Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1217

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 1215

Henschel Hs 129 and others

There is an editor by the name of Denniss who keeps changing my edits regarding German aircraft nomenclature. Now, I realise this is not the most exciting subject here, however, it is absolutely correct that the Germans did not have a gap/space inbetween the aircraft model number and any variant. For example, Hs 129B or Hs 129 B. She is completely incorrect to maintain that to have a space inbetween the 129 and the B. Every reference I have provided, every book I own, all clearly state/show that there is no space between model and variant.

This may seem trivial to most people here, however, this is an encyclopaedia and surely it should reflect correct information, no matter how small? If she is insistant on doing this to my contributions, why doesn't she go and edit every single page regarding German aircraft that correctly shows the correct aircraft nomenclature, and change it to the way she desires? Either it's correct or it isn't. I can provide hundreds of source material if you need? If this pages information regarding aircraft nomenclature is incorrect, surely every page on Wikipedia regarding this subject needs to be changed as well for consistency and historical accuracy?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henschel_Hs_129 Troy von Tempest (talk) 22:50, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Troy von Tempest you should try to discuss this with Denniss first. I see you have replied on User talk:Troy von Tempest. Per Nimbus227 on User talk:Denniss, WT:AIR may also be a good place to establish a consensus on the space (if there is a good argument in the negative). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 23:03, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Sungodtemple, yes I have and I have been dismissed out of hand here https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Messerschmitt_Bf_110 "Restoring proper aircraft designations - just leave those if don't know better". Regarding a consensus, if you look at any number of other pages, he/she either doesn't care or hasn't bothered to edit all those pages correctly, why would that be? Thanks for your pleasant reply Troy von Tempest (talk) 00:31, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Troy von Tempest! Pinging @Denniss. Have you tried discussing this with the user? See the dispute resolution guide. Also, they have only reverted you once, as it appears. Happy editing! —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 23:03, 22 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello asparagus, no, it has happened again. As above, I was dismissed out of hand. I don't understand why he/she feels the need to only police a handful of pages instead of all relevant pages. Either it is factual or it isn't? Thanks for being civil - Troy Troy von Tempest (talk) 00:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

I am quite puzzled by this editor's claim. This enthusiast has scanned 65 flight manuals of German WWII aircraft which are downloadable PDFs, the front covers show spaces and hyphens as would be expected. These are official manufacturer's manuals approved by the RLM. The German Wikipedia uses spaces and dashes for variants, evident at the Messerschmitt Bf 109 article. the diff given above is for a single reversion, this subject needs to be discussed at WT:AIR to gain a new consensus, edit warring is not the way forward. Nimbus (Cumulus nimbus floats by) 11:56, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreed that some sort of centralised discussion is needed to get a proper consensus. I have seen both styles used in WP:RS's so it doesn't appear to be an open and shut case.Nigel Ish (talk) 12:45, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

A further example is [1] which sells copies of official aircraft manuals. Books are no real reference for naming because they often omit spaces or even use flat-out wrong designations because authors/editors don't know or don't care. --Denniss (talk) 13:27, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

And he happily continues despite opposing evidence ...... --Denniss (talk) 13:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Infobox style, (honorific prefix)

In infoboxes, there is no His Excellency in Many infoboxes, For Example Joe Biden, in Joe Biden's Wikipedia Article there is no honorific prefix, so should we remove it or not?!. MAL MALDIVE (talk) 15:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy note to hosts: same question asked at Talk:Mohamed Muizzu#Infobox style, (honorific prefix) Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:27, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Why is WikiProject Fascism defunct?

I would like to participate in the development of this project, but it is not functioning. How can it be reactivated? Bennorey (talk) 11:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Instructions, with three different links, are given in the template boxes displayed on the page you link. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 15:42, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Citogenesis incident and moving an image within Wikipedia

I was looking through a (non-Wikipedia) list of PS2 games, and I came across a name I hadn't heard of before: Secret Service – Ultimate Sacrifice. Having heard of the Secret Service game, this piqued my interest. I couldn't find it in the ReDump Project which keeps extremely meticulous, comprehensive track of retro video game metadata, but sure enough, on Wikipedia, it showed right up. Having scoured reliable sources, however, I can find no evidence in contemporary sources, from reliable archivists like ReDump, on game covers, within the game itself, etc., for this subtitle. I'm highly certain the creator of the article simply misremembered and fabricated the subtitle out of thin air in 2009, it was never scrutinized, and now 15 years later it's lazily repeated without fact-checking in other sources like TV Tropes.

My question is as follows: I'm trying to purge this subtitle from the article to hopefully stem the tide, but the image name still remains. However, it doesn't seem like there's a 'Move' option under 'More'; is it possible to move it to a more accurate title? TheTechnician27 (Talk page) 16:37, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Done @TheTechnician27 I've renamed it File:Secret Service cover art.jpg for you. Nick Moyes (talk) 16:48, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

"Emeritus" or "emerita"

In Claudia Sheinbaum we have "...her mother, Annie Pardo Cemo, is a biologist and professor emeritus..." I understand that we have eliminated the use of gendered English terms for professions (e.g., actor can refer to a man or a woman), but Latin is an inherently gendered language. Do we have a policy on collapsing gendered terms into the traditionally masculine form? Peter Chastain ^[¡hablá!] 12:29, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Luckily, we're often spared the necessity of reaching our own moral decision! We can follow what sources call her. If sources refer to her situation as professor emeritus, then we can also do so. In fact there are plenty of situations where we are obliged to use the correct, official term for a title, even though it's obviously mis-gendered, because to do otherwise would mean making up our own words that have no acceptance elsewhere and would create positions that don't exist. For example, the Lord Lieutenant of Norfolk is currently the Lady Dannatt MBE, who should be referred to as My Lord Lieutenant... go figure. But there is no such thing as the Lady Lieutenant of Norfolk, so we have no right to make up the term. It may be that the university of which Sheinbaum's mother is an emerita does not formally recognise the word emerita as referring to an honour they bestow. Elemimele (talk) 12:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

For what it's worth, the Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México website calls her Profesora Emérita en el Departamento de Biología Celular. It's worth noting that emérita (as opposed to emerita) is a Spanish word, not Latin, and the UNAM website consistently uses gendered terms. Peter Chastain ^[¡hablá!] 12:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Which is irrelevant to what she should be called in English. DuncanHill (talk) 13:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, if we follow the language of the institution where the professor has emeritus status, as suggested by User:Elemimele, supra, we need to do some translation here. More broadly, checking the University of California website, I see that they consistently refer to their female retired professors as emerita. I would like it if, as a matter of style, Wikipedia did the same. Peter Chastain ^[¡hablá!] 13:19, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

And Oxford uses emeritus. DuncanHill (talk) 16:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I was hoping to get some guidance at either Emeritus or wikt:emeritus#Usage_notes, but now I'm, if anything, more confused. -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 17:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

MFD

How do I close an MFD I opened as "no consensus"? There are many errors with it. Mseingth2133444 (Did I mess up? Let me know here) 16:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mseingth2133444: Generally, you should not close a discussion you yourself opened unless you want to WP:WITHDRAW it. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 17:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Any way to download Wiki pages directly?

Every so often, I come across a Wiki topic that article that I'd like to make a copy of in my word processing application. Without finding a download tool, what I've done is a copy and paste of articles from time to time — but it's very tedious because I have to delete a lot of extraneous things I don't want.

Is there a download tool somewhere for each article? Augnablik (talk) 04:21, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik: There should be a "Print/export" section under the "Tools" dropdown menu near the top of a page (or on the sidebar if you haven't collapsed it), where you have three different options to choose from. Do any of them help? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 04:31, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

What is the word processing application you're using? Microsoft Word, LibreOffice, OnlyOffice or something else? - 🐲 Jo the fire dragon 🐉(talk|contributions) 15:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik The standard download tools provide .pdf files. If you have a modern browser (I use MS Edge) you may find it better to use the immersive reader tool of the browser and copy/paste the result out into a local wordprocessor. When I do that into MS Word or LibreOffice, I can get just the main part of the article in editable format with links. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:16, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

There are external (to Wikipedia) third-party services that are able to convert .pdfs into .docx. Searching pdf to word in a search engine gives some options. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 16:42, 21 February 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull, what is the “immersive reader” you mention that you use? And is it found only in Edge? Augnablik (talk) 16:35, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik According to a Google search, that reader is only available in Edge (shortcut there is F9 when viewing a webpage). The search offered an extension for Chrome which offers the same sort of functionality but it is a 3rd party extension which I have not used and would be wary of. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jothefiredragon, I use MS Word. Augnablik (talk) 16:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Is okay to clear my user-talk page?

I would like to clear my user-talk page, and I just wanted to make sure there is no protocol I have to follow before clearing it. Slamforeman (talk) 00:03, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

You can archive certain messages from your talk page. 100.11.111.79 (talk) 00:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Shouldn't be an issue to my knowledge, you might be interested in instead archiving your talk page's messages, you can see an example of this on my talk page. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 00:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Slamforeman You are permitted to remove most content from your user talk page per WP:BLANKING; there are exceptions related to some community processes, but none of those apply to you. 331dot (talk) 00:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

That’s seems like a good idea. I'll look up how to do that. Thank you for your help :) Slamforeman (talk) 00:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Slamforeman If you haven't found it, Help:Archiving (plain and simple). Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 09:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Slamforeman. Note that everything that has been on your Talk page will remain in its history forever, so if you or anybody goes looking, they can find it. Since it remains accessible, you mighty as well archive it (so that somebody who wants to look at it can find it more easily), but not compulsory. ColinFine (talk) 15:51, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes I think that is a good idea. I’ve done so at User talk:Slamforeman/Archive 1, in case it is important to say. Slamforeman (talk) 18:57, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Userfication

Hi. I was wondering you do you move a draft that is almost 6 months old into your userspace? Thanks for your help in advance. Roads4117 (talk) 20:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

@Roads4117: Just pull down the menu on the "Page" tab and select "Move".

If you're just trying to prevent its deletion due to being stale, you can make one edit to the draft to restart the clock for another six months. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Anachronist and @Cullen328, where do I find the menu? I tried reading the Wikipedia help page on the issue, but didn't find it useful. Roads4117 (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Roads4117, the location of the move function depends on whether you are editing on the desktop site or the mobile site or some app, and which skin you are using, which for new users will usually be Vector 2022. I prefer Vector 2010 and the desktop site on my smartphone, and for me, the move function is easy to find in a pull-down menu at the top of the screen. So, I suggest that you ask at Village pump/Technical, describing in detail the hardware and the software that you are using. Cullen328 (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Cullen328 and Anachronist, I have found it, thanks for your help :) Roads4117 (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Space question involving a prolific authors

I’m working on an article about a noted author who’s written almost 50 books and even more stories and articles. He’s also done many presentations, interviews, and podcasts, and received many honors.

When I began my work on this article (still on my computer, not yet in Wikidom), I planned to make a categorized list of all his writings, etc., rather than just a selected one, in the certainty that many people interested in him would want to see all his contributions.

The “flip side” of including so much is that it will take up a large amount of space, even though at the end of the article. But I think the value of doing this outweighs the alternative of making a selected list, which would also take extra time and effort to create.

