also no "languages" on the left sidebar. Instead, the left side has only "Main Menu" and "Contents". At the top on the right side there is a link "2 Languages", which opens a menu telling me "Missing in Français, Boarisch and more" and which has a link to "+ Add languages" where I have a live editor to add a new translation. Dediggefedde (talk) 17:41, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh. I guess you're using the new skin from 2022, which is probably the default. And I guess I never bothered. Anyway, I just switched to 2022, and I can see on the right side, under "Tools", under "General", "wikidata item" and "edit interlanguage links". Do you see those? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ping @Dediggefedde. Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh. I guess you're using the new skin from 2022, which is probably the default. And I guess I never bothered. Anyway, I just switched to 2022, and I can see on the right side, under "Tools", under "General", "wikidata item" and "edit interlanguage links". Do you see those? Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
What kind of citations are appropriate for articles about video games?
Hi! I have some interest in trying to create a draft for a video game I enjoy, but I'm not sure what kind of sources I could use. The original page is in japanese- the game itself does have a translation and a blurb of info with it, but it's on an unofficial translation page, so I don't know if it would be OK. Other posts seem to be on either fandom wikis or tv tropes. Would it even be possible to get enough citations to create an article? Chordcode (talk) 18:55, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- As with everything, @Chordcode, some video games are notable, some aren't. Very high quality articles of substantial sizes have been written about popular video games. So, the question is just how big the game you want to write about is. You can use Japanese sources. But you are right. The kind of sources you have mentioned are not usable. You need to find game reviews from reputable sources, news and magazine articles and such. If it's an old but not very popular game, you need to look for books and technical or sociological papers and such and see whether the game is historically important, whether its themes have been analysed, whether it impacted or influenced other games or gaming culture, whether it had any impact in the society that was discussed. Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:08, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Technical question on Wikipedia
I cannot put a screenshot of what I see for copyright reasons. Thank you so much 14 novembre (talk) 16:29, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- What are you trying to add? Iljhgtn (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I add a lot of book covers and movie/film posters. I could probably help with other things too, if you let me know what it is that you are trying to add and on which page. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Colpo grosso a Berlino 14 novembre (talk) 16:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Do you have the official page from which the movie comes from? I can help upload this for you. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Not the page on wikipedia, but like if it has its own movie page or otherwise. Saves me some time if you can link to that for me. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- https://www.raisport.rai.it/dl/raiSport/media/Colpo-Grosso-a-Berlino-bdb186f1-fbdc-417b-a68c-3047934706a9.html 14 novembre (talk) 16:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yeah so I found that link too, but that does not have the official movie poster listed, it seems to just show the film itself. Do you know where the official movie poster might be linked out to? I made a film page for example for this movie called "No Control", and you can see the movie poster and lots of official info linked here, just as an example. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:37, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- If anything like that exists, and you can help me find it, then I can help upload the image of a non-free file (which is what we do when the image is protected by copyright law). Iljhgtn (talk) 16:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- https://programma.sorrisi.com/rai-sport-colpo-grosso-a-berlino-250156/ 14 novembre (talk) 16:40, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I am still not seeing any official movie poster there that could be used in the infobox of this article. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:41, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- but also, if i search the title on Google and i search images, I can see a black image with the title of the film which is the opening picture. Anyway thanks Very much 14 novembre (talk) 16:42, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Colpo grosso a Berlino is not a movie, but a TV documentary, hence the lack of a "poster". You might be able to take a screen-shot of the title card, but that does not contain much information. - Arjayay (talk) 16:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Arjayay Yes that is what I wanted 14 novembre (talk) 16:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- i only add official movie posters, so i will not be able to help with that since i am not sure what the rules are governing copyright around that then. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Iljhgtn OK. Thanks all the same. Kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 20:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- i only add official movie posters, so i will not be able to help with that since i am not sure what the rules are governing copyright around that then. Iljhgtn (talk) 17:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Arjayay Yes that is what I wanted 14 novembre (talk) 16:51, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Colpo grosso a Berlino is not a movie, but a TV documentary, hence the lack of a "poster". You might be able to take a screen-shot of the title card, but that does not contain much information. - Arjayay (talk) 16:45, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Not the page on wikipedia, but like if it has its own movie page or otherwise. Saves me some time if you can link to that for me. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Do you have the official page from which the movie comes from? I can help upload this for you. Iljhgtn (talk) 16:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
why was my edit removed
my edit was removed Smartfd (talk) 18:54, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- It was vandalism (and, by extension, so is this mock-innocent question). One more, and you'll be blocked from editing. --Floquenbeam (talk) 19:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- oh ok i get it thank you Smartfd (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Smartfd Your first edit appeared to me to be a good faith addition of factual information, but your second was blatant vandalism. The first was reverted for lack of a reference. David notMD (talk) 20:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- oh ok i get it thank you Smartfd (talk) 19:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
First attempt at a citation
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Sniper_(poem) << I've recently tried to add a source for this article since I found the poem online elsewhere. Can someone double-check and look over to make sure I'm doing it right? Also that the source is actually reliable. Thanks! Sock-the-guy (talk) 18:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sock-the-guy, well, the formatting is correct. You need to next add the references section. See WP:REFB. As to what a citation is and is supposed to do, there's work to be done. So, the source appears to be reliable, but I'm mainly going by the domain name. As to the purpose, here's what we can learn from the source:
The Sniper was a poem by WD Cocker. It's found in Poems Scots and English (Brown, Son & Ferguson, 1932)
. So, the citation does one thing: verify that the poem was written by someone called WD Cocker. Our article makes more claims in that paragraph that remain unsourced, so we need more sources that verify those claims. And, the source you cited has information not yet in the article. So, you could add to the article that the poem is in Poems Scots and English (Brown, Son & Ferguson, 1932) using that source. Regards! Usedtobecool ☎️ 19:21, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
COPYRIGHT ISSUE?? The Sniper (poem), article created in 2006, claims the poem was written in 1917, but the recently added reference is to publication in 1932. Is this a copyright issue? David notMD (talk) 20:39, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ah! I don't know haha. Does it? That'd be an awkward first attempt at a citation wouldn't it... Sock-the-guy (talk) 20:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- This says it's from a book called "From the Line" but I need to dig a bit more to find that. https://asls.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/WW1_Poetry_Teaching_Notes.pdf EDIT: Found here? https://asls.org.uk/publications/books/volumes/from_the_line/ Sock-the-guy (talk) 20:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Citing that link is not a violation because it says at the bottom that it was published with permission from the publisher. Given it's library.org.uk, I think we can trust that. As for reproducing the whole poem, Wikipedia articles are not supposed to do that anyway. Free documents belong at wikisource not wikipedia. Usedtobecool ☎️ 21:05, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
How to get started?
Good afternoon,
I am a new editor and I am a bit overwhelmed with the enormous amount of policies on Wikipedia. Is there a one-page summary of them around? I don't want to keep getting warnings on my talk page when I'm here to try to make helpful edits.
Thanks and I look forward to a response so that I can make useful edits here. WizardGamer775 (talk) 21:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @WizardGamer775 welcome to the Teahouse. I might suggest you read through Help:Getting started.
- It can be overwhelming here at first, so take things slowly and listen to any advice or revert rationales you might be given. I see another admin has left some helpful supportive advice for you on your user page. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 22:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Why are some of my edits being removed?
So I'm editing, and a day later, they're removed. Why is this happening? 3.14 (talk) 20:57, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @3.14159265459AAAs: Welcome to the Teahouse! The edit summary for each reversion should let you know why this is happening. For example, go to Jason Voorhees and click "View history", and you'll see your edit was reverted by Bignole because you added "in-universe minutia that doesn't consistently appear, except the hockey mask which is mentioned". However, when looking at the history for Chucky (Child's Play), I see NJZombie did not provide an edit summary as they should have. As part of the normal Wikipedia:BOLD, revert, discuss cycle, feel free to start a discussion on the article's talk page to discuss why you think your edits are beneficial, and invite the person who reverted your edits to discuss their rationale. Hopefully the two of you and others will come to a consensus, and the article will be better for it. Hope this helps, and happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 21:14, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- For one, 3.14159265459AAAs makes significant edits and then marks them as minor, as one of the edit summaries I did leave explains. NJZombie (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I think my edits are only minor, but I only just started 2 weeks ago. I would appreciate it if you helped me understand. 3.14 (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- 3.14159265459AAAs, please read Help:Minor edit. Cullen328 (talk) 00:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Well, I think my edits are only minor, but I only just started 2 weeks ago. I would appreciate it if you helped me understand. 3.14 (talk) 00:06, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- For one, 3.14159265459AAAs makes significant edits and then marks them as minor, as one of the edit summaries I did leave explains. NJZombie (talk) 22:11, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
Discussing: Chucky
Can the person/people who reverted my edit give a explaination, and some ways I can improve?
Chucky (Child's Play) 3.14 (talk) 00:12, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- No need to ask the person who reverted it, 3.14159265459AAAs. The reason's obvious: you provided no reliable source (indeed, no source whatever) for your addition. (Also, a minor point: it had typos -- "alternationg", "regualr" -- suggesting that you were uninterested in getting the addition right.) -- Hoary (talk) 01:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- This seems to be merely a repetition of your previous question, 3.14159265459AAAs. -- Hoary (talk) 01:27, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
Their userpage says that they're an admin, AfC patroller, autopatrolled, New Page Reviewer, rollback, and page mover, but Special:ListUsers doesn't??? 32.220.205.180 (talk) 22:32, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Tollens reported Sksiwiwiwiwoww to AIV. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 22:50, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello IP user! They've been blocked by Bbb23 for disruptive editing. —asparagusus (interaction) sprouts! 01:11, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
on more naming shenanigans
how does renaming or proposing the renaming of images work?
and for the specific case this is about, which is gardevoir (yes, it's exactly what it looks like), is pixiv a good enough source for an image if proper artist permission is gotten and credit is given? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 02:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Cogsan: For renaming files, see WP:FFR. There is a list of nine reasons liked there. If your proposed rename is for one of those reasons, follow the instruction there on how to request a rename.
- For adding a new image, it will need to meet all of the criteria at WP:NFCC, unless it is licensed in a way that allows for reuse for any purpose. I did not see anything in the Pixiv article that mentions how the images are licensed. RudolfRed (talk) 04:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- If people on Pixiv submit their own derivative versions of copyrighted works, then no, permission on Pixiv isn't sufficient, it's still non-free content subject to our rules about non-free content. I could draw Mickey Mouse as he appears in modern times but I would not be able to grant permission to others to publish it because I don't own the copyright to any images of the character. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:09, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi can someone please review this page draft:mynampallyrohit
Hi I have made all the necessary changes after the rejection, can someone please verify and publish the page. I've requested many times and its been 3 weeks already. Nishikanthprabhu (talk) 20:56, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- You have not submitted it for review? Theroadislong (talk) 21:00, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Draft:Mynampally Rohit was indeed resubmitted for review, on 20 January.
- Please see the message at the top:
This may take 6 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,654 pending submissions waiting for review
. ColinFine (talk) 23:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)- It was Declined, not Rejected (which is more final). Teahouse Hosts are here to Advise, but most are not Reviewers. Asking for a Review here will not speed up the process. David notMD (talk) 04:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Page Restore
One Page named Joy e-bike got deleted from Wikipedia couple of days ago. I need to store it. Please help.
OnkarPawar7596 (talk) 06:27, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- OnkarPawar7596, Joy e-bike was deleted as the result of Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Joy e-bike. If you have good reasons why the decision was or is invalid, then read WP:DELREV very carefully. If on the other hand you want to reuse some of the material that was in it, then read WP:RFU very carefully. -- Hoary (talk) 08:10, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
CAD (USD) converts
Is it possible to convert from CAD to USD while keeping both figures, for example, 10 kg (22 lb) in the measurement converter? 20 upper (talk) 09:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @20 upper: yes, but the template is different from the unit converter one; use instead {{To USD}}. HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 09:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Account trouble
I created an account and í was logged out and my password whouldn’t Work. I tried doing password reset but the email whouldn’t work. 136.33.235.64 (talk) 01:33, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- The password reset requires that you previously enabled this feature. It's not on by default. If you can't remember your password and you didn't set it up, your only option is to select a new username. Fabrickator (talk) 01:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I know my password it just whouldn’t work while trying to sign in 136.33.235.64 (talk) 03:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Make sure your caps lock is not on when typing your password. That's a common error. If your password is not working, and the reset feature was not enabled or did not work, we unfortunately can't help you with that, and you will need to create a new account. 331dot (talk) 11:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- I know my password it just whouldn’t work while trying to sign in 136.33.235.64 (talk) 03:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Creating a theme
This doesn't seem like an easy thing to do, but I'm going to ask it anyways.
I run Linux with a custom tiling window manager setup with the Catppuccin Mocha theme. The colors list is available at https://catppuccin.ryanccn.dev/palette; Mocha is the last one, so you'll have to scroll to the very bottom.
Anyways, I've been theming the websites I use the most, and for most of them I have to install an extension. Wikipedia is nice and has theming functionality built in. However, it's also very not nice in that writing CSS for it is confusing because the classes are a big mess.
Ideally, my theme should work with both Vector 2010 and 2022.
Any guidance? —charmquark she/they talk contribs 01:59, 10 February 2024 (UTC) edit: fix signature - looks like I forgot to change my custom signature after I changed by username
- @Charmquark try your luck at WP:VPT maybe? Usedtobecool ☎️ 12:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Account trouble
I have an IP account, and have been consittently blocked. I have created an account, but í got logged out and my password whouldn’t work. When trying to reset, my email won’t work. 136.33.235.64 (talk) 03:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- What does "consittently" mean? Based on the misspellings made in this request, it seems likely that the password or email was misspelled when the account was created. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- You stated this same problem a few hours earlier (see earlier entry) and it was answered there. David notMD (talk) 13:06, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
New
oh hi, guys thanks Sopresa (talk) 10:08, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Sopresa hello! Do you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
References
I am currently in the process of making a new page about a chinese cultivation game. I would like to ask if you are allowed to use references where the reference is written in full chinese, so non english ones.
And if so how to determine what reference is best, considering chinese censorship sometimes and also considering the lack of info about wich chinese sites are better from a journalistic point of view? Drakkar68 (talk) 14:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Drakkar68 non-English references are completely okay per WP:NOENG.
- When considering the reliability of any source, you may want to post on the reliable sources noticeboard. Make sure to also search the archives for past discussions about the source, and check perennial sources. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 14:24, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Please help me improve my article
I got the article Paul Haase which I created from draft to article space but it still does not meet standards it seems because it is covered with tags (which you can't hide). How do I improve it? I don't think there are more sources, I couldn't even find a picture of its subject. Prolete (talk) 05:21, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- A picture of Haase would be nice, but is not considered essential. (Perhaps one could eventually be found in newspaper archives.)
- The two Tag boxes specify in what general aspects the article is deficient, with three listed in the first box (the second box repeats an aspect from the first). Each one of those has a link to a specific Project page: follow each of the three links, read the material in those pages, consider how in their light the article could be improved, and then attempt to make improvements. You could also look for collaborators through appropriate Wikiprojects, etc.
- There is no deadline, as every article in Wikipedia is an ongoing project, but when you consider significant improvements have been made, you can ask another editor, such as FULBERT who I think added the tags, to review the improvements and consider removing some or all of them. Hope this helps {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.107.217 (talk) 06:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Accused of blanking by system, was not blanking
was trying to create romanian article for pink pantheress, article did not exist, yet i was accused of blanking.do keep in mind im new to this.thanks Icykenny36 (talk) 14:48, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Icykenny36, if this is about the Romanian Wikipedia, then you will have to ask there. Different language Wikipedias are completely separate projects. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 15:19, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sungodtemple The edit filter log shows some insight into what happened, not a Romanian Wikipedia issue. Ca talk to me! 15:22, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, it appears that you were trying to translate an article in English into Romanian. However, this is the English Wikipedia, so you were replacing English text into Romanian text, so an WP:edit filter prevented your edit. (your edit filter log) You should go to Romanian Wikipedia instead, and translate the text there. Please see the help page WP:Translation for more info, and feel free to come back if you are still confused.
Pinging @Alexf, who warned you. Cheers, Ca talk to me! 15:20, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Revamped a article
Hi there. I wanted to ask that after fully revamping a article should i uncheck the Automatic MILHIST checklist assessment, done by the military history project bot. I have done best on my side to meet the criteria. So to get it reviewed again do i have to nominate, uncheck the Automatic MILHIST checklist assessment, or do something else to get it reviewed.
page revamped :-Hunza–Nagar Campaign Rahim231 (talk) 09:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Rahim231: Welcome to the Teahouse! You can request reassessment at WP:MHA#REQ (and also Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan/Assessment). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 14:17, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- I added the page name on the page requested article for assessment: Wikipedia:WikiProject Pakistan/Assessment. Do I need to add them on both pages, and for an estimate, how much time would it take for it to be assessed, and do I need to make changes or edit the article in the meantime? Rahim231 (talk) 17:15, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Bug with IP blocking?