I’m sure similar questions about space for contributions from other prolific authors must have come up before. Guidance/insights/tips, please. Augnablik (talk) 17:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Augnablik, it really depends. Prolific publication does not necessarily make an author notable as Wikipedia defines it. So, the first concern would be that. After that, the question would be whether reliable secondary sources have cared about all his books or select few. If there are reliable sources about all the author's work, then space in itself would not be a problem. Select works could be added to author biography and a sub-article, a list, could be created to list all their works. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:59, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Augnablik: Have you tried looking at an article for one of the prolific authors you mentioned? Here's one, and another, at random. Bazza 7 (talk) 18:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Issac Asimov was probably the most prolific author of the 20th century, with over 500 books published along with many short stories and articles. He was sometimes called a "one man Book of the Month Club". We have five separate bibliography articles listing his works. The bottom line is that lengthy bibliographies should be in separate articles. Biographies should list a much smaller number of the author's best known and most widely reviewed works. Cullen328 (talk) 21:49, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

AI generated images

A few days ago I asked if the image of Bapthomet statute was usable on my user page. The answer was no because it was restricted to use only in the article by the copyright license. I don't know if this is the right place to ask but I have a few more related questions:

1) Are AI-generated images usable in general? 2) If they are usable, would they be usable if they were AI-generated images of copyrighted artworks in Bapthomet? 3) If they are not usable, would original artistic renderings of copyrighted statues like Bapthomet be usable? Teras malum (talk) 23:38, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

I found public domain images I can use over on Commons, thanks all! Teras malum (talk) 01:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Teras malum. It is not possible to generalize about all AI images but I think that it is fair to say that they present major challenges in the area of original research which is not permitted, and copyright violations. There are pending court cases regarding these technologies. Personally, it is difficult for me to imagine situations where using AI images on Wikipedia would be appropriate, except in articles about artificial intelligence. On your third question, an artistic copy of a copyrighted image is a derivative work, and is therefore also restricted by the original copyright. Cullen328 (talk) 01:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

MoS requirement

I'm editing a section. What's a "MoS requirement" and what's meant by the following note: "There should be a couple paragraphs here that summarize the articles above. This is a MoS requirement."? rootsmusic (talk) 23:40, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

@Rootsmusic: See WP:MOS, the encyclopedia's Manual of Style. RudolfRed (talk) 00:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

That note is saying that the section is missing a summary for the article linked in the "main article:" hatnote. See WP:Summary style. Perception312 (talk) 01:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Valaurum

Hello! I want to create an article about Valaurum, but when I go to create it, it says that a previous version has been deleted and to contact the person who deleted it if you are unsure if the content your creating might be simmaler. The person who deleted it is blocked and can't edit their talk page. I assume that the content I write would be diffrent, as it was deleted under G11, and I do not intend to promote the company. However, seeing as this is the first article I'm creating, I want to make sure I'm doing things by the book and make sure that I'm good to start the draft. GrayStorm^{(Talk|Contributions)} 02:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link: Draft:Valaurum

@GrayStorm: It was deleted for being promotional or advertsing. Write a neutral draft and you should be fine. RudolfRed (talk) 02:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thank you! GrayStorm^{(Talk|Contributions)} 02:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding New Hall of Fame

Hi - would appreciate assistance in recognizing New York City Basketball Hall of Fame as NYCBHOF_year = 0000 Thanks in advance! Pundit02 (talk) 01:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Pundit02: Please clarify what you are asking for help with. What does NYCBHOF_year = 0000 mean? RudolfRed (talk) 02:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

| HOF_player = kareem-abdul-jabbar

| CBBASKHOF_year = 2006

| NMBHOF_year = 1995 Pundit02 (talk) 04:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

is it possible to show a screen shot? Pundit02 (talk) 04:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding parameters and other changes to popular templates like {{Infobox basketball biography}} require consensus. I do not know how likely it is for such a thing to happen. I notice Kareem Abdul-Jabbar's article has no inline citation for his NYC Basketball Hall of Fame induction, and that is much easier to fix, I think. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello

Hey, I want to talk about the block for repeated genre warring. I understand that it was very wrong of me but I've come here to talk. I want to keep making genre edits with reliable sources. I have tried reaching out to the administrator who blocked me, but he never answered. I'm not trying to call him out, I just need to see if he will answer. It's something I like to do on my free time. And the thing is, I'm not trying to vandalize Wikipedia, I just want to make edits. The reason why I did replace genres like the one on "Russians" by Sting was because there wasn't a reliable genre source and I replaced it with a sourced one. But I didn't realize that was wrong. I promise that I'll find a way to see if the source is reliable by asking someone, or unless there's another way to find out if a source is reliable. Iamthegoat524 (talk) 03:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Reread User_talk:Iamthegoat524#February_2024, for instructions on how you can attempt to have your partial block lifted. By writing here, you're merely wasting your and others' time. -- Hoary (talk) 03:35, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry if I wasted your time, I tried contacting the administrator, he never answered. So I was trying to see if there were other ways. Iamthegoat524 (talk) 04:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

You have now posted the template on your talk page. That page, not this one, is where any further discussion belongs. -- Hoary (talk) 08:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Template Construction needed

I need a new template created based on Template:NFL final roster that uses a different set of parameters — "Quarterbacks" "Halfbacks" "Fullbacks" "Ends" "Centers" "Guards" "Tackles" (in that order). The form used for player entry can be the exact same...

I need it for All-America Football Conference rosters, but it would also be directly usable for early NFL rosters during days of the one-platoon system. Can anyone slam something like this out for me? Thanks! —tim ///// Carrite (talk) 17:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Could be named Template:AAFC final roster or Template:1Platoon final roster ... Carrite (talk) 17:23, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Carrite, Please post your request at Wikipedia:Requested templates. Mathglot (talk) 09:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Lua error: not enough memory.

On this section, there are multiple source errors in the table with the code "Lua error: not enough memory.". When I try to look at the Lua debugging page I wasn't sure what to do. The error also dissapeared whenever I switched to source edit. Could someone fix this and tell me how I can correct this error for the future? 三葉草 San Ye Cao 06:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello San Ye Cao. The problem is simply that there is too much (probably too many templates) in the article. It needs either to be greatly simplified, or to be split up. ColinFine (talk) 12:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Is this an appropriate use of file space?

See this page. Not sure what to make of it, but it looks like a resume and a long unsourced article that might violate WP:NOTWEBHOST. I believe it's related to Draft:Balasubramanian prabhakaran from the same user which I draftified, since it's a long unsourced article, and it also looks resume-like. What do others think? Left guide (talk) 10:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree, Left guide. Take it to WP:FFD. ColinFine (talk) 12:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for the heads up, Left guide. It was blatant advertising, and now it's gone. -- Hoary (talk) 12:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the cleanups Hoary, much appreciated! Left guide (talk) 12:52, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

1970's Sci-Fi TV film where Humans were the "fuel" for the planet (1970's)

When I was working in Hong Kong in the 1970's I watched a TV Sci-Fi Film. It was based inside a small apartment style room. Food came via a "hopper" in the wall, TV style communication with neighbours. every day a siren went off. One day the siren went and a Red Light flashed in his apartment."Ah, My turn now" and he walked out and joined a silhouetted queue walking orderly towards a glowing Red Dome which was "running" the planet. Humans were the "fuel"! I cannot remember the name or the actor. I have looked through ALL of your listed info but cannot find it. ANY assistance would be most welcome. Many Thanks. Keith. KeithWoodard1 (talk) 12:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@KeithWoodard1: Probably best to ask at The Reference Desk, because this forum is for asking questions about editing Wikipedia. (Incidentally, the siren, the dome, and the using-humans-for-fuel part reminds me of The Time Machine, but that's not it) 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 13:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Sounds like Soylent Green. 331dot (talk) 13:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Multiple Stub Templates

Can we put more than one "This xyz-related article is stub, you....' templates in article as few articles do or shall we only put one which categorizes the article most. If the first, then shall we put all the templates that categorize the article, as it seems disruptive. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 13:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Presumably you mean with different versions of xyz. I don't see why not, especially if some stubs already do that. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

xyz is just an example. For other example, in an article, say for a Russian car company or Japanese football team, we can tag it with car-related stub or football related stub, but then we can also tag it with Russia related stub/ Japan related stub and Sports related stub and so on. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 14:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor It seems a bit pointless to have too many tags: I'd use only those for active Wiki Project(s) mentioned on the Talk Page of the article. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:56, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: yes you can have multiple stub templates in a same article. See for example 63rd Indian Infantry Brigade which has two stub templates. But check first if there is a specific stub template which already combines the topics, for example {{Japan-sport-stub}} is for Japanese sports stubs. MKFI (talk) 15:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Image uploader won’t stop buffering

Tracked in Phabricator
Task T358414

I recently emailed the author of these 2 photographs, asking him if it was okay to upload them, (https://www.flickr.com/photos/pallrokk/9561070628/in/album-72157635161495105/ and https://www.flickr.com/photos/pallrokk/39866005895), and he emailed back saying it was alright to upload them, and he changed the licence to allow this. However, every time I've attempted to upload them to the commons it gets stuck on the "describe" stage of the upload wizard, no matter what I do.

I would appreciate advice on what to do here, or (if it is not too much of a bother) if someone else could upload them. Thank you! Slamforeman (talk) 04:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Slamforeman. That sounds like a technical (systems) problem, rather than any sort of issue with the contents. Maybe a bug. Whatever it is, you need to ask at Commons rather than here - try C:COM:Help desk. ColinFine (talk) 12:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Will do. Thanks! Slamforeman (talk) 12:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Slamforeman: there is currently a problem importing Flickr images to Commons, see Phabricator link. MKFI (talk) 15:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Convention on placement of citation

Hello fellow editors, I'm reaching out to gather insights on Wikipedia's convention regarding the placement of citations. For content supported by a citation within a single sentence, it's clear that the citation is placed before the period at the end of that sentence. However, I'm curious about the best practice when a citation supports the entire content of a paragraph, which could be 4 to 5 sentences long. Should the citation still be placed at the end of the paragraph before the period or somewhere else? Looking forward to your guidance on this. HerBauhaus (talk) 12:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @HerBauhaus: actually, a citation comes after punctuation, not before (with a few exceptions, see WP:REFPUNCT). HTH, -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 12:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @DoubleGrazing, thank you for your very speedy response. I'll make sure to incorporate your advice in my future edits and also apply a general tidy-up lens in periodic reviews of articles I've edited. HerBauhaus (talk) 13:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@HerBauhaus: And when a whole paragraph is derived from a single source, placing the citation at the end of the paragraph is fine. (If more than one consecutive paragraph has the same source, it may be helpful to cite the source at the end of each paragraph.) Deor (talk) 15:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Deor, thank you for your very relevant suggestion. In my editing work related to the telecommunications and energy sectors, I've found government and semi-governmental sources to be invaluable. They provide reliable information for substantiating various facts across different subtopics within articles, resulting in their more frequent citation. HerBauhaus (talk) 15:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Opinions Without Sources

Hello, I hope this message finds whoever reads it well. I’m new here and want to contribute doing the “copy editing” that was recommended to me.

One part of the copy editing tutorial talked about removing opinion statements. I’ve done this a few times and wanted to check if that is okay.

Also, there are a few instances I’ve seen an opinion that could be coming from some sort of source but none is listed, is there a way to note something is lacking a source? As if there was a source I would feel wrong removing it. Apologies if I don’t do this signature right, I’m still figuring it out. Satellite5Editor (talk) 16:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Yup, you can use the citation needed template to mark something as, well, needing a citation.

Generally speaking, if it's completely obvious and would be to anyone else that something is the opinion of the editor you're A-OK to get rid of it, just make sure you're stating that's why in the edit summary; of course you may have already been doing that, but gotta make it clear. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Great, that template is exactly what I was looking for. Thank you! Satellite5Editor (talk) 16:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Satellite5Editor Welcome to the Teahouse. Your signature is fine. Opinions may not be expressed unless they are backed up by a reliable source that is cited. Anything else is original research, which is not allowed. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

That makes sense, thank you very much for your help. Satellite5Editor (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

what is math

like stuff 72.204.209.14 (talk) 16:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Try asking WikiProject Mathematics, they'd be happy to answer that. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 16:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

.... or read math. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

... or definition of mathematics. Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 16:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

69+420=489 Abdullah raji (talk) 16:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Blacklisted Usernames allowed?

'noob' is specifically mentioned on Blacklist of usernames, still many accounts like User:Noob282, User:NoobThreePointOh, User:NOOBSKINSPAMMER are active, and others like User:Noob cannon lol, User:Noobeditor though not active, but are still not blocked? Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 14:44, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor May I ask why you think my account should be blocked? I've been on here for about 3.5-4 years, making constructive edits (mostly). What makes you think I am part of the blacklist? I changed my name about a year ago since I wanted to avoid my information getting leaked. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

What happens is that a bot posts the username to a page for admins to review. An admin will review the username and decide if there needs to be a block NW1223<Howl at me•My hunts> 14:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@NightWolf1223 Exactly. When I changed my username, the admin who reviewed it knew that it was an acceptable username and allowed the change. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 14:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@NoobThreePointOh: I have not just used your user name, but also 4 others as an example to ask why is it listed on blacklist if not enforced. Answer to the question as I conceive it now is 'noob' word cannot be used to defame mostly other people/ things in username. Regards, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 15:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor I only chose this username because it sounds perfect and it's also much less cringe compared to other usernames I was contemplating in my mind when changing it. NoobThreePointOh (talk) 15:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

The blacklist you linked in not an official list. Wikipedia's username policy will be found here. Shantavira|^{feed me} 15:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, I am an administrator who frequently patrols WP:UAA. That list is not a list of usernames that are banned. Rather, it is a list of character strings that are sometimes part of usernames of disruptive editors. The list is used by a bot that reports to UAA. An administrator then evaluates the contributions by that editor. Only if the account is actually disruptive does it get blocked. Cullen328 (talk) 19:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Translating an article that already exists as a stub in the destination language

I translated the article Winter-Stielporling into English ( https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Lentinus_brumalis ), as the existing English version was only 2 sentences. How to I overwrite the 2-sentence version of this article, with the longer version I have translated? I have published it as a draft for now, but I can't move it to the mainspace, given it shares the same name as its 2-sentence version. Зэгс ус (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

Зэгс ус since the current version is only two sentences, you should be able to easily merge the contents of both articles. Merge the draft you created into the existing article to avoid issues with attributing the original authors of the two-sentence stub. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 00:53, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok thanks! Зэгс ус (talk) 20:18, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Once I have merged the articles, should I delete the draft? Зэгс ус (talk) 20:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Linking an article

I am in the processing of updating Wright's Biscuits page, as it was a former member of the London Stock Exchange, and along with it's sister firm Moores Stores, were one of the largest grocery chains of the 50s and 60s. One of the firms they purchased was tge grocery business of H. Garon (known as Garons) of Southend on Sea. Garons is mentioned in the Southend page, so I linked Garons to the Moores Stores section on Wright's Biscuits as I am adding further info regarding Garons and it is not notable enough for its own page. However an editor has reverted it. I contacted to explain but he basically reverted again stating "Why is this relevant, this talks about stores that have cliosed, not who took them over" and in the conversation said I should read WP:NOT. Could I have some advice on where to go, if I am right or if the editor is just being silly? Davidstewartharvey (talk) 18:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Davidstewartharvey, and welcome to the Teahouse. It's not a matter of whether it is "right" or "wrong". You thousht it was an improvement; Slatersteven disagreed. This is normal in editing Wikipedia, and the next step, if you wish to pursue it, is to open a discussion on the article's talk page, and invite Slatersteven: the aim is not to be "right" but to achieve consensus (see WP:BRD), and if you are unable to get there, there are further steps in WP:dispute resolution.