I accidentally left my VPN on and went to make a change to an article. But I was logged in so I shouldn't have been blocked But I got a message my IP was blocked, even though I was logged in, but when I turned off the VPN it worked. I know you cant edit with a VPN if your not logged into an account, but I was logged into my account so I shouldn't have been blocked. I'm confused. Is this a bug? Where do I report this bug? AKFkrewfamKF1 (talk) 03:39, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @AKFkrewfamKF1: You need the user right "IP block exemption" to edit from a blocked IP address, even if you are logged in. This isn't a bug, it's deliberate. When I block an IP address, I have a choice whether to disallow logged-in users from editing from that IP address. ~Anachronist (talk) 03:55, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Not a bug. These types of blocks apply whether you are logged in or not. RudolfRed (talk) 03:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @AKFkrewfamKF1: I'll add that you can request IP block exemption, but you would need to demonstrate a need, either by being a trusted high-volume contributor, or be living under a government regime that would harm you for writing things the government deems objectionable. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @RudolfRed and Anachronist: you guys missed a fine opportunity for "it's not a bug, it's a feature" joke. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @AKFkrewfamKF1: I'll add that you can request IP block exemption, but you would need to demonstrate a need, either by being a trusted high-volume contributor, or be living under a government regime that would harm you for writing things the government deems objectionable. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:03, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Pictures
I keep trying to upload a picture to an article that I own the rights to, but it keeps being blocked. Please let me know how to move forward. Thanks. 207.229.144.46 (talk) 17:31, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- You haven't told us how you're uploading it or what error message you are seeing, but you will need to relinquish your rights in order to do so. I suggest you start by reading Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials. Shantavira|feed me 17:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- You need to be logged into an account to upload images. What is your username? How are you uploading? What response are you getting? ColinFine (talk) 19:36, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
A Map For Rhodesia
A Globe Map For Rhodesia with the borders of the countries of that time would be pretty nice. ZombieGamerTakenUsernaam (talk) 18:50, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Zombie etc., and welcome to the Teahouse. No doubt it would, but it is unlikely that a volunteer here at the Teahouse will do anything about it. Whenever you ask for something to be created (even if you do ask for it, rather than just make an oblique statement about what might be nice), you are essentially asking for some volunteer to take up your request - you might be lucky, and you might not.
- Probably better places to ask would be WP:WikiProject Maps and WP:WikiProject Zimbabwe - whether you'll have any success in either place, I can't tell. ColinFine (talk) 19:49, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
movie/book plots
I saw that on pages for movies and books, there is a section named "plot." These sections do not cite any sources, probably because the media requires payment to access. How does someone verify if the plot is accurate? AaronNinetyTwo (talk) 21:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, AaronNinetyTwo. The book or movie itself is the source for a plot section. To verify the accuracy, read the book or watch the movie. Cullen328 (talk) 21:51, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @AaronNinetyTwo, plots don't need to be cited— usually— per MOS:PLOT. Relativity 21:39, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- thank you, i understand AaronNinetyTwo (talk) 21:43, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Why were my Talk Topic & Replies Deleted?
Last night, I created a new Talk Topic that included FDA & CDC links. I included the same in replies to existing Talk threads. Today my Talk Topic & replies were deleted. Why? My sources are reputable. 2600:6C58:61F0:4CB0:3D38:EAA:C7B9:D69A (talk) 21:40, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- The editor who deleted it used the edit summary
Not a suggestion for how to improve the article. Please see WP:NOTFORUM
. Talk Pages are for specific, actionable proposals to improve the article. They are not for general discussion of the topic. Cullen328 (talk) 21:57, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Avatar317 removed your post on Talk:Children's Health Defense, with the edit summary
Not a suggestion for how to improve the article. Please see WP:NOTFORUM
. Please look at that link, and if you disagree, discuss the matter on Avatar317's user talk page. ColinFine (talk) 21:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)- In effect, it appears that you were creating new content for the article, with references, but only at Talk. More proper to edit the article, and if then reverted, defend the content you added, on the Talk page. David notMD (talk) 22:07, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
Kmart redirects
I created numerous redirects, each representing the first Kmart's address in that state or territory, from this video https://youtube.com/NfyuOn6Fqpk Could it make sense or I'll have to list at RFD? We do have 3100 W. Big Beaver Road but no 3333 Beverly Road. GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 01:43, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- The links here are the headquarters GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 01:44, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- So . . . having made a great number of redirects, GabrielPenn4223, you now, just two minutes after making the last of them, ask whether their creation makes sense? My first reaction is that most if not all are most unlikely to be looked for; so no, they have little or no utility, and you have (again) unnecessarily created work for other people. Something about this doesn't make sense. (Suggestion: how about working on the improvement of existing articles?) -- Hoary (talk) 02:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Has listed unnecessary redirects for RFD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_11#14701_Rinaldi_Street GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 02:22, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- GabrielPenn4223, that YouTube link doesn't work. Hey, I was curious! Liz Read! Talk! 02:56, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Has listed unnecessary redirects for RFD. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Redirects_for_discussion/Log/2024_February_11#14701_Rinaldi_Street GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 02:22, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
"Uncultured" word, yes or no?
An IP editor added a small change to a sentence of mine, here. I'm not a native english speaker, so I'm not quite sure whether IP editor is right or not. Z80Spectrum (talk) 21:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Z80Spectrum: I've reworded the sentence to avoid it making any judgment on the 'culture' of the term. Tollens (talk) 21:53, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. I think your verions is much better than mine. Z80Spectrum (talk) 03:10, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
By the definition
Is Acela an high speed rail?
2601:204:EA7F:220:E159:45BB:B700:8EB5 (talk) 04:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- The article on Acela says it qualifies as high speed rail. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also asked and answered on the Help desk. OP, please do not ask questions on more than one forum: it wastes our volunteer respondents' time and can lead to confusion. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.107.217 (talk) 06:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Watchlist problem
I want to exclude bot edits from showing on my watchlist and I have added 'Hide bot edits from the watchlist' to my preferences with the kind help of Scottyoak2. However, it is not activated automatically when I open my watchlist. Instead there is a 'Saved filters' box on the right and if I click on it I get a 'Delete bot edits' option. Is there a way I can get 'Delete bot edits' to be active automatically when I open my watchlist instead of having to activate it manually each time? I have a screen print in Word showing how the watchlist displays when I open it, but I do not know how to temporarily upload a document to display a problem, Dudley Miles (talk) 16:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Dudley Miles, I had the same issue, and I was too lazy to figure out how to get it to work, so what I've done instead is mute the bots individually. In my case only a few bots were responsible for the vast majority of bot edit notifications, so it was relatively easily done. I think it worked, but not 100% sure yet. Best, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Dudley Miles, the procedure that I described on your talkpage works flawlessly for me, possibly because I use the non-javascript watchlist. Since you mentioned the 'Saved filters' box, I realize now that you might be using the javascript version of the watchlist. If you want to try the non-javascript interface, do this:
- Click here: Special:Preferences
- Go to the / Watchlist \ tab
- Scroll down to the heading called Advanced options
- Check the box beside Use non-JavaScript interface
- Scroll to the bottom and click the <Save> button.
- Let us know if that works. —Scottyoak2 (talk) 22:56, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Scottyoak2 it did not work, but I have found - with some difficulty - how to mute bots as suggested by DoubleGrazing and that has solved the problem. Thanks to both of you. Dudley Miles (talk) 10:42, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Moving a new page from sandbox to Wikipedia
My account is a few years old, and I haven’t published anything in a while. I created a new page in my sandbox, but can’t figure out how to move it to Wikipedia proper. I do not see a tools pull-down menu, or a “more” menu. Please advise. Thanks. Jnorman34 (talk) 01:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- You are currently at 9 edits, not quite enough to be autoconfimed. Just make a copyedit somewhere to get over the line. NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 01:58, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Jnorman34: If you move User:Jnorman34/sandbox to mainspace it will likely get deleted. It has zero references. See WP:REFB for help on that. The sandbox draft also does not show how this person is notable. WP:NBIO RudolfRed (talk) 02:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I have added more info and a reference, and I have over 10 edits now, but I still do not see any tools or more menus that offer me the option to move the page to the main site. What do I do next? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Jnorman34 (talk • contribs) 02:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Please see the reviewer's comments at Draft:Henry Duffy and address them before resubmitting it. Shantavira|feed me 09:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Unless you have experience in having drafts accepted, it is highly recommended that you use the submission process instead of directly creating articles yourself. 331dot (talk) 10:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- The draft now has a submit button. It is not clear to me that having been president of the Air Line Pilots Association, International makes a person Wikipedia-notable. Some of the people listed as having been presidents are subjects of existing articles, but in looking at those, some are in my opinion marginal in being valid articles. Maybe the better (?) ones can serves as models for your effort. David notMD (talk) 13:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Inserting references
Hello, I have uploaded an additional section to an already existing article. In my entry there are two references. Please tell me how to insert the authors of the refs and how to place the two refs in the references section of the article.
I dont know what Visual editor is so reply to Pipertune via the article on Howard S. Becker Pipertune (talk) 10:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
@Pipertune: Welcome to the Teahouse. You added some factual information with this edit]. Unfortunately it was reverted because it was not supported by any reference at all. This is common practice, so feel free to reinsert it once you understand how to add an inline citation at the end of a paragraph (see below).
Be aware that your original edit did use superlatives which are not appropriate for an encyclopaedia. It is ok to quote (and cite) music critic, Joe Bloggs, as saying that "Becker was an exceptionally proficient and forward thinking pianist and arranger." But if that's just your personal opinion, there's no place for that here. So just state that he was a pianist and an arranger if you can cite a source that proves he did both.
Now, you can learn how to add references by reading this page of guidance for users of our powerful 'Source Editor'. We have two optional editing tools. The other is known as Visiual Editor, and it has a slightly different set of editing buttons and interface. You can easily switch back and form between the two (using the dark slanted pencil icon on the right of the editing toolbar) For adding citations with Visual Editor, you'd need to follow this page of guidance. I hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:51, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
How to use Literal books not online as citation for Wikipedia
I have noticed that when given articles to contribute to, I can barely find any online citation, or most instances the only source is the Wikipedia page itself, were I to find an actual book on the subject matter, would that suffice as a relevant citation or is Wikipedia specific to just internet literature? I would love advice on this. Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 05:24, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh: You can absolutely use sources not online. For example, you can use {{Cite book}} and provide the relevant info (title, author, etc) of the book. Since it is not online, you would omit the URL info. RudolfRed (talk) 05:35, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- ah, so treat it like how I would normally cite an authority in any literary work? Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 06:26, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh:, I agree with what RudolfRed said above, plus it is often helpful to the reader and to other editors who are trying to verify, for you to include the exact page number(s), and if possible an exact quote (in the Quote field in the hidden/extra fields). [If you want to get really fancy, you can include the chapter title, especially if the chapter has a different author than the overall book -- in which case you would use the chapter author in the author field, and the editor's name in the editor field.] Softlavender (talk) 05:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh In addition to the above, I would recommend searching the Internet Archive's Texts to Borrow to see if a digital copy could be linked (alongside |"url-access=registration" in the citation) for ease of WP:VERIFIABILITY.
- If there is no digital copy availible, it would still be advisable to link either to the book's page on its publisher's website, or page on Google Books, so that someone looking to verify the information has a place to start. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 06:01, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for this, it's very helpful and I'll learn how to do the link on Google books. In the risk of sounding ungrateful
- b
- wouldn't linking it to the Publisher's websitcoesidered n be not a neutral POV, for instance, I want to contribute to the Seychelles National Movement and the publisher is same as the only authority, one could connote that this makes the information provided bias? No? Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 06:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the typo on my last comment, I meant *Publisher's website be considered to be not from a Neutral POV* Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 06:34, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh No need to worry. Asking a good faith question about the content of advice you've been given is not ungratefulness; it is curiosity and critical thinking.
- What you're describing seems to be less an issue of what you link to in a citation, and more of a citation itself being a WP:PRIMARY source, which, while still acceptable in many cases, should not be the main source of an article's content.
- Seeing that the article you mentioned above (incidentally, it's good practice to WP:WIKILINK such things in these kinds of discussions) is a stub with great room for expansion, please ensure the majority of the content you add is sourced to WP:RELIABLE, WP:SECONDARY, WP:INDEPENDENT sources. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 07:03, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so very much for the advice, truly, and also thank you for the Texts to Borrow link, I intend to use for my Wikipedia contributions as well as my everyday reading. 🖤 Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 07:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh Happy to help. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 08:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't mind, are there any other Wikipedia forums that I can join, where I might ask questions and learn the ropes and culture of Wikipedia? I'm drowning here and some admins aren't patient with us newbies, I just got a topic I raised on here deleted or archived, and I'm trying not to give up but it's becoming more and more hard. I just need guidance and freedom to ask questions or ask for help. Thank you. 🥺🖤 Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 15:42, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh I think you have raised a very valid point. The Teahouse is generally designed to resolve questions, and this applies equally as well to the Wikipedia:Village pump. There are many types of issues for which this is not the case. One thing to remember is that essentially everything you do or say on WP is visible to every other WP user. So notwithstanding the fact that I definitely don't have all the answers (even with a fair amount of experience), I'll invite you to ask me at User talk:Fabrickator, with the disclaimer that nothing I say has any official significance. (Hopefully it is not breaking a rule for me to make this invitation.) Fabrickator (talk) 16:20, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't mind, are there any other Wikipedia forums that I can join, where I might ask questions and learn the ropes and culture of Wikipedia? I'm drowning here and some admins aren't patient with us newbies, I just got a topic I raised on here deleted or archived, and I'm trying not to give up but it's becoming more and more hard. I just need guidance and freedom to ask questions or ask for help. Thank you. 🥺🖤 Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 15:42, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh Happy to help. — Toast for Teddy (talk) 08:30, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so very much for the advice, truly, and also thank you for the Texts to Borrow link, I intend to use for my Wikipedia contributions as well as my everyday reading. 🖤 Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 07:31, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
science
what is a herring 190.93.39.61 (talk) 14:47, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- See wikt:herring. {{u|Sdkb}} talk 14:50, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Also see Herring. David notMD (talk) 17:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Lead image for Saddam Hussein
I want to change the lead picture of the article Saddam Hussein by this file File:Saddam Hussein 1979.jpg. Pls let me edit it. Thank You Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 14:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Why do you want to do that? I would have said that the existing picture is of slightly better quality than the one you want to change it to. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 90.199.107.217 (talk) 14:28, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- How that photo is better, look at U.S leaders' page. How face to face taken pictures are their. Regarding pic quality. Saddam was not in that much high tech era, where filters used to make photos clear. During those times, these types of pictures look better. Check other U.S leaders' articles like John F. Kennedy, Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan. There lead image looks like a painting, not a photograph taken by camera. In case of Saddam, that picture looks very unique. Think it, if you have any problem then I will find any other photo. Thank You Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 17:52, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Your edit was reverted. I agree the 1979 pic is poor quality, but the place to propose this, together with your rationale, is Talk:Saddam Hussein and gain consensus. Shantavira|feed me 14:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Help their userpage is a db-u5. 32.220.205.180 (talk) 05:14, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- The edit summary should be revdelled. too. Softlavender (talk) 05:18, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- But if the page is deleted, only admins can see it... 32.220.205.180 (talk) 05:19, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Creating templates
Hi! I have a question about creating templates. Whenever I attempt to create a new page and try to add a template, there will be a little page that says something like "Template search: Find the template you want to insert by searching for an identifying keyword. Templates that have descriptions are more likely to work well with the visual editor" and then a search bar underneath. But the template I want to create does not yet exist. How do I create a new template?
Thank you, CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 20:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, CallieCrewmanAuthor, and welcome to the Teahouse. I may be wrong, but judging from your post at User talk:Shellwood#Question from CallieCrewmanAuthor (22:34, 9 February 2024), I'm suspecting that "creating a template" is not what you mean.
- I suspect that you are trying to use an existing template, and transclude it into a new article, but you just don't know the name of the template. I'm further guessing that the kind of template you are trying to add is an infobox - perhaps {{infobox person}}, or more specifically {{infobox actor}}.
- If you actually mean creating a new template, please explain what would be the purpose of the template you want to create. ColinFine (talk) 21:11, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @ColinFine, I meant creating a new template. I wanted to create a new one on Rosemary Carpenter Fitzgerald (I just created the page a few days ago) and I was also trying to create a page for Mark Twain's son who died in infancy, but like I said before, it would only let me reuse a template already in existence. I want to create a new template that would give general information about the person in the article (name, date of birth, date of death, family, etc.). CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 21:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Why would you not use {{infobox person}} with parameters appropriate to the individual, like every other article on a person (unless they use a more specific infobox)? What is the value in creating a template (a thing whose purpose is being inserted into many pages) for an individual's dates etc? ColinFine (talk) 21:56, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- In case there is some confusion, you do not have to fill in all the parameters, just the relevant ones. {{infobox person}} includes "name, date of birth, date of death, family, etc.", that you are wanting, unless your "etc." is very unusual, in which case we probably do not want it in an infobox. - Arjayay (talk) 22:17, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- CallieCrewmanAuthor, you should first attempt to show how Rosemary Carpenter Fitzgerald is notable (as understood by and for Wikipedia). An article can't cite Facebook. (I haven't looked at the other sources that this article cites.) I may be a very unimaginative person; perhaps it's for this reason that I can't imagine how this son who died aged 19 months could be notable. -- Hoary (talk) 00:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Why would you not use {{infobox person}} with parameters appropriate to the individual, like every other article on a person (unless they use a more specific infobox)? What is the value in creating a template (a thing whose purpose is being inserted into many pages) for an individual's dates etc? ColinFine (talk) 21:56, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @ColinFine, I meant creating a new template. I wanted to create a new one on Rosemary Carpenter Fitzgerald (I just created the page a few days ago) and I was also trying to create a page for Mark Twain's son who died in infancy, but like I said before, it would only let me reuse a template already in existence. I want to create a new template that would give general information about the person in the article (name, date of birth, date of death, family, etc.). CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 21:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
who is chopin
i am wondering who is the person called frederic chopin 2A02:A450:5959:0:D9A0:4A10:7A3E:6569 (talk) 23:39, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello – you may be looking for the article Frédéric Chopin. Tollens (talk) 23:40, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Famous classical pianist. Coulomb1 (talk) 00:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Disruptive userpage but I can't edit it. I don't know where else to put this 32.220.205.180 (talk) 06:13, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- I blocked the user. Thank you for reporting it. Next time please use WP:ANI. EvergreenFir (talk) 07:03, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- In cases of obvious vandalism, WP:AIV will get faster responses. Ca talk to me! 00:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
accolade colour change
not sure how to word this without sounding dumb lol. can someone guide me on how to change an award accolade to green or red? I tried to work it out but simply finding it a little difficult? thank you HungryReptile (talk) 03:12, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Template:Nom and Template:Won are meant to be used instead of the words "Nominated" or "Won" in tables, and they automatically add color. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 03:17, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Image
How do I put an image in? Smallcat101 (talk) 03:33, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi! Here's a guide to inserting pictures into an article. However, you're best off using source editor if you follow that guide. I recommend trying this out at either your sandbox (click on that red text to create it), or the Wikipedia sandbox. Best, Schrödinger's jellyfish ✉ 04:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Why can't we move just subpages to their base name on US places?
I know that Austin, Texas, cannot be moved to Austin as no primary topic for Austin exists; the same is true for Charlotte, North Carolina, so why can't Albuquerque, New Mexico, be renamed to just Albuquerque and Sacramento, CA, to just Sacramento? GabrielPenn4223 (talk) 10:50, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi GabrielPenn4223 - Please see previous discussions in the relevant talk pages e.g. Talk:Albuquerque,_New_Mexico/Archive_1#Requested_move and Talk:Albuquerque,_New_Mexico/Archive_2#Move_proposal both of which rejected the move you are suggesting - Arjayay (talk) 13:14, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- WP:USPLACE#Major cities is the guideline for US city articles on Wikipedia. It parallels the Associated Press Stylebook, where there are a very few specific cities whose name can stand alone without a state. DMacks (talk) 06:18, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Article protection advice, for false release date (and minor) changes, most likely by the filmmakers themselves
I've almost finished updating a feature film on IMDB, which I've known about it for at least 10 years, and was apparently released 8 years ago (although there's no proof of that).
It was definitely released 6 years ago however, as it had multiple film premieres, was released on practically every online service, plus they released DVD's and Blu-rays too, all within the same week.
Yet for some reason, in the last year the filmmakers have started re-releasing promotion for the already released film, with 2023 trailers, and 2024 "behind the scenes" images, among other things, as though it was a new film, which it isn't...
That's partly why I decided to update the film and check the credits, with the other reason listed below.
The only things left to add/correct are external links for news articles and reviews, delete a few false credits, add some missing uncredited extras, plus the big thing I've noticed...
...The release date/dates from 2018 on IMDB have been replaced with a 2021 release date somehow...
...And now I've just noticed that in January 2024 on Wikipedia, 2 people (one of which is most likely one of the directors based on his name, which is named after 1 of the 5+ company names that they use, only 2 of which are listed on-screen), changed some minor things, along with the 2018 release date which has also been replaced with a 2021 release date.
When I've finished on IMDB, I will correct some on the information on the article here.
What Wikipedia:Protection policy would you suggest to stop the release dates being changed again, and how could I suggest the protection? Danstarr69 (talk) 07:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello. I'm not sure what you mean by "what protection policy"; there is only a single policy. If there is a current, intractable dispute or edit war with information in the article you speak of, you may request page protection at WP:RFPP, which should encourage users to discuss the matter on the talk page to arrive at a consensus. Pages are not protected preemptively, or due to past disruption, there must be a current, demonstratable problem. 331dot (talk) 09:06, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you believe that the filmmakers themselves are editing the article and have not disclosed this fact(per WP:COI and/or WP:PAID), that is a matter for the conflict of interest noticeboard where you can give your evidence(but be mindful of WP:OUTING). 331dot (talk) 09:08, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Another tip, if you really want people here to help, tell them the name of the film. - X201 (talk) 09:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
How to Avoid messing up an article.
So, I had when I first joined started editing the page for "Yinka Ash" I had assumed that Wikipedia was straight forward, as I could easily find sources on the biographical subject-matter, I kept editing without knowledge of the parameters for UPE, though, I remain NOT UPE, I think I messed up so badly, now other accounts are rightfully suspicious of my edits. I wanna ask, is there like a guideline that I can study or learn better from, Fred Zepelin began to make edits on the Yinka Ash article, and seeing the previous and current I can see how my tone and his is different (his being better), I don't want to keep editing the article so as not to mess up more, but if anyone could properly guide me or make edits on same article so I can learn I would be most appreciative; I'd like to begin editing articles like "Seychelles National Movement" and even have articles in my sandbox on topics I'm interested in. Please, I really don't wanna mess up again, I would take any assistance and advice, reading materials or Wikipedia Forum I can join to get better. Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 13:33, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Anoghena Okoyomoh Welcome to the Teahouse. The fact that you can tell that someone else's edit was better than your own shows that you have the ability to discern what is and isn't a good edit. So that's a great start! But it's an extremely thing difficult to teach. Because this is an encyclopaedia that, in essence, simply collates and draws together stuff that other RELIABLE SOURCES have already published, what makes a good edit is a well-cited statement written in clear English and in a NEUTRAL tone of voice that imporves the encyclopaedic quality of any article. No peacock words or superlatives; no embellishing; just stuff written in your own words that others can understand and VERIFY for themselves.
- To avoid any accusations of UPE, my advice would be to simply steer clear of any commercial or biographical topics, and find an area that interests you. All our articles have a quality assessment allocated to them. The shortest articles are called 'Stubs' and these can benefit most easily from improvement. Perhaps you could find some of these to work on?
- Now, you mentioned Seychelles National Movement, so, for the sake of this demonstration, I'm going to imagine that topics on Seychelles interests you. Every article falls under one or more 'WikiProjects' that group topic-related articles together. You can see which ones they fall into by going to the article's talk page. In this case, it would be WP:WikiProject Seychelles. Take a look there at their table of 'recognised content' (=quality assessment table) (LINK).
- There are currently 454 'short 'stub' articles, of which 5 are deemed of 'Top Importance' and 7 of 'High Importance'. By clicking the relevant number in the intersection of the Quality rows and Importance columns, you'll get a list of articles (like this one).
- Maybe you could work through and see if you can improve one or more of them? One word of warning: the quality assessments can sometimes be rather out of date! So, though marked as a short 'Stub' they may well have been improved but without anyone changing the Assessment template.
- Reading through these, and perhaps looking for 'citation needed' templates. or asking yourself "what's missing here" could be a very good way to both learn by doing simple tasks, whilst also making a big difference to really short articles.
- I'm sure someone will make other suggestions, but I hope you find this helpful. Regards from the UK, Nick Moyes (talk) 16:25, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh My God, Thank you! I think that is the major lapse in my writing, I felt it was imperative to use the words I found on the cited sources, because, as a lawyer I was trained to use the exact words when dealing with acts and cases of authority. But with the corrected edit, I noticed that his words were more, matter-of-fact, or simply stating as it is, newspaper articles are somewhat more advertising, especially when its coverage of arts or entertainment topic, I get that now, I'll be more cognisant moving forward. Again, Thank you.
- Kind regards, Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 16:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Anoghena Okoyomoh. In fact, you should specifically not use the exact words of the source in most cases, because that may be an infringement of copyright. If the exact words are important, they can be explicitly quoted (and attributed, of course), but normally the account in Wikipedia is a summary in the writer's own words. ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you I will note that as well, I will be more specific to sounding factual and neutral in my future contributions. thank you and Kind regards, Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 10:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Anoghena Okoyomoh. In fact, you should specifically not use the exact words of the source in most cases, because that may be an infringement of copyright. If the exact words are important, they can be explicitly quoted (and attributed, of course), but normally the account in Wikipedia is a summary in the writer's own words. ColinFine (talk) 19:02, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
Plum Jam
Dark sugar is nice but i quite like granulated. but would powder sugar work for my plum jam recipe? 195.195.234.240 (talk) 10:15, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello! This page is for asking questions about using or editing Wikipedia, and is not intended as a general Q&A board – in the future please use a search engine or another website intended for general Q&A. That being said, powdered sugar typically contains cornstarch or another similar additive, and would probably not work as expected in jams. Tollens (talk) 10:23, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia CSS - background
Is there any way to change the overall white background colour in Wikipedia/mediawiki to a custom image/colour? (^∙w∙^)/ Gale + talk 11:12, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, EastBlowingGale. This is not something I've ever tried, but a few moments on Google came up with a possible answer for you to investigate for yourself: https://www.hostknox.com/knowledgebase/681/How-to-change-background-colors-in-MediaWiki.html
- Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 14:38, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
On behalf of...
Hi I am new to Wiki! Just joined today! :)
Quick question... from reading through lots of the information it appears that we must write articles on behalf of someone else, is it correct to say that we are not allowed to write articles on our own behalf? Seaside2012 (talk) 16:37, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Seaside2012 Yes, that's correct. It would be a huge CONFLICT OF INTEREST, and not always a good idea, either. See WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Whoever we write about must meet our Notabilty Criteria, or there cannot be an article about them. The same goes for any other topic in this encyclopaedia. But most editors - especially brand new ones - steer well clear of creating articles from scratch. Editing and improving existing ones is the simpler and far better way to learn the intricacies of becoming a good Wikipedian. Welcome to the club!
- I'll send a welcome message to your talk page with some helpful links to get you started. Oh, and welcome to the Teahouse! Nick Moyes (talk) 16:48, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the warm welcome...and the clarification,
- of course. :) Seaside2012 (talk) 16:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Seaside2012: To further clarify, you cannot write in behalf of someone else either. You should not have any association with the person you are writing about, otherwise you also have a conflict of interest. If you are completely independent of some other person, then you are not writing "in behalf" of them. So avoid writing about yourself, your family, your friends, your coworkers, your associates, etc. If you do, then WP:AFC is the only venue Wikipedia offers to editors with a conflict of interest to write articles. ~Anachronist (talk) 18:12, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, the idea of editing Wikipedia "on behalf of" anybody or anything is itself problematic. A Wikipedia article is not in any way for the benefit (or detriment) of its subject, except incidentally. ColinFine (talk) 20:07, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Anachronist overstated the guideline a bit. A conflict of interest does not mean you cannot create a draft, only that it must be via AfC and as long as you describe the COI on your User page. David notMD (talk) 03:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't that what I said? If you have a conflict of interest, you need to use AFC. Perhaps my first sentence "cannot" should have been "shouldn't". ~Anachronist (talk) 06:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. David notMD (talk) 12:11, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Isn't that what I said? If you have a conflict of interest, you need to use AFC. Perhaps my first sentence "cannot" should have been "shouldn't". ~Anachronist (talk) 06:01, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Anachronist overstated the guideline a bit. A conflict of interest does not mean you cannot create a draft, only that it must be via AfC and as long as you describe the COI on your User page. David notMD (talk) 03:34, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Radon
I made a discovery about radon. I’ve published A lot of papers about it. I also have a patent on a process for applying this discovery. What should I do to submit a brief summary that can be added to Radon Tosichinni (talk) 16:34, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello Tosichinni. Wikipedia does not allow original research or primary sources so you will need to wait until this discovery has been reported in independent WP:Reliable sources. Please read WP:42 for the basics of what will be required. Shantavira|feed me 16:42, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Shantavira: While Wikipedia doesn't allow for original research, primary sources are allowed, but their use is restricted compared to secondary or tertiary. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- As to citing your own published work: "Using material you have written or published is allowed within reason, but only if it is relevant, conforms to the content policies, including WP:SELFPUB, and is not excessive. Citations should be in the third person and should not place undue emphasis on your work. You will be permanently identified in the page history as the person who added the citation to your own work. When in doubt, defer to the community's opinion: propose the edit on the article's talk page and allow others to review it. However, adding numerous references to work published by yourself and none by other researchers is considered to be a form of spamming." I recommend not citing your own work, or at most a reference ot two, and definitely not any patent. David notMD (talk) 21:58, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for your reply.
- The discovery is real and very significant, but it was purely discovered by me (with support from major energy companies).
- I feel shut out because I didn’t do this within the university or government environment, where everyone supports everyone else.
- I guess I’m just way ahead of my time.
- is there a wiki site that has a dialogue on the wiki process? Tosichinni (talk) 03:49, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- BTW, why doesn’t Wikipedia like patents? Tosichinni (talk) 03:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Tosichinni: Wikipedia doesn't dislike patents. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources, that's all. A patent is a primary source. A journal article you authored is a primary source. If you or your inventions are written about, then those would be secondary sources we could cite, and those secondary sources confer notability on a topic. Notability is required for a topic to have an article here. Hundreds of patents are granted every day. Not all of those inventions are notable by Wikipedia's definition of notability. As another editor already recommended to you, read WP:42 to get an understanding of what is required. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much.Thank you very much Tosichinni (talk) 04:50, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- I may be misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you were saying that I was cited.I may be misunderstanding you, but it sounds like you were saying that I was cited Tosichinni (talk) 04:52, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- I have documented subsurface gammaray changes by a factor of 100 or more.
- This is a major discovery, and probably an important health issue. It can happen at the surface. Tosichinni (talk) 04:57, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- I presented a poster at Harvard years ago, I visited UC Santa Barbara to describe what I observed.
- no interest because it “wasn’t invented here. “ Tosichinni (talk) 04:59, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Tosichinni: Wikipedia doesn't dislike patents. Wikipedia prefers secondary sources, that's all. A patent is a primary source. A journal article you authored is a primary source. If you or your inventions are written about, then those would be secondary sources we could cite, and those secondary sources confer notability on a topic. Notability is required for a topic to have an article here. Hundreds of patents are granted every day. Not all of those inventions are notable by Wikipedia's definition of notability. As another editor already recommended to you, read WP:42 to get an understanding of what is required. ~Anachronist (talk) 04:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- BTW, why doesn’t Wikipedia like patents? Tosichinni (talk) 03:54, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Shantavira: While Wikipedia doesn't allow for original research, primary sources are allowed, but their use is restricted compared to secondary or tertiary. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:45, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
As an encyclopedia, Wikipedia is a 'trailing indicator' of content. Unpublished content such as your research documents cannot be a reference. The publication of your poster in a conference proceedings would be a primary source. A description of your observation in a reputable source such as the New York Times would be a secondary source worth using as a reference to establish notability. David notMD (talk) 12:19, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Tosichinni You say that you have published a lot of papers about your discovery, presumably in peer-reviewed academic journals. If so, it is likely that other scientists have cited these papers in subsequent work. Google Scholar will list these citations if you search for your own paper(s) or patent. It is these citations which are the secondary sources that Wikipedia prefers but in adding them to the radon article you may also cite your primary work: the idea is that the secondary, independent, mention of a publication is support that it has been accepted by the scientific community as part of mainstream science and not some sort of fringe claim which would be undue to form part of the radon article here. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:44, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
There is a talk page which has become very hostile towards editors of specific opinion(s)
The page is Talk:Dean Schneider. I've already removed several personal attacks using WP:RPA, but there are multiple editors who are creating a hostile environment for other editors through repeated personal attacks and other threats. I was thinking about mentioning this page on WP:COI/N but I am not sure if that is the right place for this.
The editors who are hostile all seem to be "fans" of "Dean Schneider" and intimidate any editor who talks "unfavourably" about him, and additionally create an environment in which people who read the page are discouraged from even posting anything "unfavourable" by creating examples "of what happens to such a person", such as ridicule and other forms of verbal abuse. Ybllaw (talk) 15:25, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Ybllaw You did right to remove the personal attack remarks. But I see no evidence in the 'View History' record of any ongoing hostile environment there. Most comment seem to have been made two or three years ago. Please just continue watching the page and reverting any future inappropriate remarks, reporting any editors as appropriate. Thanks, Nick Moyes (talk) 15:36, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I left a warning on the profile page of both involved editors. It is indeed quite old.
- The page is still a bit off a mess currently though. Some of the topics on the talk page contain text with all caps and contain very emotional language that are quite certainly original research and riddled with logical fallacies. Is there any other measure possible to clean it up in case there of future editors? Ybllaw (talk) 15:48, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I archived the old discussions. Nick Moyes, I did not see the point in removing those comments: they're pretty incoherent anyway. I wish Ybllaw had not placed those warnings: there's really no purpose in warning for edits from four years ago, and if anything it might alert those disruptive editors to come back and do more of it. Also, I do not believe you came to that page completely impartially. Drmies (talk) 15:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I disagree that they were innocent. I think they clearly violated the policy on personal attacks, nothing "innocent" about them. I thought I saw that one of those I warned had edited more recently again in 2022 and hence thinking it was still an active user, which apparently is not the case. Ybllaw (talk) 18:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Drmies
- I don't agree with "tolerating it out of fear that they would come back". I think if they would do it again it would mean they have already been warned. As for questioning my lack of impartiality, perhaps you mean my use of scare quotes. I think it did not effect the content of what I wrote. As for not being "completely impartial", the page WP:NPOV says "as far as possible, without editorial bias". Ybllaw (talk) 18:13, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- Even though they hadn't for four years? I think that's a stretch. I'm inclined to agree with Drmies and their concern about how you have come to that page. I believe leaving warnings on editors pages for events that happened four years ago may be equally as disruptive as the event was in the first place. --ARoseWolf 18:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- You are entitled to your opinion. I suggest to agree to disagree. Ybllaw (talk) 11:37, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Ybllaw Well, you would be wrong! It is not necessary or, indeed, appropriate to leave warnings for poor edits made by someone many years ago, though you do right to undo them if they still remain. There are administrators and numerous experienced editors here who made silly mistakes - a few even vandalised- when they made their first edits, and we would not expect you to be going back and warning them of their early errors years ago. So, no matter what you may think, please avoid doing that, even though it was obviously done in all good faith.