For what it's worth, I thought your addition was appropriate. ColinFine (talk) 18:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I have done as advised and the editor has replied but I don't think it will be resolved.Davidstewartharvey (talk) 20:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Citing a primary source from Ancestry.com

I'm in the process of creating an article and need to cite from a voting record available on Ancestry.com to establish the date of birth for my article subject. I understand guidelines on how to use primary sources and know about WP:ANCESTRY, but I can't cite this particular detail any other way. The information will not be interpreted. It will only be used to establish a birth date. In case anybody is wondering, I already have a number of solid secondary sources lined up for use in the article. Thank you all for your help. —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

If it's only being used to state a fact then it should be fine. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 20:49, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh, sorry! I forgot my question! :P How do I cite this source? Again, thanks for the help! —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 20:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Ohhh, you should be able to cite it either automatically or manually using the website source style. If you're using The Wikipedia Library to do that and you're using the link from there a bot will come along and sort the citation out to remove the WML proxy in it.

Just whack your source down as close to the birth date as you can (within reason) and you'll be right as rain. Something similar is done on Ren Gill where Genes United is used to identify his birth date. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, friend. :) —CurryTime7-24 (talk) 21:16, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

references

I added a citation but did not follow the pattern of a short citation (only the author and date) and then add the short citation's source to the reference section. The reference section has bullet points, and I cannot figure out how to add a reference following exactly the same format.Thanks Tmarac (talk) 12:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Tmarac, the issue is that citations used Template:sfn, where a shortened citation is present in the paragraph, and the full ref is added separately at the end. I've fixed the issue. Please let me know if you need any further help. Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 17:00, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Very much appreciated! Tmarac (talk) 20:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! Sincerely, Novo Tape^{My Talk Page} 21:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

need help for Bangladeshi playback singer

sock, blocked

Ariyan Mehedi is 100% eligible for Wikipedia page, but a user created “G11 Promotional article” but it’s not like that. He is is Orgininal and Authentic Bangladeshi music artist. Don’t delalet it

Page is: Ariyan Mehedi

This page approved by user @Wikishovel

He is is Orgininal and Authentic Bangladeshi music artist. Don’t delalet it (please protect it)

This person also available on VIAF : https://viaf.org/viaf/23167440891088532257/ Ahhabib24 (talk) 20:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

I already told you when you asked at my user talk page: I haven't "approved" anything. Please stop trying to drag me into this. Wikishovel (talk) 20:40, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Please don't post the same thing in more than one place. Asked and answered at the Help Desk. ColinFine (talk) 21:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Article submission declined: Dan Slepian

Hello,

I need some assistance finding more independent sources for the notability of Dan Slepian, NBC Dateline Producer https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Dan_Slepian

Thanks! PomPomLover96 (talk) 22:02, 25 February 2024 (UTC)

PomPomLover96 Teahouse hosts are here to advise, not to be your reference searchers or co-authors. David notMD (talk) 22:20, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Wrong background language

Hi, It's entirely my fault, really. I recently started editing, but chose to do so in Portuguese, which is not my native language. Understandably, the system assumed I would be more comfortable with Portuguese as my background language (the stuff in the margins), but I'm struggloing today to access Sandbox. Please can you point me in the right direction? Thanks Pamela Francis Arthur (talk) 17:55, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Does this link work?: wikipedia:sandbox. 🇺🇲JayCubby✡ plz edit my user pg! Talk 17:59, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Pamela. You can change your interface language back in your preferences ("Preferências"). Near the bottom of the first tab, there's a heading "Internacionalização", where you can select "Língua:" ColinFine (talk) 18:04, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Note that the link that JayCubby has provided is to the (shared) Wikipedia Sandbox (which is for practice editing, and gets cleared frequently) not for your personal sandbox, which is at User:Pamela Francis Arthur/sandbox. It's not clear which of those you want. ColinFine (talk) 18:13, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

If you want to stay in Portuguese, your personal sandbox (which does not yet exist) is available under the personal menu (top right, in the Vector 2022 skin) under the entry "Testes". ColinFine (talk) 18:15, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Direct link to the interface language preference shown in English: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Preferences?uselang=en#mw-prefsection-personal-i18n. PrimeHunter (talk) 22:30, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

help with Wikipedia page publishing

Hi Teahouse! I am looking for help with/guidance in improving sources for a Wikipedia page submission I am trying to get approved. I am wondering if you would be able to help me with navigating successful revisions for this page to make it a better submission for wikipedia publishing. Thank you in advance! Cratedcube82 (talk) 22:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

This may be about Draft:Pablo Rodriguez-Fraile. If it is, there are two ways you could improve the referencing:

Where there are unreferenced claims, add references for them, or remove them.
Where there are uncontroversial statements with multiple references, remove most of those references, keeping only the best. A good source is reliable, independent, and has etensibve discussion of the subject. Maproom (talk) 23:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Cite source error

So I added an archived link of a news article on this page University of Massachusetts Lowell#Alumni and notable people but I can't figure out how to get rid of the error. Anyone know what I did wrong? Soafy234 (talk) 21:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Lemme take a quick look at it. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Fixed Hello, as you can see in my edit fixing the error, a <ref> tag was missing the </ref> tag for it, I have fixed it. The error was in the source code for the page. Geardona (talk to me?) 21:09, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing it. But now it includes un necessary information about the references/sources in the paragraph such as the dates and such. Soafy234 (talk) 23:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. The second reference didn't have ref tags, so I added them in. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh, I didn't notice that the second reference didn't had the ref tags. Thank you for the assistance and have a great rest of your week. Soafy234 (talk) 00:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Just got warned..

I recently moved a page, Nippon Telegraph and Telephone to NTT and got warned relatively quickly after, and was told that I was "moving a page disruptively". I have read the WP:s regarding moving a page and don't believe I have done anything wrong. May someone explain to me what I did? Formyparty (talk) 01:42, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You moved several pages many times within a short time span. That's disruptive because it creates a mess out of the move histories and makes it hard to tell what the page names should be. My suggestion is to make requests at the technical move requests board and avoid moving pages yourself. The regulars there can tell you if the page moves are allowed or if they need someone with advanced page mover permissions. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:08, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Formyparty, to me, it just looks like you made one bold move, although it did involve moving other pages around too. I see nothing to justify a final warning, or even a warning actually. The encyclopedia that anyone can edit also means user talk pages anyone can edit, and sometimes, it can mean unpleasant things like this happening. You've already asked why; at this point, the best thing may be to wait for an answer. Best guess is, they thought you were one of those editors, who sometime show up, move a whole bunch of pages everywhere in a short period and leave, and it is not even technically possible for ordinary editors to undo the moves. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Handling sock/meatpuppetry

I recently nominated an article for deletion, and some users, in response to that nomination, edited the article I nominated. From reading WP: AFD, I'm aware that this is (usually) normal. Unfortunately, I have reason to believe that the edits made are inorganic. I believe that multiple accounts are coordinating to save the article, and I have reason to believe that at least one of these accounts belongs to someone with an undisclosed conflict of interest.

How should I report actions which I think breaks both WP: COI and WP: SOC? The AfD in question is here, in case more context is needed. It's my first AfD nomination and I'm aware that these aren't light allegations, so I want to make sure I do things the right way. I also deliberately haven't put the evidence here, because my question is about where to send the evidence. Thanks! HyperAccelerated (talk) 00:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

What is meant by an "inorganic" edit? 126.254.227.110 (talk) 00:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

All those comments somehow read as if churned out by a "large language model". 126.53.182.81 (talk) 01:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi, you can go to WP:SPI to open a sockpuppet investigation, there are step-by-step instructions there. (I'd be more helpful if I could, but I haven't personally opened one) Shaws username . talk . 01:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Understood, thanks. HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@HyperAccelerated: Is this about Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jiabao Li? If so, I'm suspicious too. Those accounts have hardly made any edits outside of that "realm" and I would say that it's very likely they're violating WP:SOCK. What you should do is go and create an investigation at WP:SPI (and if you want, I can do it, although it would be a great learning experience for you) and show "diffs" of edits you find strange, along with other evidence. But I would say that this might even pass the WP:DUCK test and doesn't even need to go to SPI. In that case, I would go to WP:ANI for (much) quicker action. It's your call. ‍ Relativity 01:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It is, yes. I wrote in my original question that "The AfD in question is here", linking to that AfD, but I guess it's easy to miss. I will reply again if I need more help, but I think I've got it from here. Thanks for looking! HyperAccelerated (talk) 01:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

And, I would bet $100 that the AfD defence is made by ChatGPT. TLA^tlak 02:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Regarding pop-culture pages, but especially comics.

Hello, my user name is Sewnbegun and here we go! I am here at Wikipedia for editing various lists/tables (obviously not exclusively) regarding comics, tv series and films. Can you tell me which pages of Wikipedia rules and regulations I have to read before starting; and what common mistakes I should not do while editing those lists and tables. Sewnbegun (talk) 05:38, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

Sewnbegun, if you're working on lists, Help:List, Manual of Style/Lists and Stand-alone lists might be helpful. But don't worry too much about reading every word of these. Just use them as references if you get stuck. Really, the best way to learn is just to get started and try to do what you see on similar articles. If you're not sure whether you did something right, you can always have someone else check it afterward. It's really easy to undo mistakes if needed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 06:01, 17 February 2024 (UTC)

@Thebiguglyalien, thanks for helping me but I have one last question. As I said I'm more interested in editing comic, films and tv series pages; it would be helpful for me to know that which of the following mentioned can be used for reliable sources and which ones can't be:

Comic Book Resources
AIPT
ComicBook.com
Screen Rant
SuperHeroHype
Official website of Marvel (Marvel.com)
Dexerto
Gizmodo
GamesRadar+
Bleeding Cool News
IGN
Popverse

Sewnbegun (talk) 09:11, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun You should look at the archive search box at WP:RSP, which also gives instructions for how to start a new enquiry about a source you want to use but are unsure about. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:25, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Michael D. Turnbull, I searched the above mentioned sources in that list and was surprise that only two (Screen Rant and Gizmodo) are considered as reliable source, for one (Dexerto) is advised to find alternative source while others are missing. After some time, I will definitely start a new enquiry about some sources that constantly tells about comics (CBR and Aipt). Sewnbegun (talk) 17:56, 18 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun A couple of guidelines that might help you - anything that can be edited by anyone (like fandom Wikis or IMDB) will not be accepted as a reliable source. English Wikipedia is very good at keeping articles reliable, but many other user-contribution sites are not. Meanwhile, websites of the companies that own the characters/comics/franchises are primary sources and should be avoided if possible. Good luck in your search for reliable sources and happy editing! StartGrammarTime (talk) 08:18, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@StartGrammarTime, so what if you have only the primary source for the edit you are going to do but one editor is reverting your edits on the basis of no reference, so can I include that appropriate primary reference into that article? Sewnbegun (talk) 08:32, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun It may be that the information is only available from the primary source, so what I would personally do is be bold, add the citation, and see whether that satisfies the other editor. If it doesn't, then have a look at Bold, Revert, Discuss as your guide to how to proceed. Always keep in mind that Wikipedia functions on consensus, and edit-warring is very much frowned upon, so if someone reverts your addition then you need to start talking to them (ideally on the article's talk page) so you can hash out a compromise together. Hope that helps you! StartGrammarTime (talk) 10:16, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@StartGrammarTime, thanks! it did helped. Sewnbegun (talk) 13:59, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

@Sewnbegun I'll also note that some of the sources you listed are at WP:VG/RS. For example, IGN can be a reliable source (but Make sure news items are not user-submitted info or blog postings; blog postings from site staff are most likely acceptable. Articles submitted by N-Sider should be avoided. TLA^tlak 02:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I want to improve an article so is there any way I can get my proposed improvement of that article/page reviewed by someone? Just like what we do reviewing drafts for creating new pages. Sewnbegun (talk) 06:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)

B-Class article

Hi there, i was revamping this article Hunza–Nagar Campaign to meet article criteria for B class article. Now that the reviewer stated the area's which needed improvement in Talk:Hunza–Nagar Campaign, I have improved most of those areas except one which i cant figure how can i improve it, which was of story telling and non-neutral article. I dont know much about how can i fix that problem. Is there any guide or advice i can get on this issue. Rahim231 (talk) 15:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Rahim231, it's hard to give instructions about tone and neutrality in articles. It is something one usually learns one example at a time as one gains experience. That said, there's WP:BETTER. Please see if it and other pages it leads to are of help to you. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I got declined

Hey my image that i took of famous 'Adam Bobrow' was declined when i attempted to add it to Adam Bobrow's wiki page Ijijijbigy (talk) 08:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

User is now blocked. 331dot (talk) 09:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

New article by a new editor

I noticed that, as a new editor, I cannot create a new article from scratch. I know that I can publish a draft. And still, what are the criteria for publishing a new article? Neville the long 1 (talk) 10:59, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Creating a new article is the most difficult task to attempt on Wikipedia. You will greatly increase your chances of success by using the new user tutorial, and spending much time editing existing articles, to learn how things operate here and what is expected of article content. This will include things like notability, the test for a topic to merit an article.

If you would still like to create a new article now, please read Your First Article and then use the Article Wizard to create and submit a draft. 331dot (talk) 11:06, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

OK, understood. And yet, could you please elaborate on the requirements an editor should accomplish to be able to start a new article? I tried using the translation tool, and it didn't work either. Neville the long 1 (talk) 11:25, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

You must be autoconfirmed, which means your account must be at least four days old with 10 edits or more, to be able to directly create articles. This is highly inadvisable for new users without experience to do.

You mention the translation tool, are you attempting to translate an article from another language Wikipedia to this one? Each Wikipedia is separate, with their own editors and policies, and what is acceptable on one is not necessarily acceptable on another. 331dot (talk) 11:29, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Neville the long 1, and welcome to the Teahouse. The technical restriction allows you to create a new article directly when you are autoconfirmed - that is, your account has existed for four complete days and made ten edits.

Trying to create an article directly after four days and ten edits is an almost certain recipe for disappointment, frustration, and disillusionment. Would you enter a major competition four days after you first took up a sport? Or start building a car when you had just decided to start studying engineering?

I always advise new editors to spend at least a few months learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles, before even trying the challenging task of create a new article. Once they have learnt about concepts such as verifiability, reliable sources, neutral point of view, and notability, they can read your first article and create a draft.

I would also point out that creating new articles is not the only way, and not necesarily the best way, to contribute to this vast resource. ColinFine (talk) 11:33, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

That said, it's apples and oranges, no? If someone's interested in creating an article, presumably they see a legit opportunity to do so, and suggesting they edit existing ones instead could be seen as, well, sniffy, though I know you're not really like that. 😉 – AndyFielding (talk) 10:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Neville the long 1, 331dot has pointed you to information that should be useful to you. Which part of it needs a further explanation? Or what is not explained? (And translation from which language to which language?) -- Hoary (talk) 11:28, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Refer by first or last name?

In any Biography or non-biography article, should we use the first or last name while referring to the person again and again? Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 15:55, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

That'd depend on whether their last or first names are used elsewhere to refer to different people on the page. Usually I'd use last name, but if that's used elsewhere on the page to refer to a different person I'd use first name (like if brothers or members of the same family are on a page). If you get incredibly unlucky and both the first and last names are used for different people on the page, just use their full name. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 15:57, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

It is customary not to refer to a person by their full name. It is considered derogatory to call by surname only TindDIrving (talk) 04:10, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

Please see the section of Wikipedia's manual of style about surnames mentioned further down. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 14:46, 20 February 2024 (UTC)

After the opening of the lede, where the subject's full name is shown (or their more widely-known professional name, should the article have that title), it is WP (and general encyclopedic) style to use the subject's surname only, except where you must use their given name to distinguish them from others of the same surname (e.g. family members, relatives).

Also, please, once you've used the surname in a paragraph—especially the start of a new section, where it's especially warranted—it's much less cluttered- and more professional-looking to use the subject's preferred or appropriate pronoun (e.g. he, she, they) rather than using the surname over and over, as though one were writing for amnesiacs. (Okay, I can dream, can't I?) – AndyFielding (talk) 10:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Are their any guidelines for this one? Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 16:13, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Biography#Subsequent use. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:22, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

There is a guideline: Please see MOS:SURNAME. You should never use a person's given name unless there is the possibility of confusion (such as two or more members of the same family being referenced in the same paragraph) and then only use the given names to the extent necessary to avoid confusion in that limited portion of the article. Referring to people by their given names is unencyclopedically overfamiliar. For example, in an article about Kirk Douglas one might have to say "Kirk" in a sentence in which his son Michael Douglas is referenced and there might be a possibility of confusion (but see the second sentence of Michael's article, in which it is clear that "Douglas" refers to Michael, not Kirk... and this sentence itself illustrates the type of circumstance I'm referring to), but for any parts of the article without any other Douglas family members mentioned, he should be called "Douglas". - Julietdeltalima (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2024 (UTC)

Translate from another Wikipedia pages (es and fr)

Hi, I would like to contribute this time by translating (making some modifications and adjustments) the Wikipedia page (actually in Spanish and French) of Spanish born author, photographer and former journalist Ruth Baza, who is also on the news worldwide for a couple of months, due to a dramatic event she lived in the act of service as one of the youngest and more respected former correspondent, aged 23, ill but strong and determined, in 1995, with a celebrity in Paris after interviewing this man for one of the most important film mags of Spain, Cinemania. According to WOMEN PRESS FREEDOM and The Coalition of Women in Journalism: "Ruth Baza has bravely come forward with her allegations against Gérard Depardieu. Her courage in speaking out about a rape that allegedly occurred nearly 30 years ago is not only commendable but also essential in the ongoing fight against sexual violence and the culture of silence in the media and entertainment industries. We believe that Ruth Baza's decision to file a criminal complaint, despite the significant passage of time and the legal hurdles, is an important step towards achieving justice, not just for herself but for all survivors of sexual assault who have felt powerless against influential figures. By coming forward, Baza has reignited critical conversations about sexism within the film industry, particularly in France, where recent reports have shed light on deeply ingrained misogynistic attitudes." This is an important step and a stormn in France and the Film Industry. Her career is very interesting as she belongs to the Generation X as author of a book that marked a generation, several stories, her way of writing in journalism and also her work as photographer (mostly rock stars). I will probably need help.... Or if any of you, editors wish to translate itor make your own version based on the existing pages and the hundreds references, I will be pleased to help . Thank you! Sylvie Siminovich (talk) 23:33, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Feel free to create "Draft:Ruth Baza". The summary for your very first edit that incorporates material from the French-language Wikipedia should say this (and should specify the page); the summary for your very first edit that incorporates material from the Spanish-language Wikipedia should say this (and should specify the page). Do not depend on machine translations (such as Google Translate). Do not incorporate long quotations (even if these are equipped with quotation marks). -- Hoary (talk) 23:50, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! One question: how to specify the page (French and/or Spanish) Sure, I won´t depend on machine translations since they are far from being "perfect". I prefer to make any mistake and being corrected by an editor rather than depending on a machine. Besides, my english is good enough to write long texts or stories; so, no problem with that. Of course, I may make mistakes but will do my best and not put a burden on pro editors. Sylvie Siminovich (talk) 00:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You can link to a page on a different language's wikipedia site by prefixing the link with its two-letter language code, delimited by colons. So you could say "translated by me from [[:fr:Ruth Baza]]" and it would appear as "translated by me from fr:Ruth Baza". DMacks (talk) 04:06, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

And, as the other perhaps-useful example, "translated by me from [[:es:Ruth Baza]]", which would appear as "translated by me from es:Ruth Baza". ("Fr" and "es" are slightly unusual as being not only language codes, which are what you want, but also nation codes, which are irrelevant here: by contrast, "ja" is Japanese-language and "jp" is Japan.) -- Hoary (talk) 11:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Moving to draftspace

How to request for a move to draftspace? I once moved an article to ~~mainspace~~ draftspace, and it's creator and some other editors agreed to make the article better as it was written in a certain POV, and not in an encyclopedic form. The article is Delhi Sultanate-Mewar conflicts. Creator intentionally made an article to push Mewar POV by creating an infobox and a wikitable, full of Mewar victory. As discussed in the talk section, the infobox was cleared. Though the wikitables are still present. It is misrepresentation as the viewers might assume all the military conflicts between the both parties were won by Mewar, which is indeed a misunderstanding. The user who moved the draft article to mainspace is blocked due to edit warring, and has a history of disruptive editing. Imperial ^[AFCND] 07:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It's a poorly-written article. The map in the infobox shows neither the Delhi Sultanate nor Mewar. The lead has some greengrocers' apostrophes. Maproom (talk) 08:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes. That's why some of ours decided to make an entire copyedit for that article, but a user moved it into mainspace without even leaving a messege in talk section. How can I request for a move to draftspace? Imperial ^[AFCND] 09:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Moved as requested. Maproom (talk) 11:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Now at Draft:Delhi Sultanate–Mewar conflicts David notMD (talk) 12:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Spelling convention

Hello all, recently, I noticed edits in an article where "organization" was changed to "organisation." I understand both spellings are acceptable, but I'm curious if Wikipedia has an established preference for American versus British English spelling. Can anyone offer guidance on this? HerBauhaus (talk) 12:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@HerBauhaus: Not across all articles, no. However, in articles closely related to a specific country, that country's variety of English should be used, and regardless of the article, the English variety should be consistent, ideally. Some articles will be marked with a template at the very top of the page that says which variety to use, too. Otherwise, generally the guidance is to simply leave it how it is. MOS:ENGVAR has the full details. Tollens (talk) 12:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Can you create a page on MAPTO ?

Hello friends, can someone create a draft company page for mapto.com? I'm new here and the page I opened was instantly deleted. I hope it would be better if a third person opens it. With my thanks and good intentions Eartechnic (talk) 00:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Eartechnic, it almost never happens that someone else creates an article for you upon request. It's especially unlikely they'll do so for a business. I am not an admin, so I can not tell yout whether you were close to demonstrating notability. Please consult WP:NORG and/or WP:NWEBSITE, and try again if you determine the company may be notable. It usually is not, so you may be wasting your time. Wikipedia is not the place to promote a nascent business; its purpose is to document/summarise information about topics that are already very well-established. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Eartechnic, in addition to Usedtobecool's comments, if you're going to recreate it make sure you write it in a WP:NPOV (neutral point of view). But make sure to use sourcing that is WP:RELIABLE, WP:INDEPENDENT, and WP:SIGCOV before submitting for review. TLA^tlak 02:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Here's the opening paragraph: Mapto.com is a global business directory platform that has been connecting industries since 2008. With a mission to serve millions of companies and suppliers worldwide, Mapto stands as a premier resource in the business development landscape. (And it continues in the same vein.) -- Hoary (talk) 12:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Eartechnic, it's important to understand, the will never be a "company page for" mapto or any other company. If mapto is or becomes sufficiently notable that it is extensively written about in reliable sources independent of mapto, then someone might write an article here about it. It won't be anything like a "profile" that the company might post on any of several other sites, and it might or might not be to mapto's liking.Uporządnicki (talk) 12:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

"What links here" false results

I have noticed on numerous occasions that the "What links here" search function appears to contain results that don't actually link to the page in question. Quite often, the number of such spurious results seems to vastly outnumber the number of actual results. As an example, check the "What links here" results for Bhadarwahi language. There are 287 supposed results, but going down the list, none of at least the first several pages (such as Hindi, Indo-Iranian languages, Marathi language etc.) appear to actually link to Bhadarwahi language.

If I am mistaken, can someone show me, for example, where in the Hindi article there is a link to Bhadarwahi language? If I'm right, what's the explanation for such a basic functionality being so broken as to be borderline useless, and are there any workarounds? Brusquedandelion (talk) 10:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The link is in the navbox {{Indo-Aryan_languages}}. Therefore it is not immediately seen when Hindi is opened, as the navbox is collapsed, nor is it found in the source of the article, as it is brought in by a template. Nonetheless, the link exists. I use User:PrimeHunter/Source links.js to pick out only those links that are explicit in an article, and ignore links brought in by templates. -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 10:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Is there really no way to use the default search functionality to exclude links that only appear due to template transclusions? And why does the "Hide transclusions" checkbox seem to not actually this? Brusquedandelion (talk) 11:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

(e/c) I agree this is a pain, but those links are invariably in one of the navboxes at the bottom of the article. The boxes are often collapsed by default so you may not immediately see the wikilink. The Hindi article inevitably has many of these navboxes. In that case the link to Bhadarwahi is within the Indo-Aryan languages navbox. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

But shouldn't "Hide transclusions" exclude such entries? It doesn't seem to. Brusquedandelion (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I think "transclusion" here refers to links made with {{:Bhadarwahi language}}. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It would be useful to search for only direct links. If the word or phrase of interest is rarely/never used other than as a link, I usually just search the raw wiki-text. So for example: Special:Search/insource:"Bhadarwahi language" gets me 35 hits that all look to be that actual link. DMacks (talk) 13:08, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I've re-written a page... what next?