- In other words, please listen to the advice more experienced editors such as ARoseWolf may offer you as to the best way to operate here, and you'll fit in fine. If you choose to go against consensus or the accepted way we do things just because you 'choose to disagree', then it does tend to make things more problematic. Obviously a new editor won't necessarily know what that consensus may be - hence why listening to the advice of experienced editors and hosts at the Teahouse is often very worthwhile. Best wishes, Nick Moyes (talk) 21:31, 11 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ybllaw, to that point I made numerous errors when I first came to Wikipedia. Some were corrected by others at the time and I was properly chastised and learned from them, some I went back and corrected myself, yet others have been corrected over time. Not once was I warned about edits that took place three years ago. Some of those articles are still on my watchlist. I have thanked those who corrected it. We are human, and humans make mistakes. That is why it is a good idea to be civil at all times, even with vandals. Warning people about edits made years ago will either enrage them or tempt them to return, or you may be warning a very collaborative editor who has learned and become more experienced. In that case your warning has become the first impression they have of you as a not so civil member of this community. I don't want that for you or them.
- In the end I agree with Nick, 100% fix the mistakes, but then move on. When I am patrolling new changes I try to understand why someone is making the edit. If it is not blatant vandalism I do not warn. If I think the editor is trying to improve but has missed the mark I may offer some advice but that is not a time to correct with harsh words or predetermined templates. Just take these things into consideration. --ARoseWolf 12:45, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- You are entitled to your opinion. I suggest to agree to disagree. Ybllaw (talk) 11:37, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Even though they hadn't for four years? I think that's a stretch. I'm inclined to agree with Drmies and their concern about how you have come to that page. I believe leaving warnings on editors pages for events that happened four years ago may be equally as disruptive as the event was in the first place. --ARoseWolf 18:17, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- I archived the old discussions. Nick Moyes, I did not see the point in removing those comments: they're pretty incoherent anyway. I wish Ybllaw had not placed those warnings: there's really no purpose in warning for edits from four years ago, and if anything it might alert those disruptive editors to come back and do more of it. Also, I do not believe you came to that page completely impartially. Drmies (talk) 15:59, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
How to avoid 'G11' when writing an article on someone?
Hi
I sent an draft article for submission but it got marked as G11. Could I pls get some insight on why, so for the next draft I'll be submitting the same mistakes can be avoided. Thanks Nameernkhan (talk) 06:09, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Courtesy link: Draft:Nameer Khan Victor Schmidt (talk) 07:28, 12 February 2024 (UTC)- Hello, Nameernkhan, and welcome to the Teahouse. You avoid a WP:G11 by making sure that what you write is a neutral summary of what independent sources have said about a subject. 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.
- This is one of several reasons why we very very strongly discourage trying to write about yourself. ColinFine (talk) 12:53, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
WikiVet part of WikiMedia? Can't access
Is WikiVet part of WikiMedia/MediaWiki? Under the Wikipedia for WikiVet, I click on the URL (https://en.wikivet.net/) but it says, "504 Gateway Time-out". Is it just my computer, or can no one access the website? Tried on PC & cell for several days with same error. How can I access WikiVet? Or, should I be asking this question someplace else? Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 01:44, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sunandshade: While it does use MediaWiki, the same technology Wikipedia and the other Wikimedia projects use, it is not in any way affiliated with Wikimedia. I also can't access their website, but it's unlikely anyone here will be able to help, unfortunately. Tollens (talk) 01:51, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. I accessed it a week ago so was surprised it was down now. I'm using it for a citation so guess I'll have to find another citation to use. Sunandshade (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sunandshade: I am not familiar with WikiVet, but sites with user provided content such as Wikis are not reliable sources. You should look for another source to use. See WP:RS for more info on that RudolfRed (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- I was wondering about that. The people submitting articles are vets & it says it's peer reviewed. From Wikipedia, "articles are authored by students or veterinarians, and subsequently peer reviewed by subject specialists." Is it still considered not reliable? Sunandshade (talk) 05:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sunandshade I don't see it mentioned in the archives of WP:RSPS but my personal opinion is that it won't be acceptable since proper veterinary sourcing would be better to aim for the high standards for medicine (see WP:MEDRS). Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- I was wondering about that. The people submitting articles are vets & it says it's peer reviewed. From Wikipedia, "articles are authored by students or veterinarians, and subsequently peer reviewed by subject specialists." Is it still considered not reliable? Sunandshade (talk) 05:07, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sunandshade: I am not familiar with WikiVet, but sites with user provided content such as Wikis are not reliable sources. You should look for another source to use. See WP:RS for more info on that RudolfRed (talk) 04:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarification. I accessed it a week ago so was surprised it was down now. I'm using it for a citation so guess I'll have to find another citation to use. Sunandshade (talk) 02:20, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Don't understand my sandbox page...
I am a Wiki novice! I went to use my sandbox page, and it looked like this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Ruthhenrietta/sandbox&redirect=no ... how do I get it to be a page I can start editing a completely different article on? Ruthhenrietta (talk) 13:49, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Ruthhenrietta, and welcome to the Teahouse. You can simply edit that page, and remove what's there - in particular the "#REDIRECT" statement. ColinFine (talk) 14:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
semi protected pages
I would like to edit semi protected pages who do i do that. Popscurling (talk) 14:45, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Popscurling,
- Your account is autoconfirmed, so you should be able to edit most semiprotected pages. The general way to request specific edits on pages you cannot edit directly is by placing an edit request on the associated talkpage. DMacks (talk) 14:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
University Metropolitan Tirana
Hello,
We submited the wikipedia page for University Metropolitan Tirana - Draft:University Metropolitan Tirana and we need a confirmation to publish the page.
Please can someone with the rights to confirm give us the confirmation for the page?
Thank you. Juada.J (talk) 12:35, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Juada.J Your draft has been declined today for the reasons stated by the reviewer, which are now to be found at the top of the draft. Note that the draft has not been rejected (which means it would be pointless to continue work on it) but may be improved and re-submitted. Please ensure that you have addressed the comments of the reviewer beofre doing so. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:52, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Juada, and welcome to the Teahuse. Like most people who come here and immediately try to create an article about something they are connected with, you have a fundamental misunderstanding about Wikipedia.
- Wikipedia is not for people or organisations to tell the world about themselves: that is called promotion, and is forbidden anywhere on Wikipedia.
- Your very first task in writing an article is to clarify whether you are associated with the university, and (if you are) to make a formal declaration of your conflict of interest, and if you are in any way employed by the university, your status as a paid editor.
- 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.
- So your next task, which should preferably be done before writing so much as one word of an article, is to find such sources - nothing written, published, or commissioned, by the university or its staff or associates is relevant.
- After that, you will need to forget every single thing you know about the university, and write a neutral summary of what those independent sources say about it. ColinFine (talk) 13:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- We already have a Metropolitan University of Tirana article, where you have also been editing. The content you wrote is unacceptable regardless of whether you write it in the live article or try to create a new article from scratch as a draft. DMacks (talk) 14:46, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
how to make a page to put information
like presing which button on wiki to write things and information Dmdim (talk) 17:03, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Dmdim You were left a 'welcome message' on your talk page with lots of useful links, but you decided to delete it 8 minutes later.
- I have left you another - shorter this time. I suggest you leave it there and follow the big blue 'Learn more about editing' link and read the guidance pages. We expect new users to take the time to read the basic guide to editing for themselves. We can't tell you which buttons to press - you must learn that for yourself. If, after that, you have particular questions about how to edit, then do pop back and ask for clarification and guidance on any point. You may also wish to visit Help:Getting started. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- and further edits like this [21]] will very quickly lead to a block. Theroadislong (talk) 17:26, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Dmdim, and welcome to the Teahouse and to Wikipedia. To add to what Nick said: you ask about "how to make a page". If you mean that you have an idea of creating a new article, then please, please, please, do not rush into doing this. Spend a few months making improvements to some of our existing articles, and learning about Wikipedia's policies and procedures before you even try this. People who try the challenging task of creating a new article before they have learnt the basic craft of editing, often have a really miserable and frustrating time. ColinFine (talk) 17:37, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Photo, copyright
Hi all! Is it okay to use a photo of a person from a newspaper scan available on Google Books to illustrate an article about them? The person died in 2009. The year of the American newspaper is 1980. And if so, what is the correct license to specify? Thanks in advance. ColinSchm (talk) 20:14, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, ColinSchm. A photo in a newspaper article published in 1980 is still covered by copyright. However, a photo of a person who has died is one of the allowed uses of non-free images as described at Wikipedia:Non-free content#Images #10, if no free images are realistically available. Follow the policy language closely, and upload the image here to English Wikipedia. Be aware that Wikimedia Commons does not allow non-free files. Cullen328 (talk) 20:22, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Not free image?
Can I use this image on my user page?
File:TST-baph-statue.jpg Teras malum (talk) 19:36, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Teras malum, the answer is "no". Non-free images can only be used in the specific encyclopedia article specified in the non-free use rationale. They cannot be used on user pages. Cullen328 (talk) 19:58, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Teras malum: What you can do is link to those images without displaying them. See my own user page. Below the image gallery is a section listing the non-free images I have uploaded. You link them by putting a colon in front of the File designation, as in [[:File:my_non-free_image.jpg]]. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:46, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
How do I add a non-free photo?
Hi Teahouse,
I'd like to upload a non-free photo. It is about a deceased person in the article about that person. The subject died in 1988, so it's not likely that I can get their photo in public domain. How should I upload it? I definitely can't use Wikimedia Commons ... Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 23:08, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Uploaded. NVM. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 23:24, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Advise for Cleanup - References and sections per MOS
Hello all, I am new to Wikipedia and grateful that my first article has been apprvoed.
Meanwhile, I was suggested that "This article may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. The specific problem is: References and sections per MOS."
So I had made the correct update for "Selected Exhibition and Performance" as per the guideline.
Can anyone help to let me know if there's any further edit and improvement needed?
This is the page: Link
Thank you so much! Perhaps20andyetitall (talk) 02:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Hello, I am trying to edit the Great Wall of China document...
This is a protected document, so editing is not possible. I looked at the document The map was posted as an incorrect map. Is there any way to fix it? Coperacchio (talk) 02:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Coperacchio Great Wall of China is semi-protected, so you cannot edit the article directly. You must instead submit an edit request or wait until you have 10 edits and have had an account for 4 days.
- By an 'incorrect map', do you mean the file on the right here? If so, you can bring this up at Wikimedia Commons. English Wikipedia and Wikimedia Commons are separate projects, so I am not familiar with their correction process. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- The map shown there reflects Goguryeo's Pakjakseong Fortress, not the Great Wall of China. It actually only extends to Hebei Province. Coperacchio (talk) 02:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
redirect vs disambiguation
Two items. There is a redirect for cecal to go to cecum. In this case, cecal is used as an adjective, e.g., cecal carcinoid tumor. It's also used as ileocecal. But the user should really be given the choice to also choose Cecotrope. How do I add that in?
Caecal also redirects to cecum, although that word is not used in that article. It's an alternative spelling to cecal but since it's not in the article, would it be ok for me to change the redirect to Cecotrope? Or, should the user be given the 2 options? Sunandshade (talk) 09:02, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Spelling variations do not need to be included in the redirect target. You'll want to create a WP:disambiguation page and redirect both spellings to that. Alternatively, you can put a WP:hatnote on the cecum page. Don't make a new redirect to a different page from caecal. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 10:14, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- After reading the help articles, it looks like I should use a hatnote since cecal would go to only 2 articles. Now it redirects to cecum. In the disambiguation help file, it says to choose a Primary Topic. For the cecum article, the cecal term is used as a adjective. For the cecotrope article, it's a noun & cecal is another name for cecotrope so I was wondering if I should make the cecotrope article the Primary Topic. I'm a little confused about this so would appreciate input from others. Thanks. Sunandshade (talk) 05:27, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Soory
soory, again i accidentally removed reference from an article. I don't know how to edit it Akhinesh777 (talk) 05:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Article name Oppo F1 Akhinesh777 (talk) 05:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Done, I reverted the article back to before your edits, so anything removed by accident is back in article. Cmr08 (talk) 06:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks Akhinesh777 (talk) 06:48, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
WikiProject
Hello. WikiProject Inca Empire was created in 2020, and marked as inactive since that date becuse of a lack of editors. An organized approach to editing would be fruitful for articles concerning the subject, however. These subjects often go ignored, and only a handful of editors have a full knowledge of them. Therefore a group of connected editors is the best approach, in my opinion, to dealing with errors or expanding articles, without giving one version of history too much credibility (Since in this specific subject there are several, and a discussion between editors would be preferable, before one gets chosen over the other). However I have no idea how to find volunteer editors interested in that subject and currently active. If anyone would be interested please say so, and if anyone could give me a way to search that isnt nerve wrecking that would be great too. Thanks. Encyclopédisme (talk) 22:29, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Encyclopédisme Your best bet is to post to the talk pages of related wikiprojects and hope enough people answer your call. I am thinking WP:PERU (and neighbouring countries?), and maybe WP:HISTORY or WP:ARCHAEOLOGY? And any other you can think of. Check whether they have a wikiproject and contact them if they do. Wikiprojects have a list of participants where you can look for active editors you might want to reach out. You can also check the editing history of main articles of interest and see if there are any currently active editors who've recently made significant edits to any of the articles. That more or less covers it. Some wikiprojects are just not meant to be, this being a volunteer project. In that case, you'll just have to wait for more people who think alike to join Wikipedia. You don't need a wikiproject, it's just nice to have. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I don't wan't semi-protected
Hello I'm Oliverangé p, I want may a edit without semi-protected, can guys help? Oliverangé (talk) 08:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, the good news is that you will be able to edit semi-protected articles in just two days. Your accounts needs to have at least 10 edits, which you already have, and be 4 days old to be auto-confirmed.
- If you want to edit an semi-protected article now, you can use the Wikipedia:Edit requests process. (click the link for more info)
- If you want to create new articles, you can use the WP:AFC process. Ca talk to me! 09:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
How to detect Wikipedia spammers?
How to identify Wikipedia spammers? Hanoifun (talk) 09:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, the WikiProject WP:WPSPAM has some information on identifying spammers. In general, if an editor is linking the same questionable website over and over across a variety of articles, its a clear cut spamming. Help:Linksearch is a helpful tool on locating other spam links if you already know the URL of the spammed links. Ca talk to me! 09:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Can I take a break
Can I take a break from editing! Poppodoms (talk) 03:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- 'course you can. ltbdl (talk) 04:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. If you want to let others know you are on a break, you can add a template from WP:WIKIBREAK to your userpage, but that is not required. RudolfRed (talk) 04:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
inserted page numbers
I posted the following at Talk:Emancipation Proclamation but received no reply. I expect that I will receive one if I post it here:
In the first paragraph under "Political impact," which begins "The Proclamation was immediately denounced," I corrected the quotation (the original does have "an utopian"). The two "page needed"s in that paragraph, after the two "note 107"s, is page 64 (it's at Google Books), but I don't know how to enter it. If someone will do that, then I'll know how and I will be able to enter the page numbers of subsequent footnotes. Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:43, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Maurice Magnus This case, where you want to quote different pages from a given book in various places in the article text is an ideal case for the use of the template {{rp}} (see template page for the details). I'll leave it to you to do the updates. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Help creating book article
Hello,
I was researching a book that I discovered to help me understand where it sits in the reading and publishing order.
The book is called "Night Angel Nemesis".
I had recently finished the first three books (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Night_Angel_trilogy), and found no mention of the book there. When looking at the author's page, I found the book listed under the author's "Works" section (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brent_Weeks#Works). It turns out that it's a new series starring the same protagonist.
A page for the book doesn't exist on Wikipedia, yet. It's a red link on the author's page, so I thought that I could help out by starting the page for the missing link:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Night_Angel_Nemesis
I've followed the article structure for the previous books' Wikipedia pages (e.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Way_of_Shadows), omitting "Setting", "Plot summary", and other sections that I am not prepared to provide.
My drafts have been rejected, though, and one of the reasons, I believe, is that I'm not making a compelling enough case for this book to merit its own Wikipedia page.
I'm hoping to help answer the questions that I had when I first began researching the topic. I'd like to try to help others who might be on a similar path. I found reliable answers to my questions, but it took research on platforms -- platforms whose main objective is to pitch and sell, not to convey data and information. I wanted a Wikipedia article, but it doesn't exist yet.
I see three ways forward:
- This book simply doesn't merit its own article right now.
- The book does qualify, but my current draft of the article needs a few more specific pieces.
- Maybe I'm putting the information in the wrong place. Maybe this sort of information would be better summarized under an article for the new series itself, rather than the first book of that series. On the other hand, the path into this query began with the book for me. I didn't know that the series existed.
If this is (1), that's fine. I'll drop it for now, and keep an ear out for any awards that it might win.
If this is (2) or (3), let me know what you think?