@Nick Moyes a couple of weeks ago (or so!) I asked about when it's ok to re-write a page, and you suggested doing it in my sandbox. I've now done it and want to know a) if it's acceptable and b) what I should do next! My sandbox page is here: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User%3ARuthhenrietta%2Fsandbox&wvprov=sticky-header and the original article is here Antony Gibbs & Sons Ruthhenrietta (talk) 15:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ruthhenrietta I haven't had a chance to go through your revised version in detail. But it looks pretty good, and I've fixed a few formatting errors for you.

I do have concerns that you have copy pasted a number of small paragraphs from other sites. These need to be removed and be rewritten in your own words, please, as we do not permit use of other people's copyrighted text. We have a tool to identify such issues. See HERE.

Because you are citing some printed books, please ensure you've not made the same mistake with these, too. In addition, I recommend citing individual pages, rather than expecting a user who wants to VERIFY a statement to read the entire work. You don't need to redo the citations; just use the {{rp}} template to add the appropriate page number after each reuse of the single citation (and remove any page numbers within a multiple-use citation, as this will cause a conflict)

OK, so, once you've sorted that, I suggest going back to the article talk page and adding a new thread to state that you've now re-worked the page; link to it (perhaps pointing out major differences and errors you've fixed); and propose that the article is replaced with your sandbox revision; and seek feedback. Looking at the page history, I don't see any major contributors in the past that would merit 'pinging' - especially as the original article creator was blocked long ago. You could go to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Companies and link to your thread, and seek comments to be made there, too. Wait a week or two for any feedback or comments. If no, simply WP:BEBOLD with a nice clear WP:EDITSUMMARY explaining the revision coming from your sandbox (include a link). Hopefully, that'll be job done. Does this all make sense? Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 20:47, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks @Nick Moyes, yes, that's really helpful - I love the earwig copyvio detector. I'll do as you suggest. I've read the BEBOLD page - not quite clear if I literally delete all the old article and put mine in, or do I do it paragraph by paragraph... or how?! Ruthhenrietta (talk) 10:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Ruthhenrietta It would probably be best to do a paragraph by paragraph replacement. That way, if someone feels your changes are not an improvement, they've only reverted one bit. (But there are few people watching that page, TBH). I would probably wait a day or so between replacing edits unless you feel it's all really very non-contentious.

I must apoliigse that I am currently too busy IRL to do a line by line comparison to offer more detailed help, Nick Moyes (talk) 13:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

that is helpful - thank you Ruthhenrietta (talk) 14:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

How do you report a vandal?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User_talk:91.196.30.232 This user has been told multiple times by others to stop their actions, but continues to be a disruption. ZestyBurrito (talk) 17:25, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi ZestyBurrito! If they are vandalizing or spamming, and they have been warned, you can follow the instructions at WP:AIV to report them. If it is less clear and may require some discussion, you may report them at WP:ANI. Hope this helps, v/r - Seawolf35 ^T--C 17:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)

@ZestyBurrito You can also use tools such as Twinkle to warn and report vandals far easier. You can also use it to welcome people to the platform. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Uploading images to Wikipedia

Hello,

Can anyone tell me how to know if an image is copyrighted? I found one online I want to upload to Wikipedia. The photo does not seem to have any known author, date taken, or copyright symbol. In this case, is it safe to upload?

If you would like to see the photo for yourself, it is this photo. I hope that link works.

Thank you, CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 16:04, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Our rule-of-thumb is to assume that any image found on the Internet is copyrighted unless there is a specific statement to the contrary (which might be to the effect of it having been released under a Wikipedia-compatable license: see Wikipedia:Copyrights and Creative Commons license). There are exceptions, such as images created by US Federal employees as part of their job, but none will apply here. In general, copyright issues are complicated, and subject to various international laws which Wikipedia must be very careful not to infringe, for obvious reasons. Hope this helps. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.45.226 (talk) 16:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Are images someone posted on social media platforms copyrighted if it's just, say, a selfie of themselves on a trip? CallieCrewmanAuthor (talk) 15:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@CallieCrewmanAuthor Yes, as above. You may think something is "just a selfie" and hence unimportant but that is merely your opinion and gives you no right to license the image for use elsewhere. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Bayodata of a Realtor firm owner

There is a business man owner of Rebridz Realtors who contacted me, and he wants his profile to be added on Wikipedia. How can he do that. Kaundinya Fashion (talk) 14:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

If he wants a profile on Wikipedia, all he has to do is register for an account. As for a Wikipedia page to be made about either him or Rebridz Realtors, it doesn't look to me as if the company is notable enough due to a lack of sources and thus couldn't be made.

Additionally, if I'm getting this right from the title of the section, a biodata of said owner isn't really what Wikipedia does, see WP:NOT for more on that. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Kaundinya Fashion. I recommend you read WP:BOSS, and show it to your boss.

If you are going to continue editing Wikipedia (which you are very welcome to do, but preferably not on articles where you have a conflict of interest), you need to change your username, because names which suggest that the account is representing an organisation are not permitted. See WP:UNP. Since you have made no other edits, it is easiest just to abandon that account and create a new one. ColinFine (talk) 15:59, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Gaming the system

I saw someone gaming the system by making useless edits (adding and removing new lines) repeatedly on a new account. While they have been banned because their name was offensive, what should I do in the future so that moderators can be aware of this problem or similar behavioral issues?

Here's the account in question: Special:Contributions/Charlie_Ugly_Fail_Poor_Protituteee

Therealteal (talk) 17:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to Wikipedia! In the future, if users are not acknowledging messages on their talk page and are continuing to make disruptive edits, the appropriate venue is WP:AIV, the "Administrator intervention against vandalism" noticeboard, which contains instructions for adding notices. Happy editing! :) ~ Eejit43 (talk) 18:02, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

How to insert translated quotes into an article

Hi guys! I am working on a article about the Forchtenberg Tower Clock, which is the oldest dated clock in the world. I want to use a quote from the owner of the bakehouse where it is located. Firstly,do I need to ask permission to use a quote that is on the Internet, and secondly, since the quote is in German, can I put a translated quote into my article?

This is my first time ever starting an article from scratch, so any help would be highly appreciated!! 3602kiva (talk) 16:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@3602kiva You don't need permission to put short quotes into articles provided you cite the source, as you will be doing. Many of our standard citation templates such as {{cite web}} allow for parameters such as |quote and |trans-quote. See the linked template page for the details. As a new editor you should also read H:REFB. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Mobile view displays infobox before lead on article?

I added an infobox on Draft:Kane Pixels, but for some reason, on mobile view, it displays before the lead. I tried checking the source code and could not understand why it wouldn't move. I found this discussion on help desk where someone had the same issue, however I could not find a solution that worked. This has also happened on other articles where I have inserted a userbox. For example, my own user profile does it.

Is there something in the source code that I am missing? If so, what can I do to fix this &/or prevent this from occurring? Thanks. Not0nshoree (talk) 14:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Not0nshoree. In the app, I'm seeing the lead before the infobox (in fact, all the AFC boxes are between the lead and the infobox), but in a browser on a mobile I see what you say. I don't know why. My guess is that it is because of the shortness of the lead, but that is only a guess, and I may be wrong. (Remember that on web pages generally, the browser has to make decisions about how to fit items together, and depending on the sizes of the items and the window, it may make surprising choices). ColinFine (talk) 15:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Is it possible that even with the same source code in pages in draft- or userspace will display the infobox first, and those in articlespace will display the first paragraph of the lede first? Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Not0nshoree: Infoboxes are before the lead in wikitext and also in the generated HTML of desktop pages which can be seen in a narrow window. In a wider desktop window the infobox is displayed to the right as a floating element which allows the following text to be displayed to the left, so the viewer doesn't discover that the infobox technically comes first. The mobile site has special code which moves the infobox HTML to after the lead paragraph but this requires that "the lead paragraph" can be identified. Draft:Kane Pixels has so much stuff before the lead that it's hard for a program to tell what "the lead" means. Don't worry about it. If it's moved to an article without all the review stuff at top then the infobox will be moved down as normal in mobile. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Can I write an article about a musician?

I noticed on German-language Wikipedia an article about a British musician - Alison Janet Bentley - who recently died. I knew the musician well and there are several factual errors. I decided to write an English-language page for the musician with more accurate information. I feel that she was quite well-known and there should be a record of her career somewhere for future reference. I created an account and wrote an article in my ‘sandpit’ with 4 citations, but it gets deleted. I suppose this is because I’m attempting to write new stuff as opposed to collating previously published stuff, so should probably forget about Wikipedia for now and look at other sites for publications – or am I missing something? OpellaDFlush (talk) 19:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Your sandbox still exists at User:OpellaDFlush/sandbox, and you can continue working on it there. What was deleted was your userpage at User:OpellaDFlush. Just a note: different language Wikipedias work independently of each other, and they each have their own set of rules. Writing about Alison Janet Bentley [de] here will not necessarily correct errors at her German Wikipedia (de-wiki) article—you'll have to ask the de-wiki help forums for instructions on correcting errors. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @OpellaDFlush, welcome to the Teahouse. Wikipedia is not the place to record things that have not been recorded elsewhere; in fact, exactly the opposite - we're only supposed to record things that have already been recorded in reliable sources. Have you seen WP:Alternative outlets? 57.140.16.57 (talk) 19:46, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The draft can only contain information that is verified by published articles, used as references. David notMD (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

article suggestion

Hi, I tried to create an article for the company I work for, Labthink International in Medford MA and it was rejected. Could I suggest the editors create an article about Labthink? I think it would be of interest in the engineering field. The company has created patents to many testing instruments that ensure the safety of medical and food packaging. Labthink instruments have been used and referenced in many scientific studies. Thank you for your consideration. Lisa Lisapaulinet (talk) 20:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Lisapaulinet: You can add it to WP:RA but it may be a long time before someone acts on it. RudolfRed (talk) 20:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for your help. Lisapaulinet (talk) 20:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Lisapaulinet: By "it may be a long time..." understand that to mean never. There is no group of volunteer editors dedicating to creating articles suggested by others. If you intend to try again, remember to put that PAID notification on your User page. David notMD (talk) 21:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Lisapaulnet. Unfortunately, nothing you have said in the first paragraph contributes to what Wikipedia means by notability, which is broadly that enough has been written about the company (not its products) in indepedent sources to base an article on.

I'm not saying that it is not notable (though must companies are not); but it appears that you are looking in the wrong place for ways to establish this. ColinFine (talk) 21:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Why did my article get declined?

Hello I wrote an article and I am wondering why it got declined? Rpaul1650 (talk) 20:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Because there was no evidence of notability and the tone was laughably inappropriate for an encyclopaedia. Theroadislong (talk) 21:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

It'd be better to ask the person who denied the page for a reason why. From what I can see on what I assume is the draft, Draft:TJ Atoms, with a very quick skim read, the page has no inline citations and two general citations, which reads to me as not notable enough to be moved to mainspace.

The page also needs a massive tidy-up in regards to the Manual of Style as it's formatted much akin to a page in a book rather than a Wiki page. I'd advise going to WP:FIRSTARTICLE to get some good tips on, well, how to make your first article. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:04, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Indeed. The absurdly promotional language is counterproductive. People will take "multifaceted creative luminary" as meaning "overhyped bullshitter". But the total lack of citations is the biggest problem. Maproom (talk) 21:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Like a page in a book? A book from a vanity publisher, perhaps. 126.205.249.189 (talk) 21:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Rpaul1650, and welcome to the Teahouse. People who attempt the challenging task of creating a new article before they have spent time learning how Wikipedia works, often have a frustrating and miserable time. Would you set out to build a car the day after you started studying engineering? Or enter a major competition when you have only just taken up a sport.

I always advise new editors to spend at least a few months making improvements to some of our six million existing articles and learning how Wikipedia works before they even try creating a new article: in particular, learning about verifiability, reliable source, neutral point of view, and notability. ColinFine (talk) 21:45, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Do photographs help establish significant coverage in notability refs?

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § Do photographs help establish significant coverage in notability refs?

– —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 00:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

WP:GNG requires "significant coverage in reliable sources that are independent of the subject", where

"significant coverage" addresses the topic directly and in detail...Significant coverage is more than a trivial mention, but it does not need to be the main topic of the source material.

This doesn't give sufficient conditions for significant coverage, so I wonder if references that

cover the subject as the main topic and
include photographs of the subject

provide significant coverage (in particular, this would exclude trivial mentions).

A case in point - Dmytro Kushneruk, where notability concerns were raised. Thank you

~~ Trzb (talk) 00:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Trzb, did you have a specific source used in that article in mind? There's too many there. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

I would say no, absent some special circumstance. Since the photo would be attached to an article or similar material (I can't imagine why any publication would publish a photo of a person with no accompanying context at all, except as "Left to right, X, Y, and Z"; in that case Z would definitely not get notability from just that.) I think you'd go with just the text. Newspapers throw in photos of people into articles, it doesn't make them any more notable than what the accompanying text does. (You have got enough material to meet the GNG anyway, it seems, three articles about him (and that's not looking at the other 12 refs). Herostratus (talk) 07:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Agreeing with @Herostratus, unless it's a notable magazine cover or something (possibly). I read the New York Times, and they often tell stories by using the story of a non-notable person (in the context of Wikipedia), and they can end up having a paragraph or two about them as well as a photo in the NYT, which Wikipedia regards as a top source. TLA^tlak 08:03, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Note: Just going to move what Nick Moyes responded with over at WT:TEA into the box below:

@Trzb Welcome to the Teahouse. If I understand your question correctly, the answer is 'no' photographs do not add very much at all towards establishing notability, though they do help make an article more interesting/appealing/encyclopaedic.
What situation did you have in mind where significant numbers of photographs of a thing/person might help establish notability? If we can understand the circumstances, we might be able to give you a more detailed answer. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Article Help

Hello team,

I am trying to create a page for myself on Wikipedia. I am a writer and would love to have some of the work that I did published as well as my carrier, for some reason it seems like my first try did not work out, so I need assistance on this. Thank you! Matheoscoelho (talk) 22:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Matheoscoelho; please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY. Sdkb ^talk 23:11, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

RE: my WP page submission: a simple reference tool for readers of the novel Infinite Jest.

Yesterday my article (linked below) was immediately flagged as, it was suggested, not being notable and not having already been the subject of publication by reliable and independent sources.

Less than an hour later I was told that I was in violation of WP:NOTDATABASE "Wikipedia is not an indiscriminate collection of information" and that it was proposed for immediate deletion.

My source of the content of this page, page numbers and endnote numbers, is the two main print editions, hardbound and paperback, of the novel Infinite Jest. I have provided for the readers of the book a handy cross-reference for navigating between the pages of the novel and the many endnotes that constitute essential creative content inextricable from the main body of the novel. Losing one's place in the 1000 page book is not very difficult, but thanks to the cross-reference one can easily find the page number on which the relevant endnote number appears in superscript, and thus its context in the narrative.

After creating this cross-reference tool for myself I found it an invaluable resource while reading the novel myself. I believe that many other readers of this popular book will benefit from this reference as they too navigate its 1000 pages. My hope was to include it in the See also section of the Infinite Jest page, which includes information about the importance of the endnotes.

In submitting my first Wikipedia page I obviously went about it the wrong way. While I do intend to go methodically through the tutorials and help guides to understand the protocols, standards, and policies of Wikipedia content creation, I am anxious to make this reference resource that I have prepared available to Wikipedia users interested in this major work by the late David Foster Wallace. If this is absolutely not appropriate content for Wikipedia, I will respectively abandon what I, with the best intentions, had hoped to share.

I was inspired and encouraged to create this page specifically reflecting on how much I benefited from the index of Doctor Who episodes that Wikipedia contributors had prepared, viz., List of Doctor Who episodes (1963–1989) and List of Doctor Who episodes (2005–present). My contribution is much simpler, yet powerfully useful to the reader of the novel.

I am a great fan and financial contributor to Wikipedia, and that my contribution is at odds with its spirit and purpose pains me significantly.

I appealed the immediate deletion and rather than being deleted my page was designated a personal essay and moved to user space:

User:Puzzledrat/Page-Endnotes Guide for Infinite Jest

After first posting a starker original version of the page (I was thinking concise) and receiving notices that it would be flagged for deletion I made edits to provide greater clarity and define the page's purpose better.

I do still intend to work to revise it after I have educated myself with all the recommended tutorials and help guides, even if it is not ever destined to be suitable for Wikipedia's main space. The reason I created a separate page in the first place was because the columns of numbers would obviously be obtrusive on the main Infinite Jest page (notwithstanding that the content itself, I now know, doesn't comport with Wikipedia's SOPs).

I thank everyone for the feedback, support, and resource recommendations.

Sincerely,

Nicholas Mitchell

Puzzledrat (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Puzzledrat. I recommend that you read Wikipedia:What Wikipedia is not, which is policy. That will help you understand why this content is not appropriate for this encyclopedia. Cullen328 (talk) 21:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I will check that out first. Puzzledrat (talk) 01:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Incorrect title of my article

I used a Wiki widget to create my article. On my first successful publishing of the piece I noticed that instead of "The Lynching of Giovanni Chiesa" the title read "Draft: The Lynching of Giovanni Chiesa." How do I eliminate the word "Draft." Here's the article: Draft:The Lynching of Giovanni Chiesa WarrenRicheyKid (talk) 01:55, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

WarrenRicheyKid you can simply move the article into mainspace, but you should really format it with sections, filled in citations, etc before doing so. Make sure it is also notable. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your helpful criticism and advice. Firstly, how do I format the article with sections. Is there a template? I don't understand what is meant by the suggestion to fill in citations. WarrenRicheyKid (talk) 02:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

You use this.

==Section== Brachy08 _(Talk) 02:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks! WarrenRicheyKid (talk) 02:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

WarrenRicheyKid, I am not sure there's enough to support a standalone article separate from Coal miners' strike of 1873. Half of the story appears to be your original research. We are not supposed to do that. We only summarise what's in the sources. We don't write up conclusions about what's in the sources or try to piece together a story of our own theories based on what's not in them. You can add some information that is in the sources to the original article, and then create redirects to that article from Giovanni Chiesa or even Lynching of Giovanni Chiesea. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:38, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

When is it appropriate to fork a new article for added coverage?

I am new here. I am working on an article where the group of editors working on it are much more experienced than I am and they seem to have a fairly specific and narrow goal for the article I'm working on, so they have removed and minimized my contributions. That's fine, because I can understand that their goals might be different from my own, but I do think I have valid knowledge to contribute to the subject, specifically on its history and important personages who were involved with the subject and cotemporaneous. Unfortunately I don't think they see eye to eye with me, even after attempting to explain why I think my contributions are valid. I am wondering if it would be appropriate to create a "History of Subject" page which their page could link to (or which could link to theirs) so that they could work their work and I could add to the subject without stepping on their toes for the vision they have of their article.

On the other hand, I can imagine how this might be seen as less than useful or even downright underhanded if I did it incorrectly, or did it for the wrong reasons. Any advice you can provide for me would be helpful. Eschaton1985 (talk) 03:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

What you are suggesting is called a WP:POVFORK - they are not accepted on Wikipedia. You should work with the other editors to reach some sort of consensus. Taking content that has been edited (or even rejected) to another page title will generally not help the situation. MrOllie (talk) 03:18, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I will review that now. What are those "history of" links I see on some pages, where another page covers one specific aspect of the subject, but with the same POV as the parent article? The other editors and I don't have a disagreement over POV, just what content is appropriate for the article. Eschaton1985 (talk) 03:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

They are generally a product of an article split - sometimes an article gets so long keeping all the content on one page becomes impractical. The article you were discussing is relatively short, so that would not be appropriate there. MrOllie (talk) 03:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you again. I'll go back to the original article. Eschaton1985 (talk) 03:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Adding logos to a page

Hello. I recently added a few logos to update a college’s wiki page. They were almost immediately taken down although they are 100% correct and should be there. I have now been blocked from editing that page as well. What gives? Mainerlife (talk) 03:36, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

It likely has to do with the reasons already brought up on your talk page, as well as Talk:Thomas College. Remsense诉 03:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

So I can’t add information without being blocked? How can others do this and I can’t? Mainerlife (talk) 04:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Mainerlife, we can't help you if you are not willing to listen. No one can. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:33, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

The block log explains the reason "Repeatedly adding images of text instead of searchable, editable text". When another user left a message for you about it, you said "I don’t mind that it’s out of your manual of style. I will continue to add it as an image. I am the Creative Director for this college and I would like it on our page." Please understand that it is not your college's page, it is a page about your college, and as an employee if you intend to edit it, you need to make a WP:PAID and WP:COI disclosure. It is highly advisable that as someone with a conflict of interest, instead of editing directly, you request the change on the article's talk page. If you would like to appeal your block, there is guidence at WP:UNBLOCK. Shaws username . talk . 04:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I have to imagine that posting images of text has to contravene some part of MOS:ACCESSIBILITY. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

From my interpretation of them, it would be of images #3. While I haven't seen the images because they've been deleted from commons, it's the impression I get from the messages on the talk page of it being described as a list. Shaws username . talk . 05:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link: WP:ANI#Text as a graphic Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 07:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Can someone reupload this?

I have an image getting nominated for deletion cause I used the copyright thing wrong but could someone reupload it? Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

By the way https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Caption_world.png Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 15:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

You need to take this up on Commons, not here. But since you say that the image is dated 24 April 1985, your claim that it is PD because it was published before 1929 makes no sense. Unless you can positively show that the image is either PD, or has been explicitly licensed by the copyright owner with a licence acceptable to Commons (such as CC-BY-SA) then you may not upload it to Commons.

On a related subject, I cannot see how User:Blackeyedpea2/sandbox can possibly be consistent with the purposes of Wikipedia. Please see WP:NOTWEBHOST. ColinFine (talk) 16:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

well I guess I’m gonna have to find a new image but that’s fine I already took pictures of it so atleast I have it in my memory delete for gods sake i don’t care Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 16:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

But what copyright do I choose??? I know it’s not before 1929 I just didn’t know how it worked jeez Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 16:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Blackeyedpea2 If you took the image, you can choose whichever license you want as you are the copyright owner. If the image is copyrighted and unlicensed, then you cannot upload it to Commons. Instead you need to upload it locally to Wikipedia under WP:Fair use. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

But Wikipedia's rules on non-free content say (among other things) that non-free images may only be used on articles, not drafts or user pages. Since the contents of your sandbox have zero chance of ever being accepted into Wikipedia, there is no way that you may upload or use that image, unless its use on Fandom (where I presume you found) explicitly licenses it under CC-BY-SA or similar.

I'm sorry to say it, but everything looks as if you are not here to build an encyclopaedia, but to engage in alternate history. There is nothing wrong with that, but Wikipedia is not the place to do it. ColinFine (talk) 18:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Well what’s the use for the sandbox then????? Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Blackeyedpea2: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1217. The sandbox (both your personal and the communal ones) is intended to be used to test edits that benefit the encyclopedia and/or draft articles. You can read more about this at Help:Sandbox tutorial. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:12, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Also if Wikimedia images are supposed to help wikipedia then how is this image helping https://commons.m.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?search=world+war+three&title=Special:MediaSearch&type=image Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 11:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

See all the country all images? That’s not helping wikipedia Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 11:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Ball not all Blackeyedpea2 (talk) 11:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Aside from the whataboutism exhibited, several of those countryballs images are actually being used on someone's userpage over on PTWiki. Commons is accessible across all of Wikipedia. Another image is used on ITWiki for an article on Countryballs that may be deleted due to a lack of notability, a lack of sources and potential copyvios due to a lot of the information apparently coming from a Fandom site; that would make it largely sourced from user generated content, something disallowed on Wikipedia.

If you wish to call into question those images and whether they and other images like them belong on Commons, please take your noble fight there. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Visual editing and source editing

What it means about visual editing and source editing? Can somebody help me to know it? Arief Azazie Zain (talk) 14:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Arief Azazie Zain, welcome to the Teahouse. See this guide and this one for introductions on editing in both ways and the differences between the two. You can almost always switch between them at will when editing Wikipedia, though the Visual Editor does not work in some areas (such as talk pages). 57.140.16.57 (talk) 14:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Any way to fix this?

When I undid an edit on the page Discipline, when linking to the reason why I undid it (WP:DICTIONARY), I accidentally published the edit without including part of the link. I think that would be misleading if the person who had done the edit had seen the reason. So what I wanted to ask is, is it possible to change the reason, even if it isn't me who changes it? ~Fuffi-Marie~ (go talk) 14:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @FuffiMarie welcome to the tea house! Edit summaries are not themselves editable. If you think you've made a mistake in your edit summary large enough to be worth fixing/noting, but please see dummy edits since they are generally see as a fine thing to do in this case (which probably doesn't need a dummy edit with summary but would also be fine to do). Skynxnex (talk) 15:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! ~Fuffi-Marie~ (go talk) 15:42, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

IP check

How do I ask the administrators for an Ip check. There was an editor that was blocked this month for sockpuppetry. I noticed one of the new editors in an article I'm regularly editing, joined the day after that blocked editor lost their editing privileges. I find it highly suspicious and I'm seeing the similar behavior from the new editor. By the way, I have asked directly the editor about this.[2] Hotwiki (talk) 16:37, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hotwiki see WP:SPI. In my opinion the comment you linked is... aggressive. CheckUsers will only check IP's if necesssary, and not whenever you want. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 17:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution for controversial issues -- how does it work?

How does wikipedia resolve ^[1] controversial^[2] ontological associations like Far-right politics ? Talk:Far-right politics has a big debate over whether it's equivalent to Nazi-ism . And there are biographies e.g. Blake Masters & Marjorie Taylor Greene with edit warring over associating those Persons with "far-right" . So the end-to-end result is tying specific polticical candidates to nazism (e.g. the Swastika renders directly on a candidates article page

What is the process for establishing the bar for associating someone with a controversial / undue label like "far-right", "far-left" , racist etc? Are there certain ontologies or categories that have a high bar ? is there a way to be more explicit about who gets associated with a category / concept? Is there an escalation process for resolving disputes^[3]?