Also, I've done a bit of research on how to upload an image of the book cover. I'll leave this topic as a follow-up, in case it's (1) above, but if we do move forward with this, I could use guidance on how to go about requesting and submitting the image and licensing.
Thanks for any help,
--Reeddunkle (talk) 00:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Reeddunkle. Please read Wikipedia:Notability (books). The most common way that a book becomes notable is by being independently reviewed by several reliable sources. The general principle which applies to almost all topics, not just books, is that the topic must have significant coverage in reliable sources that are entirely independent of the topic. Your draft is missing that. Cullen328 (talk) 01:03, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- As for Night Angel trilogy, that article is a complete piece of junk, entirely unreferenced, and with major problems of several types. Cullen328 (talk) 01:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Now on to The Way of Shadows, Reeddunkle. That too is a terrible article with major problems. If you want to use an existing article as an example for a new article, please select a Good article or a Featured article. We have too many bad articles needing to be cleaned up, and do not need more bad articles. Cullen328 (talk) 01:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Got it. Thanks for the reply. Reeddunkle (talk) 14:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- As for Night Angel trilogy, that article is a complete piece of junk, entirely unreferenced, and with major problems of several types. Cullen328 (talk) 01:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Is this file Ok for this article @File:Saddam Hussein Iraqi.jpg
@Skitash Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 08:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Are you sure you took the picture and own copyright to it? It is marked as your "own work" in the file description page. Otherwise, it's a copyright violation and should be deleted.
- It appears that @Skitash disagrees with the changes to the portrait of Hussein, and has reverted your image changes. This is a completely normal part of collaboratively working in Wikipedia. Try reading though the help page WP:dispute resolution. I see you have already discussed the matter with Skitash, but did not come to an agreement.
- So, you should now try to gain WP:consensus for your image edit: that is how editors deal with disagreements. The help page WP:dispute resolution lists some ways on how to find consensus. Ca talk to me! 09:26, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- My friend gave it me, whom i met in Iraq last year. Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 09:51, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- If your friend gave the picture to you, how can it be your "own work"? And unless your friend 1) was the owner of the copyright, and 2) formally transferred that legal ownership to you, then you do not have the legal power to licence it. I have nominated it for deletion at Commons, as a copyright violation. ColinFine (talk) 11:10, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't the copyright procedures and all. Do I have to mention my friend's name. Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 14:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- If your friend gave the picture to you, how can it be your "own work"? And unless your friend 1) was the owner of the copyright, and 2) formally transferred that legal ownership to you, then you do not have the legal power to licence it. I have nominated it for deletion at Commons, as a copyright violation. ColinFine (talk) 11:10, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- My friend gave it me, whom i met in Iraq last year. Kharbaan Ghaltaan (talk) 09:51, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Bibliography
I'm working on an article about an author who has written many books and other articles. Because I thought Wikipedia used MLA style, I set up a bibliography in the traditional way in that format — although I also broke it down further for ease of readers to "digest" according to publication genre (books vs. articles, etc.) and type of audience (children vs. adults).
In looking at a number of other Wiki articles on authors, however, I see that almost all bibliographies are in the form of a "List of References" organized according to publishing date. Is this, then, Wikipedia's preferred format? If so, would an article with a bibliography formatted in the traditional way be rejected until modified? Augnablik (talk) 17:54, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Augnablik, and welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia accepts several different citation styles, including MLA: see WP:Citing sources. Citation within an article should be in consistent style, as far as possible.
- However, from Wikipedia's point of view, the important thing about citing sources is to provide verifiability for each claim about the subject, and (for the great bulk of these) to a cite a source wholly independent of the subject.
- If you are writing an article about an author, then a selected bibliography is certainly a good idea; but citations of those works themselves are almost irrelevant. If you have citations for critical (or other) discussions of those works, by people unconnected with the author, they are far more to the point. ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 10 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, ColinFine, for the good news in your first paragraph.
- I'm not sure I understand your second one, though. You mention "a selected bibliography"; is that because bibliographies HAVE to be selected rather than complete for an author? I assumed complete, and I would hope that's all right for Wikipedia. Why wouldn't Wiki readers want a complete bibliography for an author? Augnablik (talk) 16:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Qs about bibliography & article section set-up
I could have sworn I already asked the question about what I'll be asking here somewhere else, like a Wiki Help place, a few days ago. But I can't find either my question or an answer, so I'll raise the same set of questions in the Teahouse.
- I'm working on an article about an author with many publications, all of which I want to include as a bibliography. Since I read somewhere that articles should be in MLA style, I set up a bibliography in that format. Later I noticed that many articles about authors seem to have something called a List of References, similar to a traditional bibliography but organized by date rather than alphabetically. I hope this is okay ...?
- Because of the sheer number, audiences, and variety of this author's publications and audiences, I broke the bibliography down somewhat for ease of readership — for instance, by type (e.g., books and articles) and subdivided again into audience (e.g., children and adults). Again, I hope this is okay ...?
- Similar to breaking down the bibliography as I've described above, I also broke down sections of the article into correspondingly numbered sections. But I don't see numbering on most or all other articles I've looked it. I hope this is okay ...?
Augnablik (talk) 22:38, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Augnablik: It may help to put your article in draft space for others to view and offer advice. It's hard to visualize your concerns without actually seeing what's causing them. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Well, Anachronist, maybe I should. I'd been a little hesitant to do that because I didn't feel quite ready to make the article semi-public, for several reasons.
- Just curious about a few related things:
- Are all senior editors notified when a new draft is posted?
- If so, is there a time limit in which one of them is supposed to take on a review of the new draft so the editor who posted it isn't left dangling for a long time?
- Is there a way for the editor who posted the draft to try to attract editors with special background or expertise in working with certain issues?
- Augnablik (talk) 16:57, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello again, Augnablik. Your question is above, at #Bibliography, and I answered at least part of it there. ColinFine (talk) 23:06, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Twitter or X?
Should I address the app as Twitter or X? Abigbagel (talk) 05:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @abigbagel: twitter. most people still call it that. ltbdl (talk) 06:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Abigbagel Musk's Twitter is just a bot on the landscape. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- you can address it in a few ways, the least controversial one is "X (formerly Twitter)" Natelabs (talk) 17:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Requesting assistance
Can someone help me post a couple of additions to Valerie Carter? I don't believe I am supposed to as it might be considered a conflict of interest. OohChild (talk) 16:35, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @OohChild: Your best approach is what you did last year. Create a new edit request on Talk:Valerie Carter. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Edit request for page
Request to edit semi-protected page https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bubonic_plague&action=edit§ion=6 with https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2024/feb/13/oregon-resident-caught-bubonic-plague-pet-cat in epidemiology Weavingowl (talk) 14:36, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Weavingowl: You should place your request on the talk page of that article, and add the {{Edit semi-protected}} template. RudolfRed (talk) 15:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- added the topic there though not sure i added the {{{ part correctly Talk:Bubonic plague#Request to edit page to add this Weavingowl (talk) 16:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Weavingowl: I fixed the request template, but you need to be more specific about what you are asking for. Go back to the talk page and format your request as "change X to Y" RudolfRed (talk) 19:59, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- It looks like the edit request has been marked as not done and removed from talk, saying I should use Wikipedia request page instead. Weavingowl (talk) 20:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Why are some date-times in my contributions crossed out?
So I was looking through my contributions and I saw that a few date-times of some of my edits were gray and crossed out, and aren't links. Can someone explain what this means? (All of them were edits to my user page or subpages, but not all edits to those pages had crossed-out date-times, so I don't really know what's going on here.) TypoEater (talk) 16:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, TypoEater! That means those versions of the page were revision-deleted; that is, removed from the public archive and made so that only admins can see them. There are various reasons why a page revision might be revision-deleted, from exposing personally-identifiable information to copyright violations; you can read more here: WP:REVDEL. In your specific case, I'm guessing you're talking about your edits to User:TypoEater/Sandbox_highlights; as you can see in the deletion log for that page, the revisions were deleted for serious BLP violations. Please be sure not to make or copy similar edits, about any subject, again in the future. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 16:21, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Still pretty confused as that page is simply a place for me to put funny stuff people add to the Sandbox (It's only in my userspace since I proposed to add a page for that to Wikipedia:Department of Fun but they haven't replied yet) and nothing in those edits pertained to biographies of living persons in any way, as far as I know. TypoEater (talk) 16:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @TypoEater: You posted some disparaging text about a potentially real and identifiable (the school she attends was mentioned) girl named Sophia. It was reverted with the edit summary "please don't copy stuff like this", and the versions containing it were revdeled. Deor (talk) 16:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Still pretty confused as that page is simply a place for me to put funny stuff people add to the Sandbox (It's only in my userspace since I proposed to add a page for that to Wikipedia:Department of Fun but they haven't replied yet) and nothing in those edits pertained to biographies of living persons in any way, as far as I know. TypoEater (talk) 16:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
link help
What is the difference between an external link vs a redirect link? Jude Marrero \=D (talk) 20:30, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I believe the difference is that an external link will lead you to a website outside of Wikipedia and a redirect link will take you to a different article within Wikipedia than the one you looked up/clicked on a link for. Tuna
VeniVidiVici 20:32, 13 February 2024 (UTC) - an external link is a link that will send you to a website outside of wikipedia (like a YT video), while a redirect link will send you to a wikipedia article that is different then the one you clicked on. Babysharkboss2!! Killer Queen 20:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
I need Video.
I am new here. And a student. So many things are new to me. I need help and complete videos to understand Wikipedia. So that I can do well here.
Zeeshan Ali Zeeshan Adeeb (talk) 16:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Zeeshan Adeeb: Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a video site. You have a welcome message on your user talk page, and it includes some prominent links to click on, to help you get started so you can do well here. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- a good place to start is WP:getting started.
- its a good bit of reading, but im sure theres videos somewhere on there Natelabs (talk) 17:09, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Dear I submitted my first article in Wikipedia with carefully write but Wikipedia not except.
- please tell me the write way to write and submit. Zeeshan Adeeb (talk) 17:15, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Zeeshan Adeeb: Regarding Draft:Azad Mehdi, if you don't want to follow the advice you have already been given, what do you expect?
- You were given links to information that would help.
- You were given these links in the welcome message on your talk page, and also further links in the message that declined your draft. I'll give you one more, simple and easy to read: Wikipedia:Golden rule. Your draft completely failed to abide by it.
- Your usage of English, as demonstrated by the first sentence in your reply, needs work, and giving you English lessons is out of scope here. You need to learn that on your own. Writing drafts is good practice, however. ~Anachronist (talk) 17:23, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Zeeshan Adeeb. There are some instructional videos linked from WP:Instructional material. ColinFine (talk) 17:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- a good possibility is that your english is faulty.
- enwiki doesnt really like bad grammar that much, and will remark on it if your grammar is particularly unusual.
- you might have a better chance going to the wikipedia of your native language, as most people are better writers in their first language Natelabs (talk) 21:37, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Zeeshan Adeeb Some listed here: Wikipedia:Instructional material Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 18:59, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
For an article about a living person, ALL CONTENT requires references. See WP:42 to understand references. If Mehdi has not been written about then there is no potential for your draft to become an article. David notMD (talk) 17:49, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Uploading files for citations
Do we have a guideline for best practices on uploading a file and then citing it as a source? In this instance there's a reliable website with demographics information, but the site is set up to just produce reports using javascript and then allow you to download them, so it's not possible to link to any individual report. I know for files used as the primary image for an article we have the Upload Wizard and Commons, but do we also use those for citations, or is there something better? -- Fyrael (talk) 19:28, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Fyrael, and welcome to the Teahouse. To a considerable degree, my answer to #Refs to reliable sources online - does it matter where hosted? above will apply. On the whole, I would advise against doing this. ColinFine (talk) 19:44, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply, ColinFine. Yeah, I saw that discussion and it bears a little resemblance, though in this case I would be the uploader and at least for my own part would obviously be confident that I didn't modify it. Sounds like the best option is to just cite the website of the org producing the report and just not include a link, as we frequently do with print sources. The link would've just been to save someone a few steps if they were trying to validate the information, but they'll have to make do. -- Fyrael (talk) 20:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Unfortunately, you being confident that you didn't modify it wouldn't help, just as we don't accept personal recollections or knowledge: everything in an article should be verifiable from a reliable published source. I think there is a field in the Cite templates where you could give the reader instructions how to find the right information. ColinFine (talk) 22:11, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply, ColinFine. Yeah, I saw that discussion and it bears a little resemblance, though in this case I would be the uploader and at least for my own part would obviously be confident that I didn't modify it. Sounds like the best option is to just cite the website of the org producing the report and just not include a link, as we frequently do with print sources. The link would've just been to save someone a few steps if they were trying to validate the information, but they'll have to make do. -- Fyrael (talk) 20:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Drama
Hi. Is there any wikidrama to take part in? I promise I will be a legitimate party, and I also do useful contributions to Wp. But just pls give me some drama. Sockpuppet investigation? ANI? Edit war? Anything will do really. Thanks. Encyclopédisme (talk) 19:25, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Encyclopédisme I'd strongly advise against going looking for drama. It'll likely only serve to make you more disgruntled with the project, increase tensions, and possibly cause you to be blocked if your comments don't help enough. Unlike social media websites, Wikipedia is a collaborative project and drama is generally bad, not good. Sincerely, Novo TapeMy Talk Page 19:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. I can reassure you tho, I am happy to contribute positively to content dispute resolution. I actually contribute to the mainspace as well. Its really just that I want to take part, neutrally, in various inside discussions. Im far from the only one often seen on dispute resolution (or actually Im not seen there, but Id like to be). Cheers. Encyclopédisme (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- doesn't the act of going there specifically for the drama kind of ruin that? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Encyclopédisme, it would be a big mistake for an editor with barely six weeks of service and 177 edits to seek out drama. Those who do usually make things worse and often end up blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 19:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I edit under ip longer tho, and I principally work on fr.wiki. Encyclopédisme (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Though I get it, you wont give me current discussions. No worries, il be just as happy watching drama. Cheers. Encyclopédisme (talk) 19:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Encyclopédisme: I agree with Cullen. On your username, you have lines
in Wikipedia, there is no property, there is only knowledge
. The goal of Wikipedia is to sum up human knowledge, drama is in none of the goals of Wikipedia. Your comments similar from this thread can be seen as trolling, or return of some previously blocked editor. I strongly recommend you to concentrate on content building, and the related activities of there-of. —usernamekiran (talk) 19:59, 13 February 2024 (UTC) - Be careful what you wish for; you just might get it. One who seeks drama will usually find themselves in it. Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 20:02, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes alright alright. My comments off of the Teahouse are all legitimate. Cheers. Encyclopédisme (talk) 20:10, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Encyclopédisme: I agree with Cullen. On your username, you have lines
- Though I get it, you wont give me current discussions. No worries, il be just as happy watching drama. Cheers. Encyclopédisme (talk) 19:56, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- I edit under ip longer tho, and I principally work on fr.wiki. Encyclopédisme (talk) 19:55, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Encyclopédisme, it would be a big mistake for an editor with barely six weeks of service and 177 edits to seek out drama. Those who do usually make things worse and often end up blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 19:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- doesn't the act of going there specifically for the drama kind of ruin that? cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 19:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes. I can reassure you tho, I am happy to contribute positively to content dispute resolution. I actually contribute to the mainspace as well. Its really just that I want to take part, neutrally, in various inside discussions. Im far from the only one often seen on dispute resolution (or actually Im not seen there, but Id like to be). Cheers. Encyclopédisme (talk) 19:43, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Encyclopédisme: If you really want to know, the drama page is WP:CESSPIT, more commonly known as WP:ANI. Another place with somewhat less drama is WP:AE. I advise against diving in there unless you really know what you're doing and are intimately familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:40, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
How to update/edit an existing Wikipedia page
I recently got editing rights. However, have no clue how to begin. I want to add additional drag queen names to this page: Category:Swedish drag queens. However, unclear when clicking on Edit how to add additional information. Thanks,
Wallaby5312 (talk) 22:46, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- You don't, you'd use a tool like HotCat to add a category to an existing page, such as RuPaul. All of the necessary instructions for HotCat will be on that page to help you with it. CommissarDoggoTalk? 22:50, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Wallaby5312 the page you just linked is a category page. See Help:Category for guidance on how to add categories.
- If you don't know where to contribute, you can always go to your newcomer homepage which can suggest edits to you. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 22:52, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Manuelle Oudar
Hi, This person was appointed to the Senate of Canada today. Definitely should be included in wikipedia (even before Senate appointment) and trying to create the page. Lots of biographical info and details at these links but I might not have cited correctly? Not sure how to do that.
https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/backgrounders/2024/02/13/manuelle-oudar
https://www.pm.gc.ca/en/news/news-releases/2024/02/13/prime-minister-announces-appointment-senator
https://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/trudeau-announces-new-senator-manuelle-oudar-1.7113795 Canadianpoliticaljunkie (talk) 00:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Name should also be added to the chart on this page, but I am afraid to mess up the formatting: List of current senators of Canada — Preceding unsigned comment added by Canadianpoliticaljunkie (talk • contribs) 00:11, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Canadianpoliticaljunkie: Draft:Manuelle Oudar was declined because it lacks inline citations. See WP:CITE for guidance. Summarize what the sources say and cite the sentences you write. ~Anachronist (talk) 00:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
What "counts" as a Wiki edit
— After editing awhile as a brand new editor, I began to realize that edits that I'd spent, say, 20 minutes doing counted the same as edits I'd spent only 3 minutes doing. It struck me that if I wanted to quickly amass a lot of edits, and thus be rewarded with accolades for reaching a certain level or edits like my 100th or 1,000th, the way to go for a point-greedy editor would be to make only a few edits, stop and post, rinse and repeat. Somehow, that seemed a little unfair. I was wondering if this discussion has ever come up in Wiki editordom.
— Are our Teahouse questions and replies counted as edits? Augnablik (talk) 17:24, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi, Augnablik! The answer is: it depends on the context. The software considers any change to any page on the project, article space, project space (like the Teahouse), or otherwise, as an edit, so from that purely technical perspective, yes, they all count.
- But if you're talking social capital, then maybe not. There are no real awards for edit count per se, so the value of the award, and thus of each individual edit, is only whatever value you decide it has. For that very reason, there are also no designated minimum edit counts for things like running for adminship, because such requirements would be easy to game. So, from that perspective, no, they might not count, or at least not as much.
- Finally, let me just say: I would try to avoid thinking of your edit count as your point total. Such point-scoring is a common attitude for people new to Wikipedia to have, but Wikipedia is not an MMORPG, and many people will look askance at a user who treats it as one. We are here to build an encyclopedia, no more and no less. :) Writ Keeper ⚇♔ 17:33, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia is an MMORPG lied to me! 57.140.16.1 (talk) 17:53, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- There are service awards (see Wikipedia:Service awards) you can put on your User page for milestones of number of edits and how long have had an account. These are self-rewarded. In the intro there: "Please remember that neither the number of edits nor the length of time from when an account was created is a good indicator of the quality of an editor's contributions or diplomatic ability. Hence, service awards do not indicate any level of authority whatsoever; "master" editors are not bestowed with more authority through this award than "novice" editors." David notMD (talk) 17:54, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, David notMD and Writ Keeper. And now, for the first time in the Teahouse, I find myself in the delightful position of being able to add something useful to a replier's valuable insights. I just came across a Wiki essay entitled Editcountitis Wikipedia:Editcountitis, a hilarious "medical description" of the affliction of obsessive interest in augmenting edit tallies. It was 100% serendipitous, this find.
- The problem that I see for Wiki editors in reading Editcountitis, however, is that it could make those with weak immune systems collapse in laughter, thus bringing about another serious medical issue perhaps even requiring admission to the ICU. Augnablik (talk) 02:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Antoneta Alamat Kusijanovic
Hi, how can I get the linked draft approved to be published? Please let me know what is needed. Thank you for your help! See at this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antoneta_Alamat_Kusijanović
The subject I'm writing about, currently has a Wikipedia page for her film, MURINA, published. See at this link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Murina_(film)
Thank you very much! 2AMUser (talk) 00:56, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @2AMUser, you can't ask for an AfC submission for review – that wouldn't be fair. The subject does seem notable with the right sourcing now, but there are some formatting issues. I'll help with that. TLA (talk) 01:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- First of all though, please rewrite the article. It's copied directly from https://arts.columbia.edu/directory/antoneta-alamat-kusijanovic. See WP:COPYRIGHT. TLA (talk) 01:07, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @2AMUser: For Draft:Antoneta_Alamat_Kusijanović you need to add sources that show the subject is notable. See WP:REFB and WP:N for guidance on that. After you have made those changes, click the Resubmit button to request a review of the draft. RudolfRed (talk) 01:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- I am not 100% sure on the independence of the sources [as some look like interviews]. Also, inline citations, would make it much easier to verify claims. (Edited to remove ambiguity) ✶Quxyz✶ 02:22, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Any office Action pages
I’ve only seen extra protct. Leninistpython (talk) 02:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Goodday @Leninistpython, could you clarify your question? If you are asking about the protection levels, please see WP:Protect ✶Quxyz✶ 02:27, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Leninistpython: You can learn more about that at Wikipedia:Office_actions and the links there. RudolfRed (talk) 02:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Can I have more sandbox
Hello, can I have more sandbox? I would like to test, edit and write some new articles. Thank you! Hanoifun (talk) 03:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Hanoifun: You can create as many sandboxes as you like! Any page title beginning with
User:Hanoifun/is a potential sandbox – User:Hanoifun/sandbox 1 is an example. Tollens (talk) 03:08, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Going about splitting a page for the first time
The page The Zircons came up in my newcomer feed, and i believe it should be split due to it being about 2 seemingly unrelated groups. Assuming either of these groups are notable enough, how would i go about trying to split for the first time? Powder9157 (talk) 23:08, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Powder9157 You'll have seen that I've left you a comment on the talk page, agreeing with the need to split the two articles. My approach would be to keep the article about The Zircons with just the relevant content about that one group, then copy over the text relating to The Zirkons to Draft:The Zirkons. (You should make that copy/paste edit by giving appropriate attribution to the authors who wrote it i.e. by simply pointing to the source article url in an Edit Summary)
- I'd work to find more sources for both bands as, TBH, I really don't feel either of them look like they would meet our WP:NMUSIC notability criteria. Many very old articles were not so rigorously assessed as they are today for notability. Only when you do find the source for The Zirkons should you then move it into the main part of the criteria. Doing so too soon would render it liable to a deletion discussion.
- Once both articles are in mainspace, you shopuld consider a WP:HATNOTE on each of them, pointing to the different group with different spelling. The relevant section within the Hatnote page can be found with this shortcut: WP:SIMILAR. Hope this helps, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:34, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry for the late reply but i've been looking for sources and i can't find a single one. The only sources in the article are discogs and apple music, and the other two are completely unrelated. Likely doesn't meet notability Powder9157 (talk) 03:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
This article has a substantial amount of unformatted text that has existed for at least four years. What should be done? 76.14.122.5 (talk) 03:14, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- The preferred way is to be WP:BOLD and fix it. If you are not confortable with that, you can start a discussion on the article's talk page about it. RudolfRed (talk) 04:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
How can I retrieve a deleted help message?
I just deleted by mistake someone's message in response to a request for help on a certain topic, and I really want it back. It happened because I didn't realize clicking on a blue circle would delete the message. I wish that had been shown near the blue circle.
I think the person who wrote me some important information was named something like RedRudolph, but I don't know how to see a list of the names of all editors so I could try to contact him or her directly.
The information that editor gave me was in answer to my question as to whether requests for completely replacing an existing article might ever be considered. I remember that editor sent me a link to a help article on this subject with something like "blowing up an article" in its title.?
Augnablik (talk) 22:04, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Augnablik: I'm happy to help you, but I need a bit more information. (FYI, the editor you refer to is almost certainly RudolfRed).
- Where did this take place? Like, what page?
- What is the blue button?
- When did this happen? Today, yesterday, earlier? Whatever you did, it will show up in your contributions.
- 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 22:12, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Augnablik: Is Wikipedia:Help desk#Full replacements what you're talking about? RudolfRed is one of the commenters there. Deor (talk) 23:30, 8 February 2024 (UTC)
- Cremastra and Deor, thank you for replying. My original message was apparently at the Help Desk on the 8th. The blue button seems to have been on an Alert message ... over at the top right of the message. Happy to hear that there is a RudolfRed among the editors, as that should be a very helpful piece of information in tracking him or her down. Augnablik (talk) 02:33, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Augnablik: Are you referring to notifications that you can access by clicking
at the top of the page? Clicking on the blue dot only marks it as read. You'll still be able to read it. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 03:04, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- All I know is that it disappeared when I clicked on the blue button. Augnablik (talk) 03:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- That happened to me once, but it was for a cross-wiki notification. Have you tried clicking on the "> All notifications" button at the bottom that shows up when you click the bell icon? HansVonStuttgart (talk) 08:18, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
- All I know is that it disappeared when I clicked on the blue button. Augnablik (talk) 03:46, 9 February 2024 (UTC)
source code, how enter new line without space
When adding a citation in source code, I find it difficult to read, so I like to start the citation on a new line. However, that adds a space before the [n], which is not correct. E.g., ...info. [1]
Is there a code I can use that adds a new line without the space? Like <ampersand>nbsp (add space without newline), but opposite (want no space, with newline). Thanks.
Disclosure: I asked this question along with many others in another discussion but did not receive an answer so am asking it here on its own. Sunandshade (talk) 03:28, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Would it not be sufficient to format your citation like this:
- ...regular prose.<ref>
- {{cite web|
- ...citation details...
- }}
- </ref>
- It seems like a waste of space to me, but I don't see how you would get much clearer than that. -- Fyrael (talk) 04:47, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, I could do that. Thanks for the info. As you say, the 1st "ref" is on the same line of the text. Then new line starting with "cite web". All the rest can be on that same line, which saves space. For me, ideal would be to have the 1st "ref" on a new line, but that adds a space so I can't do that, but close enough. Sunandshade (talk) 05:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Placing comments on AfC submissions as a non-reviewer
Hi all, obviously I'm not allowed to review AfC submissions (decline/accept) but am I allowed to put comments? For example on Draft:Albert Aretz I wanted to mention that more non-primary sources are needed, and I often spend time at NewPagesFeed where a lot of not-very-good submissions come up. TLA (talk) 00:53, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @I'm tla like any other draft, you can leave comments on an AfC submission's talk page, or on the primary editor's user page directly (which might be more likely to reach them). I would avoid using the AfC comment template, but there isn't any rule against it in principle. Rusalkii (talk) 05:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Christian persecution complex page and edits anti-Christian
| Take it to the articles' talkpage please, or don't. Usedtobecool ☎️ 07:08, 14 February 2024 (UTC) |
|---|
| The following discussion has been closed. Please do not modify it. |
|
How many Christian church and school shootings will it take to remove or edit the page: Christian persecution complex - Wikipedia? It should instead be edited to something similar to: Holocaust denial - Wikipedia article. 2601:1C2:4C00:F7E0:E15D:36F:2FE9:E905 (talk) 04:42, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
|
Refs to reliable sources online - does it matter where hosted?
I'm looking at Andrew Malcolm (author), where a number of the references - 20+ - are to documents uploaded to a website belonging to the subject of the article. Most are images or text of articles that are from reliable, independent sources; this article from Private Eye, for instance. A few are to primary sources Malcolm has uploaded, such as this letter. What's the policy on this? I'm assuming any primary sources should come out, but is it ok to leave the links to akmedea for the remaining references? For Private Eye, which is still largely print I think, the alternative would be to give the date, title, author only, as with any print ref I guess. I have tagged the article with SPS, but technically these are self-hosted rather than self-published. Thanks, Tacyarg (talk) 18:12, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Tacyarg. The point of a citation is to allow a reader to determine the origin and likely reliability of a source, so it should always contain as many as possible of author, title, date, where it was published (what journal, magazine etc). If there is a legal copy online, then it is helpful to readers to link to it, but that is not a requirement.
- When linking to an online copy, the preference is, of course to a copy posted by the original publisher. If that is not available, then there are two questions that must be considered. The first is copyright: did whoever posted the material online have permission to do so? If not, or if it is in doubt, do not link to it: as a matter of policy, Wikipedia articles do not link to copyright violations. (Note that copies posted on the subject's site may or may not have permission: unless it somewhere states that they have, I would suggest erring on the side of caution).
- The second point is of reliability. Has the material been posted by a reliable source, or by some random person? Of course, if it is a screenshot of the original publication, it probably hasn't been altered (though may very well be a copyright infringement). But if it is the text of an article, say, how confident can you be that it is a faithful copy? ColinFine (talk) 18:59, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Crossed in the post with ColinFine: Yes, it does matter, depending on the situation. We should not link to sites that violate copyright, hosting material whose copyright they do not own (see WP:COPYVIOEL), so with something like a Private Eye article you'd need to be sure akmedea are all above board. No matter where hosted, letters and accounts of legal proceedings are primary, and don't really belong in an article like that unless some secondary source has commented on them. If he wrote a letter to OUP, for a WP article I want a newspaper telling me about it. And the least of all the problems, in the interests of neutrality, I think it's best to use reasonably neutral sources where possible. Elemimele (talk) 19:01, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Thinking about reworking "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Impact_of_self-driving_cars"
Yeah, that. Any thoughts or ideas? Right now it seems like a mess of unorganized information that's biased, and I want to shorten parts of it and make it much clearer that many of the proposed benefits are stated as facts.
I think most of this hasn't been touched since 2021. I'm definitely a bit skeptical of self-driving cars, but I think I could do something that is at least NPOV and clearer. homo momo (talk) 21:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- ... amazingly, the first section about the automobile industry doesn't even talk about self-driving cars at all. Need somewhere to rant haha homo momo (talk) 21:07, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- the beginning paragraph is a sort of introduction. itd be weird to start a story without the exposition (unless you can do it correctly) Natelabs (talk) 21:19, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sawerchessread: The first thing to do is give it a WP:NPOV title, such as "Effect of self-driving cars", rather than the current pejorative "Impact...".
- Incidentally, you must change your signature as it contravenes WP:CUSTOMSIG/P. Bazza (talk) 10:52, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
How do I do visual editing in my sandbox?
Hi I'm working on something in my sandbox, and I can't see how to get visual editing... I've looked at the help page, but my sandbox page doesn't have the visual editing option - what am I doing wrong?! Also, I can't get the citations tab to work so I can populate a citation template... again, help please! My sandbox page is here https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ruthhenrietta/sandbox&action=edit Ruthhenrietta (talk) 16:22, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- it's because that's the sandbox's talk page. you can't normally edit talk pages with the visual editor without some minor jank (changing the
&action=editto&veaction=edit, like so) - on that topic, why is the sandbox itself a redirect anyway? that only makes the editing process slightly harder cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 16:41, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- sorry, I don't really understand your reply.... I'm a real novice, so need things explaining in more detail and not in wiki language! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- basically
- sandbox: can be edited with the visual editor without changing the url. you seem to have accidentally made yours a redirect to the article you're working on
- sandbox's talk page: can't be edited with the visual editor normally and lacks a dedicated citation button, as it's normally meant to be used to discuss whatever is in the sandbox. you seem to have accidentally written there instead of in the sandbox
- in any case, i transferred the contents of the talk page to the sandbox, so you can go there to edit now cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 18:06, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you so much for transferring it... much appreciated... will crack on!! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 19:04, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Cogsan It's a minor point I'd like to pick you up on, but you are incorrect in stating that there is no dedicated Cite button available whilst editing a talk page with Source Editor. It very definitely is there, and often comes in most handy when discussing sources to put into an article. To avoid all those references appearing at the bottom of a talk page (rather than at the bottom of the particular individual thread, you can use the
{{reflist-talk}}template with it. Cheers, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:17, 13 February 2024 (UTC)- i meant in talk pages. not the source editor
- can understand the mistake though cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- oh, wait
- my reading comprehensions skills took a nose dive while i was typing that last reply, wow
- the cite and template buttons are unavailable when using the comment function (which is what i'll assume was happening, since ruth mentioned the lack of the citation function), not editing the talk page with either editor
- my bad cogsan (nag me) (stalk me) 11:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- basically
- sorry, I don't really understand your reply.... I'm a real novice, so need things explaining in more detail and not in wiki language! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 17:31, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
Quick route desired
I seem to be making up for months of Wiki inaction this week in the Teahouse. Hope not to wear out my welcome. This request for help getting where I want in the Teahouse will perhaps be helpful for other new editors.
If I get a notification of a reply to a question I've raised in the Teahouse, I'm hoping there's a way within the notification to quickly go right where the reply was posted. So far I just don't see one. Is there one? Augnablik (talk) 10:06, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Augnablik: At least the way it is set up for me, if I click the short preview of the reply it takes me directly there. Perhaps it will do the same for you? If not, what does happen when you click the notification itself? Tollens (talk) 10:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Well, Tollens, I just realized that it differs depending on whether I'm on my iPhone or my computer. Neither one, though, is exactly what I want. I'm really surprised that you get where you want in the Teahouse by merely clicking on the short preview of the reply but I cannot.
- — On my iPhone, I click either the phone icon or "On web" and I'm taken to the top of the Teahouse. Once there, I find NO way to search the Teahouse with a search word, such as my replier's name or a unique word in my question.
- — On my computer, although I'm again taken to the top of the Teahouse I can at least do a search of the Teahouse (Command-F on my Mac) and all instances of the search word will be highlighted for me to see. Eventually, I'll get to the place I want, but that's so cumbersome. Augnablik (talk) 12:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Augnablik On my PC, if I "subscribe" to a thread like this then I am alerted when someone else replies and these alerts provide clickable links straight to the correct section. I have alerted you by the WP:PING system, so there should be a similar link for you there. Alternatively, if you look in your contribution history and cast your eye onto the part where it shows your contribution to "Teahouse/Quick route desired" then clicking on the latter part should take you straight back here (unless the thread has been archived). Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:46, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Error: No valid link was found at the end of line 6.
In the section on Emancipation Proclamation in Abraham Lincoln appears the statement "Error: No valid link was found at the end of line 6." That was not true, because, although the first link in footnote 225 did not work, the archived link did. But I edited the footnote to get rid of the first link. Now I'd like to get rid of "Error: No valid link was found at the end of line 6," but I don't see it when I go to "Edit source."
Also, I've never before seen "Error: No valid link was found at the end of line 6." I've often seen [dead link]. Is there a reason to use "Error: No valid link was found at the end of line 6" rather than [dead link]? Maurice Magnus (talk) 13:34, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Maurice Magnus the error was not due to a reference, it was due to an WP:Image map. I have fixed the error and restored the previous citation. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 13:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
The Talk Page for Article is a Different Topic
Ubiquitous is that which is appears to be omnipresent, as in seen almost everywhere.