This isn't a question about the specific "far-right/far-left" ontology . It's a question about the process for establishing a high standard for ontological definitions on wikipedia. Tonymetz (talk) 22:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

References

If you're talking about Wikipedia:Biographies of living persons/Noticeboard#Joe Kent, you're already at the right place for determining consensus, given previous discussion at Talk:Joe Kent itself. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 03:14, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Sure the early process is clear ("post on Noticeboard") but the late part is less so. there are larger debates on big topics or big political articles -- but it's unclear how those get resolved.

Perhaps someone could share an example of a larger controversy and it's resolution.

Did someone senior or paid staff step in?

how does the adjudication process work upon stalemates? is there an escalation? Tonymetz (talk) 17:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymetz, please make test edits in your sandbox. Paid staff is not going to step in over a content dispute. You linked to WP:Dispute resolution above - that is where the options are listed. For large-scale issues, the final step is often an RfC, which gets publicized in various places around Wikipedia so more folks are aware of it and can weigh in. For behavioral issues, there's ArbCom. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 17:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

thanks on both counts -- i moved over tot he sandbox while i figure out a tagging issue.

If you can think of a notable controversy that will help.

We can mark this as #resolved. thanks for the guidance. Tonymet (talk) 17:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymet, the most recent controversy I had any involvement in (I stay away from contentious topic areas, since I'm an IP editor) was the Vector 2022 kerfuffle, which resulted in this massive RfC (among others, and among many other discussions in various places). 57.140.16.57 (talk) 17:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

this is very helpful thank you i'll read more into it. and if you have context on being an IP editor (vs anon vs named) id be curious about that too.

(and sorry for the name switcheroo i've been debugging push notifs) Tonymetz (talk) 17:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymetz, "IP" and "anon" are largely interchangeable terms for the same thing: someone whose edits are tied to their current IP address, because they have not logged in to an account. WP:IP editor covers the basics. 57.140.16.57 (talk) 17:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

In the image below someone made a button that you click and are taken to a random page of that category how do I do that but with a different category?

for the question.

In the image below someone made a button that you click and are taken to a random page of that category how do I do that but with a different category? DMPenguinTheJewishPenguin (talk) 17:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The user linked to Special:RandomInCategory, and specified the category by replacing "..." in the following: Special:RandomInCategory/.... The user also put that in a {{Clickable button 2}}. If you want a copy-paste version, see below, replacing the parts in the angle brackets. Happy editing!

{{center|{{Clickable button 2|Special:RandomInCategory/<article goes here>|<text goes here>|class=mw-ui-progressive}}|style=margin:1em}}

~ Eejit43 (talk) 18:07, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. DMPenguinTheJewishPenguin (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

So how would I do that for a random page that needs editing for grammar/spelling? DMPenguinTheJewishPenguin (talk) 17:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

This is probably what you want:

{{center|{{Clickable button 2|Special:RandomInCategory/All articles needing copy edit|Random article needing copyediting|class=mw-ui-progressive}}|style=margin:1em}}

It gives:

Random article needing copyediting

~ Eejit43 (talk) 17:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Yes thanks. :) DMPenguinTheJewishPenguin (talk) 17:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Perfect! :) ~ Eejit43 (talk) 18:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Exact copy of refused draft added direct to mainspace

An article I made a while back, Draft:Syria at the 2024 Summer Olympics, was recently put into the mainspace. As the creator of the draft, I am very confused as to why it was refused then (in spite of special guidelines existing on the subject about approving such articles). ASmallMapleLeaf (talk) 18:08, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

ASmallMapleLeaf, it looks like your article was copy-pasted by another editor to mainspace. They were not supposed to do that, especially not without providing attribution. The thing to do is to request WP:HISTMERGE and make the editor aware that they did wrong. As for why AFC declined it, there's a category of articles that are hard to approve through AFC but it's not worth it to seek deletion if they somehow make it to mainspace anyway; this article would be one of those. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 18:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

COI editor not responding

Hi, I've proposed a COI change here Talk:Geotab#Update request for introduction section and was being helped by a Wikipedian. He's not responded for the last month, however, so is there a way to get an alternate Wikipedian to help? Minura at Geotab Inc (talk) 16:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Minura at Geotab Inc. Please be aware that Spintendo is a volunteer who has not edited in 3-1/2 weeks. Perhaps the editor is on vacation or is ill. I do not know. I suggest that you make a fresh edit request formally, and hopefully another editor will respond. Cullen328 (talk) 18:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Article Reject

Why the hell did this happen? Chillalbert25 (talk) 16:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

We try to be friendly and civil here on this page, please. Your draft was deleted as unambiguously promotional; I examined it and must agree. Wikipedia article should have a neutral point of view and not talk up the subject, summarizing what independent reliable sources with significant coverage choose to say about it, showing how it is notable. Please see Your First Article. 331dot (talk) 16:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm not promoting anything. I'm just writing. Like... And even then. Why would you delete it? Chillalbert25 (talk) 17:03, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Chillalbert25 Because an admin, User:Nick Moyes agreed it was unambiguous promotion. See message on your Talk Page. Wikipedia forbids WP:PROMOTION. Mike Turnbull (talk) 16:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm not promoting anything. I'm just writing. Like... And even then. Why would you delete it? Chillalbert25 (talk) 17:04, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Chillalbert25 What you wrote was totally unrelated to the purposes of Wikipedia. This site is not a free webhost for you to write any old childish nonsense you want to. Go do that somewhere else, please, if you aren't genuinely interested in helping to build a world-class encyclopaedia of notable things. See WP:NOTWEBHOST for why I deleted your page. I hope that answers your question as to 'why the hell' that happened. See also WP:NOTHERE for why admins like myself block users who don't appear to be attempting to contribute positively to Wikipedia. Nick Moyes (talk) 17:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Chillalbert25, I am also an administrator, and I agree with 331dot and Nick Moyes. Your draft was promotional, unreferenced and not appropriate for this encyclopedia. Please read Your first article and pay attention to what it says. Cullen328 (talk) 18:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I believe that thousands pf drafts/articles are deleted every week. Encyclopedias have a requirement for neutral point of view and reference requirements. David notMD (talk) 20:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Bias

The description of Donald Trumps presidency is completely false and inaccurate. It says he was the worst president in history. as we all know that is a lie. Donald Trump was and will be again, the best president in history. Who ever put that bias lie on Wikipedia needs to be fired for placing a bias false opinion when wiki is supposed to be a comparative encyclopedia, not a left wing bias unethical, no decorum or professionalism personal activist platform giving non truths as a factually correct definition of a former President of the United States of America’s term. Put CCP BIDEN as the WORST illegitimate President to ever disgrace this country in 250 yrs if we’re talking truth. Change that about Trump NOW!!!! 2603:9000:B900:491E:A452:8669:2A3A:F587 (talk) 07:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, 2603:9000:B900:491E:A452:8669:2A3A:F587. I think you must have misread what Presidency of Donald Trump says. It doesn't say he was the worst president in history but that "Trump had historically low approval ratings, and scholars and historians rank his presidency as one of the worst in American history". Do you think that's an incorrect summary of his approval ratings and what historians have said about him? Cordless Larry (talk) 07:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

2603:9000:B900:491E:A452:8669:2A3A:F587 If you want to change the article, then propose a specific request in the format "change X to Y" with reliable sources cited. Otherwise you're just kvetching, which is not productive to our goal of improving Wikipedia. If you want to live in your bubble, Conservapedia is → thataway, and you might be happier contributing there. Wikipedia reports, without bias, what reliable sources say about a topic. If you don't agree with reliable sources, that isn't a problem for Wikipedia. ~Anachronist (talk) 08:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Tragically, Wikipedia follows reliable sources, not internet rants. 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 13:19, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

People wihout accounts are not able to edit 'locked' articles (the lock symbol, upper right). That is why Anachronist mentioned that a path open to you is to use the Talk page to suggest an article change. At the Talk page, protests about possible bias have been raised many times (see the Archives for multiple earlier discussions). Article content about expert rankings of him being a bad president has not been overturned. David notMD (talk) 20:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

AfD article

I listed an article for deletion (AfD) to which only two people have contributed. I don't want to lobby in any way as that's obviously out of order, but is there any legitimate way to encourage editors to take a look (regardless of whether they agree with me or not)? Thanks, Emmentalist (talk) 12:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Emmentalist, there is. WP:AFD has instructions, right after instructions on how to create AFDs. You can leave notices to user talk pages of people who have previously edited the article (in this case, no one). You can also leave neutral messages to talk pages of relevant wikiprojects (see WP:CANVASS first). That's allowed but I wouldn't bother. it's sufficiently advertised. There just aren't many people interested in deletion discussions. Two participants are two more than in many other AFDs. You should not worry too much about how it goes. AFDs always leave some people unhappy; sometimes the unhappy one is you. In this case, I see it was created by PamD who's a valuable contributor. And it's about a "museum". It's unlikely to amount to a huge disaster whichever way the AFD closes. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 13:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

This is super advice, @Usedtobecool. Thanks so much. I didn't realise AfD discussions often had no/few contributors. I'll leave it at that, then. I think you're still cool, by the way! All the best, Emmentalist (talk) 20:09, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Right back at you, Emmentalist! BTW, the AFD did get a few extra visitors after you posted here[3] — Usedtobecool ☎️ 01:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

How great! And also a very cool chart I had not learned about! Emmentalist (talk) 22:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Question

Is there somewhere where I cam find suggested pages to edit? Thank you very much and kind regards 14 novembre (talk) 21:34, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Well, there's a couple different methods. One of them is to just click "Random Article" and go mad. Another is to take a look at the Task Centre and see what tickles your fancy.

I'd personally advise doing citation hunting (you can find that in the Fact Checking section), which will get you used to how citations and reliable sources work which will help you on your way to potentially making your first article some day. You may also find some random article that you want to improve in general if it's looking a little worse for wear. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:42, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@CommissarDoggo Many thanks. 14 novembre (talk) 22:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

coraline jones?

Where is the page for Coraline Jones? Oreooo333 (talk) 20:23, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Coraline (film) EvergreenFir (talk) 20:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Oreooo333, we also have Coraline about the novel. Cullen328 (talk) 23:15, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Need help with my first article

Need help with my first article Wikinoobrider (talk) 23:09, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Wikinoobrider: Welcome to the Teahouse! Are you referring to Draft:Nikita S? If so, please be aware that IMDb is not considered an appropriate source per WP:IMDB. Hope you can find additional independent published sources that provide significant coverage of this person. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:20, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

looking for an article

im looking for a certain article (links to butterfly effect in the see also) about a guy going to the hospital that also caused the fall of a country 216.100.95.82 (talk) 19:08, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Welcome to the Teahouse, IP editor. You've not given us much to go on, nor is the Teahouse help forum the right place to answer your question. (We're here to help users having problems editing, not finding articles). However, you could work backwards from "what links here" to the article Butterfly effect. There are 363 article titles that might jog your memory (see HERE). Regards Nick Moyes (talk) 19:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

The Đorđe Martinović incident? The man in question went to the hospital and The collapse of this taboo [against open ethnonationalism] in the coverage of the Martinović case heralded the growth of nationalism that was to lead to [Yugoslavia] the country's collapse in 1991 (Mertus 1999). And yes, butterfly effect is linked in the See also section. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 19:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@Rotideypoc41352 Well sleuthed! The incident caused the fall of a country? Wow - that must have been a bit of a bummer!

Nick Moyes (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I must admit that this was less sleuthing and more serendipity—I happened upon a joke about the Martinović incident with framing similar to IP's question. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 23:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Assistance needed with submitting a page

Hello,

I have started working on my first page about a conlang I am developing. Today I decided to submit it, but it was declined because "In summary, the draft needs multiple published sources that are: [in-depth, reliable, secondary, independent of the subject]".

What should I do if this article is about a topic that has no sources?

Article: Draft:Shared Alliantic

MyNamesIs 55 (talk) 23:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@MyNamesIs 55: Welcome to the Teahouse! All Wikipedia articles should be created based on multiple independent published sources that provide significant coverage of the topic. If there are no such sources, then there can be no article. If you haven't done so already, please see Help:Your first article. GoingBatty (talk) 23:17, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

MyNamesIs 55, please read Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not for things made up one day. Cullen328 (talk) 23:24, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: Thank you for your reply! I am sorry if I caused any inconvenience, I will publish this article somewhere appropriate and remove the draft once I'm done. Have a good day!

55 (talk) 23:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

To tag the draft for deletion by an Administrator, put Db-author inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top of the draft. David notMD (talk) 23:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Embedding citations

How do I embed a citation next to a claim? I'm having a hard time understanding the entire process. Cystidia (talk) 23:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cystidia: Welcome to the Teahouse! I suggest watching the video at WP:EASYREFBEGIN. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Cystidia (talk) 23:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

How to make Wikipedia editors stop taking out your edits because you don’t have citations? I don’t know how to put in real citations that they approve.