However, the Talk Page for the article is the talk page for Omnipresence.
How can this be fixed? Starlighsky (talk) 02:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think its really a problem that needs to be fixed. It is normal for a talk page of a redirect to be merged with the parent article's talk page. It helps to centralize discussions, since redirects do not get much attention. Ca talk to me! 02:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- It evolved because they were originally considered the same word.
- However, there is no way to talk about the article ubiquitous at this point...as I understand this. Starlighsky (talk) 03:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ubiquitous is a redirect to Omnipresence. (However, it doesn't seem to work at the moment because of the RfD notice.)
- Talk:Ubiquitous is a redirect to Talk:Omnipresence. If you click on Talk:Ubiquitous, then look just under the top title of Talk:Omnipresence, you will see it says "(Redirected from Talk:Ubiquitous)". Clicking on that link will take you back to the actual Talk page for Ubiquitous. -- Verbarson talkedits 14:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Correction: Ubiquitous has at some point been a redirect to Omnipresence (hence the Talk page redirect), but it has been overwritten to redirect to Ubiquitous (adverb or adjective), which doesn't exist.
- Yes, this is a mess. Feel free to discuss it at the RfD page. -- Verbarson talkedits 14:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Is this sufficient for Wikimedia Picture posting
I believe WP:TH also handles Wikimedia questions. The Ellis Island Foundation (https:/www.www.statueofliberty.org) is part of the Nat'l Park Service. The US Gov't usually does not copyright their materials. The Foundation has a photograph of a Russian Volunteer Force (RVF) vessel that I would like to add to the RVF article. I was able to receive the following statement from the Foundation: "Hello again, The images of the passenger lists are not subject to copyright as they are documents produced by the US government for the purposes of immigration. Best, Donor Relations" Needless to say when dealing with the Federal Government it is virtually impossible to get the exact name of the person who inquiries should be referred to. Is the enough sufficient to allow the photo to be posted on Wikimedia? Thanks. Oldsilenus (talk) 00:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oldsilenus most likely yes, though you may want to check at the Wikimedia Commons help desk. (The Teahouse is for using or editing Wikipedia). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:41, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! Sorry, I thought the last time that I asked them a question the response came from WP:TH. Another benefit of asking was that I found that a VPN I thought was removed was still present! Oldsilenus (talk) 14:54, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
No Discussion, move?
If I initiated a move discussion, and advertised(notified) about it on the WikiProjects 1 2 and other things, but still the discussion seems inactive, should I be bold to move it? There is no response on Requested moves too. ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 14:38, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- I don't see any reason to not be bold. Go for it! Ca talk to me! 15:09, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
You guys think this article is complete?
To everybody who reads this message, don't actually accept or decline, but if you have time, can you check to see if the Draft:U.S. Route 83 in South Dakota article is ready for the mainspace? I feel like it has enough sources, there's a detailed route description, and a history and future section is also put in there. Ping me to let me know how it looks. Thanks. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 11:23, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- NoobThreePointOh or you could just wait until a review. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 13:43, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Sungodtemple I guess. I've already submitted it for review and waiting. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- In my view it's about Start level right now. In Future and History you have a single short paragraph under a header, but that's not particularly preferred. MOS:PARA discourages that. I think if you combined them into a longer, broader section or found a way to reasonably expand those two sections it could be C Dionysius Millertalk 13:46, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- The weird thing is that trying to find information is extremely scarce since the route is extremely rural and lonely. I guess if it gets accepted, we could try to improve it a bit more. Not sure, but could use some brushing up. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @NoobThreePointOh, In case you haven't seen it, this may interest you:Why Wikipedia’s Highway Editors Took the Exit Ramp Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:40, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Gråbergs Gråa Sång Thanks. I will look at it later. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 17:16, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @NoobThreePointOh, In case you haven't seen it, this may interest you:Why Wikipedia’s Highway Editors Took the Exit Ramp Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 15:40, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- The weird thing is that trying to find information is extremely scarce since the route is extremely rural and lonely. I guess if it gets accepted, we could try to improve it a bit more. Not sure, but could use some brushing up. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 13:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Issues with timelines, but no error messages?
I think there's an issue with EasyTimeline but for the life of me I can't figure it out, nor do I know where to report the issue....
If you try to change anything whatsoever on a timeline (a person's date, color of an instrument, anything at all), such as here or here, it will display as if there's no image. There's no error message or anything.
However, on timelines such as here or here, it's perfectly fine and displays as normal when something is changed. But the latter two were created in the same way as the former two.
I have absolutely no idea why this is affecting some timelines but not others. I cannot find any major differences between the first two and second two examples, and I've even tried copying the attributes (timeline size, colors, etc.) of a working timeline into a broken one, and it still doesn't work. It's random and I don't know the cause of it. Xanarki (talk) 16:51, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Xanarki, you might want to ask this question at Wikipedia:Village pump (technical). WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:28, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Why exactly does the visual editor not work on non-article pages?
Title Eightos (talk) 00:26, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Eightos, could you specify what pages you are referring to? CanonNi (talk) 03:38, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Eightos, the answer is that the developers who work for the Wikimedia Foundation have not yet successfully implemented that functionality, despite years of effort and countless dollars spent. Some might say wasted. I suggest that you consider using the fully functional source editor instead, which works perfectly everywhere on Wikipedia. Many people see it as "old fashioned" even though it works smoothly and has been instrumental in creating the #7 website in the world. I am no code monkey or computer geek, but still found it very easy to learn. Take a look at WP:CHEATSHEET. This is neither brain surgery nor rocket science. Any smart, focused person can learn the basics in half an hour or less. Cullen328 (talk) 09:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Cullen328 Sorry, I wasn't trying to attack the WMF for not implementing it. Sorry if I sounded rude or anything. Eightos (talk) 12:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, @Eightos. You didn't do anything wrong. Did the visual editor just disappear from articles? It's always available on all articles, but sometimes it gets 'hidden' behind a second button.
- Looking at your contributions, I think you might have a preferences setting for "Remember my last editor". That means that if you start in the visual editor, it keeps going in that editing environment, until you switch to a wikitext editor (e.g., by Undoing an edit). Then it keeps going in that editing environment until you switch back.
- Unfortunately, if you don't remember the one-time message about how to switch back, you might get "stuck" in the old wikitext editor. If it feels like the visual editor has disappeared from the articles, then please go to Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-editing-editor and look for a drop-down menu that says "Editing mode". I suspect that says "Remember my last". Set that to whatever you want. For example, I have it set to "Show me both editor tabs" (I get separate buttons for the visual editor and a wikitext editor), and a lot of newer editors prefer "Always give me the visual editor if possible". You should pick what you want.
- If you don't want to change your preferences and just want to switch back, then here's how to do it:
- Open the wikitext editor (in case you ever need to know, you're using one called the '2010 wikitext editor', which is also called 'WikiEditor'; you can see screenshots of many options at mw:Editor). You can do this on any article, even one you don't intend to edit.
- Look all the way at the far end of the editor's toolbar, in the top corner, for a pencil icon. Click that, and choose "Visual editing".
- It will switch you to the visual editor. Then you can close the tab. (You don't have to publish an edit for it to remember that you used the visual editor most recently.)
- There's a matching button in the visual editor's toolbar to switch back to your wikitext editor. Sometimes people switch multiple times during a single edit. Good luck, WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Are such Userpages allowed?
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Does User:Praxidicae's userpage violate Userpage Guidlines like "...you should avoid substantial content on your user page that is unrelated to Wikipedia...."? (Note: I don't have any problem with User:Praxidicae and/or Black Lives Matter, but simply confused as User:Praxidicae seems experienced user. Also I am not asking this on their talk page as it may lead to bias.) ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 13:32, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- ExclusiveEditor, this encyclopedia covers the incidents involving the people listed there. In addition, Praxidicae has not edited in six weeks. Cullen328 (talk) 20:10, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- What about my userpage is objectionable to the point it doesn’t warrant a discussion? I am an experienced user, you are correct. And as such, you should probably approach users when you have issues as long as they aren’t egregious (ie. harassment). GRINCHIDICAE🎄 17:47, 13 February 2024 (UTC)
@Praxidicae: There are numerous examples of such user pages on Wikipedia, I took yours just as an example, and treated this question from a general perspective. Although I already mentioned why I tried not to discuss this on your talk page. Regards, ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 14:21, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @ExclusiveEditor, I think the answer is towards the end of that section:
- "The Wikipedia community is generally tolerant and offers fairly wide latitude in applying these guidelines to regular participants. Particularly, community-building activities that are not strictly "on topic" may be allowed, especially when initiated by committed Wikipedians with good edit histories. At their best, such activities help us to build the community, and this helps to build the encyclopedia."
- Providing some personal information (e.g., you are busy in real life, you are interested in STEM, you are using Google Chrome) might not be obviously "on topic", but they can be helpful to the community. For example: Don't be surprised if the busy person doesn't reply immediately. You are interested in science, and Praxidicae is interested in Black Lives Matters, so take the science question to you and the BLM question to Praxidicae. You are using Google Chrome, so if you ever report a software problem at the Wikipedia:Help desk or Wikipedia:Village pump (technical), then we won't have to ask you for web browser information. This is ultimately helpful to the community in a way that, say, a fanfic story or an advertisement would not be. WhatamIdoing (talk) 18:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Added twice a section and did a SAVE. The additions did not show up or disappeared the next day. What do I do wrong? Please reply to temp AT ontooo.com Thanks Ddccc (talk) 18:17, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Ddccc, welcome to the Teahouse. You added content in this edit. Another editor, Jochen Burghardt, summarized your addition in a different place (see this edit) and then removed your original contribution (see this edit). This can all be seen in the page's history. If you want to contest their change, you can start a discussion on the talk page, Talk:Unification (computer science). 57.140.16.1 (talk) 18:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Ddccc, and welcome to the Teahouse. I only see that you once added a section. If you look at the article's history, you will see that Jochen Burghardt reverted your edit, but their edit summary says that they moved it up to another paragraph.
- You have started discussing the matter on Talk:Unification (computer science), but you didn't WP:ping that editor, so they may not have seen your post there; however, I have pinged them here, so they should see this discussion and hopefully will go to the talk page to explain to you why they made the change.
- Nobody will be contacting you by email: that's not how we work. ColinFine (talk) 18:25, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
list of draft deletion proposals that make no sense today
i remembered that somewhere there was a page in the wp namespace about article drafts that got deleted for reasons that would be silly today (like iPhone)
can anyone help me find this page Natelabs (talk) 20:02, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Natelabs: Perhaps Wikipedia:Before they were notable? DanCherek (talk) 20:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Maps
What software will allow me to generate a new map and release it under a free license? 20 upper (talk) 12:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- If you don't receive an answer here I suggest you ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Maps. Shantavira|feed me 13:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @20 upper! Many maps of the sort that we would want to use on Wikipedia are ineligible for copyright, so the licensing should not be a concern unless it includes satellite imagery or some other copyrightable component. I second the suggestion to ask the maps project. Cheers, Sdkb talk 21:16, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Hi!
Hi! How do I create a meetup editathon page? Do I just create one in my sandbox and then link it somehow? Bumusiclibrary (talk) 19:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Bumusiclibrary All the information and instructions are to be found at WP:MEET. Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- The page instructions say create a page, but don't explain how to create a page. Bumusiclibraryblackcomposereditor (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- You create a page by typing its full name (which in this case will start with either
Wikipedia:orUser:Bumusiclibraryblackcomposereditor/) into the search bar, and when it says it can't find it, it will offer you the option of creating it. ColinFine (talk) 21:42, 14 February 2024 (UTC)- ok perfect! Thank you so much! Bumusiclibraryblackcomposereditor (talk) 21:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- The instructions suggest you should use the tools at Programs and Events Dashboard Mike Turnbull (talk) 21:44, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- You create a page by typing its full name (which in this case will start with either
- The page instructions say create a page, but don't explain how to create a page. Bumusiclibraryblackcomposereditor (talk) 21:17, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
The draft I created in Sandbox yesterday is no longer there
Hello, I was working on my page Susana Tubert/sandbox last night and wanted to finish it today but I had to log in again and now I don't see the page there anymore. Was it deleted? Do I need to start all over again? How do I save my work to make sure it does not happen again.
Thanks for your help!
Susana. SusanaTubert (talk) 21:59, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @SusanaTubert, welcome to the Teahouse. The above appears to be the only edit you've made with this account, and your account has no subpages. Did you click Publish page or Publish changes at any point while working on your draft? That is the only way to 'save' anything to Wikipedia. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 22:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh shoot. No, I thought that by clicking on "Publish" it would be reviewed by the team that reviews new pages and I had not finished my draft so I did not click on it. Fortunately I saved a copy - so would I be able to copy/paste it again? And should I click Publish every time I want to save a work in progress draft? SusanaTubert (talk) 22:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, @SusanaTubert, you'll need to click the Publish button in order to save any changes you make. It simply makes your page active on Wikipedia - it doesn't put the page into a reviewing queue. Once you make the page, if you ask for help here someone will be able to add the submission template, which will have the button for putting the draft up for review. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing this super helpful information. May I take the opportunity to ask you a couple of other questions ...or do I need to start a new thread/topic? SusanaTubert (talk) 22:22, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Probably easier to keep it all in one place, unless you want to ask something entirely new and unrelated - inquire away, @SusanaTubert, that's what we're (not) paid for! 57.140.16.1 (talk) 22:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Ha-ha! Love that! You're awesome... even though I don't know your name so I cannot thank you personally. (Sorry!) Sp, I just copy/pasted the article back onto sandbox. I clicked on Publish and now ...poof! the page is gone again ...? Or am I not accessing it through the proper means?
- Also: I don't see the links anymore ... or the citation sources below. Do I have to reconstruct everything manually? SusanaTubert (talk) 22:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @SusanaTubert, it's at User:SusanaTubert/sandbox. I'm afraid you'll indeed need to reconstruct everything, and since you're apparently writing about yourself, you should review our policies on editing with a conflict of interest (WP:COI). You can call me 57.14 or IP editor or Tarlonniel or anything you like - I'm not picky.
57.140.16.1 (talk) 22:35, 14 February 2024 (UTC) - @SusanaTubert It seems that you have some footnote references, but when you copy and paste, you only copied the text and didn't copy the references. Perhaps try "edit source"? Also I agree with the IP editor above: it is discouraged to write about yourself on Wikipedia. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 22:37, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @SusanaTubert To warrant an article here you need to show how you are wikinotable. Your award from the Themed Entertainment Association will help do that but you must write with a neutral tone, without any hint of promotion, which is very difficult for someone writing an autobiography, which is why we strongly discourage that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 22:48, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @SusanaTubert, it's at User:SusanaTubert/sandbox. I'm afraid you'll indeed need to reconstruct everything, and since you're apparently writing about yourself, you should review our policies on editing with a conflict of interest (WP:COI). You can call me 57.14 or IP editor or Tarlonniel or anything you like - I'm not picky.
- Probably easier to keep it all in one place, unless you want to ask something entirely new and unrelated - inquire away, @SusanaTubert, that's what we're (not) paid for! 57.140.16.1 (talk) 22:24, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you for sharing this super helpful information. May I take the opportunity to ask you a couple of other questions ...or do I need to start a new thread/topic? SusanaTubert (talk) 22:22, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, @SusanaTubert, you'll need to click the Publish button in order to save any changes you make. It simply makes your page active on Wikipedia - it doesn't put the page into a reviewing queue. Once you make the page, if you ask for help here someone will be able to add the submission template, which will have the button for putting the draft up for review. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oh shoot. No, I thought that by clicking on "Publish" it would be reviewed by the team that reviews new pages and I had not finished my draft so I did not click on it. Fortunately I saved a copy - so would I be able to copy/paste it again? And should I click Publish every time I want to save a work in progress draft? SusanaTubert (talk) 22:13, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Wikipedia font
Hi. Does anyone know what font Wikipedia uses for its headers and body text? Thanks. CanonNi (talk) 03:56, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @CanonNi According to WP:TYPE, Sans-serif. Relativity 04:29, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- At least in the body. The serif font looks pretty similar to headings and titles. Relativity 04:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Relativity Thanks you so much! CanonNi (talk) 08:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @CanonNi: Note that the typefaces "sans-serif" and "serif" are not actual typeface names. They simply tell the browser to use a sans-serif font, or a serif font. The browser can be configured by the user to display any typeface for those categories. On Mac computers this is typically Helvetica for sans-serif, on Windows it used to be Arial but now it's Calibri, and on Linux I think it's Nimbus Sans. But the user can change it to anything. Wikipedia does not dictate what typeface to use; that's up to each individual browser. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Relativity Thanks you so much! CanonNi (talk) 08:55, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- At least in the body. The serif font looks pretty similar to headings and titles. Relativity 04:30, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
copyright of public domain material in non-free books (UK)
Would public domain photos, illustrations etc extracted from copyrighted books still be in the public domain or would they be under the same copyright as the book which they were extracted from? Both book and photo/illustration were published/created in the UK. Goldclock (talk) 00:02, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- I'm not entirely sure of what it is that you're asking about, Goldclock, but I'll have a try. Gin Street is in the public domain. I may publish a book about Hogarth, gin, moral panics, stoops, or whatever, and within this book reproduce Gin Street. I'd almost certainly copyright my book. You could then decide that the reproduction in my book of Gin Street is superior to that in Commons. My copyright claim doesn't apply to the reproduction of Gin Street. You may scan the reproduction and upload it to Commons, as in the public domain. Does this answer the question? -- Hoary (talk) 00:35, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Using AI for editing and creating Wikipedia articles
Hello everyone, my name is Hanoifun. How can I use AI for editing and creating Wikipedia articles? Hanoifun (talk) 05:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hanoifun, simply, you do not use AI. You use your own intelligence instead. -- Hoary (talk) 06:01, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Did You Know
Apologies, but is the “Did You Know” template on the front page available for public use? I would want one that instead lists new facts for every time the cache is cleared, this is for a Fandom wiki I’m on, if it isn’t for public use nor is it free to use, I’ll ask other users on Fandom instead and see if I get any help. Cometkeiko (talk) 06:07, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Cometkeiko! Wikipedia:Did you know is a complex system. The actual code is at Template:Did you know, but it relies on subtemplates, etc., so it might be difficult to copy. Something like Template:Random portal component would be able to achieve the behavior you're seeking on clearing the cache. You're free to copy anything on Wikipedia so long as you abide by the terms of the license. Cheers, Sdkb talk 06:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Downgrading an article
Hi. I'm working on this article and have a question. Can a article be reassessed and downgraded? I think the article no longer furfills the FL criteria. If a downgrade is possible, how can I do it? Thanks. CanonNi (talk) 07:58, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, CanonNi. If you think that a featured list needs to be improved or expanded to better meet the criteria, then your very best option by far is to improve or expand the list. All other options pale in comparison. I see no edits by you to the list since last December 9, and I see no discussion by you on Talk: List of skyscrapers in Shanghai. This is, after all, a list article where the inclusion criteria are clear and reliable sources regularly cover the topic area. If you have not yet made a good faith effort to improve and/or discuss any shortcomings, why do you think that other editors would agree to downgrade the list. Am I missing something? Cullen328 (talk) 08:13, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Creating a company's page and declaring the "conflict of interest statement"
Hi everyone,
I am creating Wikipedia page for one of my previous company. Yes I have a connection with the company owners, but still I have managed the neutral point of view in the content. Also I have added the reliable sources.
Now I want to declare the conflict of interest statement in that. Can anyone help me ensure that how can I do this? WriterPankajRai (talk) 04:43, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- @writerpankajrai: see here for instructions. ltbdl (talk) 05:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Ltbdl
- I have used "{{ c o nnected contributor }}" command to declare my self as a connected author with the topic/company.
- I'm also going to follow the instructions that you have shared.
- Can you let me know if It is possible to get a company page (that is popular and have reliable PR sources) created on wikipedia even if I’m connected as an employee or past employee? WriterPankajRai (talk) 06:38, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Press releases are not acceptable sources, as they are the company speaking about themselves. Wikipedia wants to know what independent reliable sources with significant coverage have chosen on their own to say about a topic like a company- not based on materials from the company or prompted by the company.
- The connected contributor notice is for the draft talk page, not the draft itself. You should also make a disclosure on your user page, see WP:COI for instructions. If you work for this company, you must instead make the stricter paid editing disclosure, a Terms of Use requirement. 331dot (talk) 08:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
How to deal with Mobile edits from non-accounts just IP addresses
There are multiple edits made on topics referring to early Mongolian cultures, often times they refer to the same “Ashina” story, which I’ve recently learned is some Turkish nationalist rhetoric. I have done academic research of these anthropological culture that I am referring to and there is no connection at all between these cultures and the “Ashina”. Many times these edits are referring to a hypothetical language that cultures spoke, but there is zero evidence of their language in any capacity, but these IP addresses keep changing my edits. How to keep fake information off of the pages I am editing? Fact Check Mongol (talk) 00:50, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Fact Check Mongol the discussion process for IP addresses is the same as any other user. Calling it 'fake information' wouldn't be very constructive in such a discussion. In any case, you should read WP:BRD. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 01:39, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Fact Check Mongol, Wikipedia articles need to summarize what reliable published sources say. I have no expertise or even familiarity with the topic area, but I do see that the article Ashina tribe includes quite a few references to sources, that on first glance, appear to be reliable, academic sources. As a general principle, if content is added without being properly referenced to a reliable source, any editor has several choices: Find and add a reliable source verifying the content. Or, add a Template:citation needed tag if the content is plausible. Or, discuss the matter on the article talk page. Or, forget about it and move on. Or, if you are reasonably sure the content is incorrect, remove it with an accurate edit summary explaining why. You cannot edit based on your own academic research. You must summarize published, reliable sources.
- We have no policies whatsoever restricting edits by IP addresses using mobile devices. They have just as much of a right to edit as anyone else, as long as they comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 10:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- At first glance, the paper cited is a paper about some Empress Ashina, however the paper does not contain the words slab grave or anything relating to the slab grave Anthropological culture at all. Fact Check Mongol (talk) 21:45, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- We have no policies whatsoever restricting edits by IP addresses using mobile devices. They have just as much of a right to edit as anyone else, as long as they comply with Wikipedia's Policies and guidelines. Cullen328 (talk) 10:04, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- You should start a discussion on the article talk page. Right now, you're reverting edits without discussion, which will make people think you're acting in bad faith. Even if you're right, edit warring is still banned. I recommend you start a thread on the slab-grave culture talk page, ping all the other involved editors, leave messages on the IPs' talk pages (they don't get ping notifications), and work to establish a consensus. WP:FRINGE, WP:RS and WP:RSHISTORY will be useful reads. You can also contact WP:Anthropology or other relevant WikiProjects for advice. HansVonStuttgart (talk) 09:18, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Please help me!
Dear participants! My article was rejected because it looked like an advertisement. I didn't want to write it this way, but it turned out differently. Please help me complete the article!
Draft:EGOV.PRESS Zzremin (talk) 09:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Zzremin One reason it looks like an advert is because it has multiple external links to egov.press in the body text, which look like spam links. Remove them all (see WP:EL). Incidentally, your draft was declined, not rejected, which means you can continue work on it and re-submit. You need more sources meeting these criteria, as well as adjusting the tone. Mike Turnbull (talk) 10:01, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
WP:LEAKS
@Walkersam started Wikipedia_talk:Reliable_sources#WP:LEAKS and @WhatamIdoing replied. I used the TALK and other pages to start WP:LEAKS essay. Draft is Draft:Leaks_are_questionable_sources Softlem (talk) 12:49, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- This does not seem to be phrased as a question. Were you looking for some feedback on your essay? From a cursory glance, everything in it seems solid. Ca talk to me! 15:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
Were you looking for some feedback on your essay?
yes. sorry. i want feedback before i move it from draft Softlem (talk) 16:36, 14 February 2024 (UTC)- I think there are a few little bits that would benefit from revision (e.g., a press release isn't a leak), but I think you should put it in the Wikipedia: space now. WhatamIdoing (talk) 17:00, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- @Softlemonades Your draft looks good to me but note that the shortcut WP:LEAKS already exists, linking to part of WP:RS, so you need to invent other shortcut(s). Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:03, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- ... sorry, you probably already knew that! Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think the intent is to replace the existing WP:LEAKS shortcut, due to its shortcomings I pointed out at the talk page. As to the piece, I have three points of feedback:
- I think it might be prudent to define "leaks" explicitly in the intro rather than merely linking to the data breach page (though I do think there is a good definition there, really only the last sentence of the intro paragraph is needed).
- We should acknowledge that leakers are often also whistleblowers - the tone of the piece overall reads quite critical of "leakers"; I think we might be able to acknowledge that leakers can have good intentions while nonetheless accepting that they are not WP:RS.
- Lastly, I left a bit confused by the references to "promotional" and "self-published" leaks, maybe because I simply haven't encountered this genre. Perhaps you have an example or two that could be referenced?
- I'd like to thank @Softlemonades for your effort - it's a marked improvement on the status quo and I expect it will serve as a valuable reference for many editors to come. Walkersam (talk) 00:04, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
I think the intent is to replace the existing WP:LEAKS shortcut, due to its shortcomings I pointed out at the talk page.
Yes. Replace shortcut, and put the nutshellunless reported by a reliable source, leaks should not normally be used or cited directly in articles
on WP:RSI think it might be prudent to define "leaks" explicitly in the intro rather than merely linking to the data breach page (though I do think there is a good definition there, really only the last sentence of the intro paragraph is needed).
We should acknowledge that leakers are often also whistleblowers - the tone of the piece overall reads quite critical of "leakers"; I think we might be able to acknowledge that leakers can have good intentions while nonetheless accepting that they are not WP:RS.
- Good ideas
Lastly, I left a bit confused by the references to "promotional" and "self-published" leaks, maybe because I simply haven't encountered this genre. Perhaps you have an example or two that could be referenced?
- If you put leaked Wikipedia admin talks on web page, that would be self-published. A lot on twitter and blogs.
- If you put leaks somewhere that said you were good and smart or had big enemies, that would be promotional.
- I just edited to try to make clearer diff Softlem (talk) 12:01, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- I think the intent is to replace the existing WP:LEAKS shortcut, due to its shortcomings I pointed out at the talk page. As to the piece, I have three points of feedback:
- ... sorry, you probably already knew that! Mike Turnbull (talk) 17:05, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
does anyone know where to hire for article writing?
does anyone know where to hire for article writing? Looking to hire for something that is plenty detailed in references and links and cross references. TIA Tetelestaidudes (talk) 22:09, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Tetelestaidudes, welcome to the Teahouse. There are no 'official' writing services, and the vast majority of the unofficial ones are scams. Beware anyone who contacts you offering to get an article published in exchange for payment. You might want to read WP:SCAM. 57.140.16.1 (talk) 22:12, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello. I doubt you will get much advice on where to hire someone; though allowed if disclosed, paid editing is generally not looked upon too favorably. If you choose to do that, don't hand over any money until you see the finished product. They cannot promise you anything(such as writing an article that will not be deleted). See WP:SCAM as well. For what reason do you want to hire someone? 331dot (talk) 22:15, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, Tetelestaidudes. As well as what the others have said, I recommend you read an article about yourself isn't necessarily a good thing. ColinFine (talk) 22:32, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
- That said, there are paid contributors here who do good work, fully disclose their clients, and are meticulous about abiding by Wikipedia policies and guidelines, especially avoiding directly editing articles and instead discussing improvements on talk pages. I recall interacting with one such person in the past on a BLP talk page, and that editor is in good standing on Wikipedia. They tend not to list themselves on category pages so they aren't easy to find. Some are listed at Wikipedia:Statement on Wikipedia from participating communications firms including the editor I just mentioned. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:19, 14 February 2024 (UTC)
It appears that last spring you created a draft about a band Tetelestai, the draft being deleted for inactivity six months later. Before trying again, see WP:NMUSIC for establishing notability for music topics. David notMD (talk) 12:31, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Unable to Get the draft Published
Hi, I was trying to get the draft published for Insurancedekho. But, it was rejected. It was a neutral content and tried to keep the reference links for all the major points. Is there any specific things to be kept in mind for approval? Ashutosh2097 (talk) 13:46, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Ashutosh2097. It wasn't neutral content if it was speedily deleted as promotional.
- Please very carefully read WP:NPOV and understand that only organisations who meet our notability criteria merit an article. Wikipedia is not a business directory. Qcne (talk) 13:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
How do I get to the site for Chickasa, Oklahoma
I just became a member of this site but don't have a clue on how to get to the website for Chickasa, Oklahoma Beckonwood2 (talk) 14:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Do you mean Wikipedia's article about Chickasha, Oklahoma. Click that link. There is a link to their official website at the bottom of that article. Shantavira|feed me 15:05, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Can these information be included in an article?
My question is regarding this article. Does the following information fall within the scope of the article?
- The band's reason for switching to writing original songs - A member of the band in an interview published in Young Guitar Magazine has stated: "At first we were copying songs like ELLEGARDEN and BLUE ENCOUNT that didn't have shouts in them because we thought we couldn't play in a loud [rock] band yet, but somewhere along the line, we all got a bit pissed off and decided to give it a try, so we started copying songs by Maximum the Hormone and others. In the process, we ran into a wall in terms of skill level, but we thought, why don't we just make our own heavy songs that match our skill level?" (Source)
- The inspiration for their first original song - They started off as a high school band. Their teachers were not cooperative and called their music "noise". They also didn't get their desired club room resulting in confrontations with the teachers, the frustrations over these events were the inspiration being the lyrics of their first song.
- Tour details - The Japanese version of the article includes a table of their performances, venues, supporting acts, can these be mentioned in the English version of the article as well?
- Appearances in media - The band has appeared in CTV talk show Roomic, various radio shows, and on the cover of various well know music magazines including Metal Hammer and Headbang Magazine. Their songs have also been used in TV shows. Can these be mentioned on the article and under which section?
- Endorsements - Can endorsements, sponsorships and other commercial tie-ins be mentioned on the article? I saw some articles like BTS have those mentioned.
- Charity work - The band has raised money for earthquake victims, but it's the only such act by the band which got media coverage, is this enough for a "Philanthropy" section?
- Their original genre 'Harajuku-core" - The band has used the term to define their music and it also finds widespread use by media outlets covering them. (eg: Tokion Wall of Sound and many others including their artist page on Sony Music Japan's website). Should the term get a section or sub-section? The band has also talked about the origins of the term, should it be mentioned as well?
- Appearances with other notable artists - They have toured/played with a number of well-known artists; can this be mentioned in the introductory section?
Sorry if this is not the right place ask this, but I have asked this on the article's talk page (only the first point though) and did not get a reply for months and I also tried to look in Wikipedia guidelines about style, notability etc. I don't know where else to ask. If there are any articles regarding specific guidelines on what can or can't be included about artists/bands, then please do let me know. Any help would be much appreciated. Thank you for your time. Lucems (talk) 16:59, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Welcome to the Teahouse, Lucems. Although I rarely deal music-related articles, I feel that all the above would be perfectly OK to include, provided a) they can all be supported with RELIABLE SOURCES that allows anyone else to VERIFY the statements, and that b) that they are not trivial mentions.
- Thus, if they gave $50 to a local cat's home, I'd say that is TRIVIA and should be left out. But supporting major causes can be mentioned providing you have good, independent sources to corroborate the statement you want to add. I think one act of 'philanthropy' doesn't necessarily require a separate sub-section unless there's lots of detail in sources that merit it.
- I don't think Harajuku-core necessarily needs its own sub-section within the article, unless there is in-depth writing about this in mainstream media. I hope this helps, but others with more experience of music-related articles might give you a different opinion. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:27, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
No more archive messages
Why I don't receive Teahouse thread archive messages for Muninnbot anymore? I have not even opted out and there's no {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} on my talk page. I want them, what do I do? ExclusiveEditor Notify Me! 18:17, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for raising this, @ExclusiveEditor. Looking at @Muninnbot's contributions, it appears to have stopped operating in August 2022; did we just miss this? There's a recent note on the talk page of the operator, @Tigraan, but they do not appear to have been active in a few months. Another bot operator may need to pick up the task. I will open a thread at the Teahouse talk page so we can be sure to follow up on this. Cheers, Sdkb talk 19:30, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Enter-key-like symbols in wiki pages?
For some reason, in some pages there are enter-key-like symbols such as in this wiki page. It only shows in edit mode for some reason. Is this some special character that MediaWiki uses or something like that? AverageWikiContributor (talk) 16:44, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- its a hidden newline in the source. you can tell this by going to the source editor natelabs (talk) 17:18, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! AverageWikiContributor (talk) 19:39, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Problem with dates
Greece followed the Julian calendar until 1923. The articles having been written by different authors each have a different date. I want to apply a single chronology to all articles on politicians and governments. What should I do?
to write down both dates?
to write old style up to 1923?
to write downnew style
Is there a specific policy about that? D.S. Lioness (talk) 18:19, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers could help. Industrial Insect (talk) 19:43, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- @D.S. Lioness: Please see MOS:OSNS. In short, the date method should follow that of reliable secondary sources. This would probably mean using old style for those before 1923, and new style for those after 1923. If it's not clear which method should be used, you can use {{OldStyleDate}}. —Matrix(!) (a good person!)[Citation not needed at all; thank you very much] 19:50, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hello, DS. Lioness. Specifically, within the page Industrial Insect linked, see Julian and Gregorian calendars. If that does not answer your question, I suggest asking either at the talk page of the MOS page, or at WT:WikiProject Greece. ColinFine (talk) 19:51, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
Updating Talk page reply
Sometimes I realize I should add something to a talk page reply. When should I edit my old reply or add a new reply? Sophon96 (talk) 19:53, 15 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Sophon96; good question! This is somewhat a matter of personal preference, and there's no hard-and-fast rule (if there was it'd be at Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines) so long as you're trying to communicate clearly.
- Personally, I'm more likely to edit my comment rather than add a new one if the comment is recent and the tweak is minor. If it's more substantive (e.g. a new thought) or the comment was made a while ago, I'll add a new one. I try not to edit my comments (beyond uncontroversial things like typo fixes) after someone else has replied to them, since it can be confusing or unfair to alter the record like that.
- For particularly sensitive edits, it's possible to cross out text (use the code
<s>text</s>), underline added text (<u>text</u>), and add an addendum to your signature (e.g.[[User:Sdkb|Sdkb]] ([[User talk:Sdkb|talk]]) 14:07, 15 February 2024 (UTC)<sup>Edited ~~~~~ to clarify my point</sup>; the five ~ insert the timestamp) to help make it clearer to others what has been changed. But that's not normally needed. Cheers, Sdkb talk 20:41, 15 February 2024 (UTC)