I’ve added a few edits to some articles, but only a few of them have been accepted because I don’t know what you mean by citations. Help. Nolan1scool (talk) 16:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. All information on Wikipedia needs be cited- which means that we need to know where the information is coming from. For example, you made this edit which has good information, but you did not include a source for the information. Please read Referencing for Beginners to learn more about writing citations. 331dot (talk) 17:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Nolan1scool I see that @331dot gave you a link about how to add references. But I notice that you may have been using our 'Visual Editor' - one of two choices of editing tools that user have. That guide ralted to those people preferring to use our Source Editor.

So you might find this shortcut link to a different help page of some use if you are using Visual Editor: WP:REFBEGINVE. Hope this helps. Regards, Nick Moyes (talk) 17:13, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, thank you for the clarification. What do you suggest I add for citations for the …And Justice for All edit I made? Nolan1scool (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Citations are basically where you got your information. For example, in your edit at '...And Justice for All', you mentioned about it selling 9 million records. Using '< ref >' and '</ref>', you can add where you found the information from (using a hyperlink to the article containing that 9 million figure). A personal example of what from me would be this edit:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Sukhoi&diff=prev&oldid=1210072251, although I'm sure someone might be able to give a much better example as this was a hard subject to source. ASmallMapleLeaf (talk) 18:22, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Does the reference need to be directly from Wikipedia or can I use other websites for citations as well? Nolan1scool (talk) 22:49, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Nolan1scool, the reference cannot be from Wikipedia. Please read WP:CIRCULAR. The reference must be to a reliable, independent published source with editorial control and a reputation for accuracy. Cullen328 (talk)

@Nolan1scool: If you like, you can discuss this at the article's talk page: Talk:...And Justice for All (album), where you can tell explain where you got the information from, and other editors could help you add the information appropriately (if there is consensus to do so). Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:37, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

MazdaFan404

I’m new here! I am a fan of Mazda because I am getting the CX-5! MazdaFan404 (talk) 22:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@MazdaFan404: Welcome to the Teahouse! You may be interested in updating articles in Category:Mazda and its subcategories and/or joining Wikipedia:WikiProject Automobiles. Happy editing! GoingBatty (talk) 23:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

MazdaFan404, it is fine to be a fan, but please be aware that any content that you wrote must be written from the Neutral point of view, which is a core content policy. Cullen328 (talk) 23:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

New Here - Fair Usage Questions

Hi - this is in regards to the article of deceased person. Would it be fair usage to upload too wikipedia a portrait of that person, which was used in a newspaper? If you can please advise! HCR24 (talk) 23:02, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, HCR24. If no freely licensed photo of the deceased person exists, then the answer is yes, with certain limitations. The policy language can be found at WP:NFCI #10. You must follow the entire policy very carefully. Cullen328 (talk) 23:21, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay. Thanks for that. Perused WP:NFCI HCR24 (talk) 01:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Submitting New Draft Page for Review

Hello, I built a new page for a non-profit here is the link: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Kiss_The_Ground I can't seem to publish it and get it submitted for review.Any help would be appreciated! Jamesborland43 (talk) 01:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

@Jamesborland43 I have gone ahead and submitted it to Articles for Creation for you. In the future, you can follow the directions at WP:AFCREVIEW to find out how to submit it. The reviewing process will take some time since we have 1818 drafts currently to review, so it could take up to two months. ‍ Relativity 01:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! Jamesborland43 (talk) 02:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Is a photograph without findable attribution "Free Content"

There is the photograph of a deceased person, which I'd like to add to that person's article. No attribution for this photograph seems to be findable anywhere online and the photograph is used many times on many pages online, but always without attribution. Would that make it safe to assume that this photograph is "free content", as wikipedia understands it and that it is safe to upload? HCR24 (talk) 02:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Precisely the opposite: lacking any information to the contrary, we must assume that rights holder retains the copyright and has not released the photo under a license compatible with Commons. As Cullen328 pointed out to you above (#New Here - Fair Usage Questions), an upload of a photo of a deceased person must carefully follow our WP:NFCI policy. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 02:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

HCR24, I agree with Rotideypoc41352. You absolutely cannot make such an assumption. Modern copyright law is very clear on this point, although many aspects of copyright law are highly complex. Copyright notices are no longer required. When a photo is published, it is automatically copyright protected for 95 years by the act of publishing it. Unless there is solid written evidence that it is freely licensed or in the public domain, then you must assume that it is copyright protected. Other websites may use copyright protected images under the legal concept of fair use. Not Wikipedia. We have much stricter standards because our educational goal is to maximize free content which can be used and reused by anyone for any purpose without permission and without fear of being sued for copyright infringement. We are the #7 website worldwide and #1 in originally written content. We have much higher standards than other websites, and those standards are enforced. Cullen328 (talk) 03:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

How does a WikiProject get revived?

So WP:APPS has been semi-active for quite some time now. At what point does it become fully active? TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 04:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

When enough people are actively involved! I really don't see any sign of an increase in involvement on the Talk page. -- asilvering (talk) 04:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Citing a WP:CIRCULAR?

I'm currently getting to work on a few G5/G11 speedy deleted drafts. Right now I'm working on Draft:Bitget, and I can see some content that could be used from this copy of the now-deleted article on a Wikipedia mirror. How do I give attribution to this? Obviously can't use as a reference.

Do I attribute to the creator sock (I think its Antonio Vinzaretti) or is there a way to see the contribution history? TLA^tlak 03:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

If I am reading WP:ATTREQ correctly, you can link to the page at HandWiki, if that site is complying with the license and shows the author. I am not sure if it does. But, that article is quite short and has already been deleted ten times. I suggest just rewrite from scratch. RudolfRed (talk) 04:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

RudolfRed, perhaps WP:ATTREQ needs rewriting to be clearer because later on that same page, WP:RUD says Deleted articles may not be recovered and reused from Wikipedia mirrors, online archives, or the view-deleted administrator right. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 04:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

That page you link also says unless attribution is otherwise provided. I don't see why we can't use CC licensed text even if it was previously deleted, that makes no sense to me, but I don't make the rules. RudolfRed (talk) 04:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

That was helpful, thank you. It doesn't seem to attribute the authors, so I think I'll just rewrite it from the groundup and disregard the mirror. The Wikipedians on Discord seemed to suggest the same thing. TLA^tlak 04:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Plain date or (Start date) template?

On the page M11 (Istanbul Metro) the infobox is very wide and personally a bit visually appalling. This is due to the usage of the {{start date and age}} template. I was wondering if it is appropriate to remove the tag as it is a metro line that is not a historic line, and frankly takes up too much space. Or if there are other alternatives, such as using <small> to reduce the size of the stations that were opened at that date. Thanks in advance! ~eticangaaa (talk) 05:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Moved to Talk:M11 (Istanbul Metro) § Plain date or (Start date) template?

Regarding Image Use

I am in the process of creating an article about the oldest dated tower clock in the world, in Germany. Unfortunately, I don't live in Germany, so I cannot get any photos myself. There are a few photos online, but I am unsure on whether I can display them on a Wikipedia page without consent. Are there any rules regarding this?

Cheers, 3602kiva (talk) 20:46, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Yup, mostly in relation to copyright. If you go to Wikimedia Commons you can find the upload wizard, the first page on there will give you the generalised rundown of how you should and should not upload images.

There is, however, another choice: you can go to the WikiProject Germany photo requests page and ask them very nicely, maybe someone will head out and take a picture for you. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Got it. I will take a look at the upload wizard, and also send a few emails out to gain either consent for existing photos or get new ones taken.

I appreciate the swift response, 3602kiva (talk) 21:12, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

No worries, if you need any more help with it then you know where to find us. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 21:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

commons:Category:Turmuhr Forchtenberg has 33 images of it, in varying levels of focus on it vs marginally-visible, interior vs exterior, perspective/direction, etc. If you can read German, the de:Turmuhr Forchtenberg article on German Wikipedia could be a source of inspiration for content. DMacks (talk) 09:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

How to make a note/footnote, and can the same note/footnote be used multiple times in the same article?

I want to make a note/footnote saying:

"The Royal Albion Hotel was damaged by a fire in July 2023, so only 63 of the 64 hotels are operational as of February 2024"

Preferably including a reference talking about the fire in the note.

Obviously I'm wanted to add it to the 3 places on the Britannia Hotels article which says there's 64 hotels, as only 63 of them are open. Danstarr69 (talk) 06:46, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Does this answer the "multiple" part of the question? As for the "note" (as opposed to, though perhaps including, a reference), try Template:Efn/doc. (Incidentally, I'm surprised to hear that an article on a hotel chain has to say three times that there are X hotels, whether X is 64 or 63.) -- Hoary (talk) 07:48, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hoary I don't know what the first part has to do with notes/footnotes, however I managed to add the same note 3 times without a reference using the "named references" bit of the efn/doc template.

The reason why the number of hotels is listed 3 times, is because they're listed at the start, they're listed in the infobox, and they're listed at the start of the table.

However what I can't understand, is why all 64 hotels aren't listed in a single table, as all it does is cause confusion.

Right now there's 2 tables, 1 containing 38 uniquely named hotels, and 1 containing 26 hotels which is split into 3 sections for hotels which have the same name in different towns/cities.

It took me ages to figure out that the reason a Bradford hotel was missing, was because a Manchester hotel had been added twice (once to each table). Danstarr69 (talk) 09:22, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Deleting a redirect

Hello there. Just a small issue. The to-do list on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who currently links to a redirect called Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who/to do. I wanted to know whether this redirect could be deleted, and instead ensure that the to-do list link as featured on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Doctor Who could link to Wikipedia:WikiProject Doctor Who/to do directly, without having to be redirected first. Reply by VisualEditor is fine. All the best, Lotsw73 (talk) 13:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Lotsw73, did I do it? Is that what you meant? — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Usedtobecool, yes, you did it. Thank you very much! Lotsw73 (talk) 09:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Resolving naming discrepancies

Hello! There is a conflict of info between these pages: Heart Internet - Wikipedia & 123 Reg - Wikipedia

The first says the company was founded by Tim Brealey and Jonathan Brealey. The second one says Jonathan and Tim Beresford-Brealey. One of the citations on the second page says Jonathan Brealey and Tim Beresford.

I did a Google search and it looks like those same people went on to found a company called 20i according to their About Us page. Heart Internet and 123 Reg, along with the dates those companies were founded are on there. This page says Tim & Jonathan Brealey.

Which one would be the best one to go with? They look like busy people, so would I be better off doing more research and putting together a sort of biography page to mention the different businesses that they founded? Thanks so much!! Majortony866 (talk) 10:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

It's clearly the same situation as Robbie Hunter-Paul and Henry Paul.

Robbie got married and included his wife's surname.

Henry didn't.

Timothy James Mark Beresford-Brearley took his wife's surname.[4]https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/YXXunGOF8pNm2FhWSD3eZhiJeLg/appointments

Jonathan Robert Eric Brearley didn't.[5]https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/officers/xheQ7-bqs2cemvxjoMgwvNehJq0/appointments Danstarr69 (talk) 11:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

In my opinion Heart Internet should be nominated for deletion for lack of references that confirm notability, as existing refs are either brief mentions or HI's own website. That would solve the problem. David notMD (talk) 12:55, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Article Help

I'm working on an article about sociologist and professor Aaron Shaw (see my drafts), but it got denied due to insufficient citations. Can someone help me understand why? It might have something to do with the "cite journal" thing at the end, but I don't know how to get rid of that. Thanks! Gnat8 (talk) 01:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Gnat8 are you Aaron Shaw by any chance? If so, you should read the Conflict of Interest guideline.

Other than that, there are no independent sources in the draft, which automatically mean Shaw does not pass the general notability guideline. The notability guideline for professors is not met either. The reviewer (User:Brachy0008)'s decline reason might have been in error but I would endorse the decline review. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

As an addendum to what has already been said, please read carefully the notability guide. Currently the page includes no evidence that he has made an impact on the national/international field. Without this there is really zero chance that he will pass a review, just being a Prof is not enough. Ldm1954 (talk) 15:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Debug tools for watchlist notifications

I've set up my watchlist and notification settings. but often edits to my watchlist pages are not coming through -- both on web wikipedia and via email.

Is there a tool to debug or see a log of watchlist notifications? I'm trying to figure out why some watchlist changes are not being received Tonymetz (talk) 17:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't believe you get push or email notifications of stuff changing on your watchlist, you essentially have to have a tab open on that at all times.

As for why some changes don't come through on your watchlist, that'll be down to the filters you set up on the watchlist page itself. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 17:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

ok thanks i better understand watchlist now.

as for replies, those still seem to be inconsistent -- some replies push a notif and some don't. any tips on debugging that? I've been testing with an alt account. Tonymetz (talk) 23:16, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Tonymetz What notifications you get by email are set in Special:Preferences#mw-prefsection-echo. Your main and alt account could be set up differently. See also Special:TopicSubscriptions which lists the threads you have subscribed to, which trigger notifications but not emails, unless you set up your preferences to do that as well. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

i think i found the bug. it was a global setting "show cross-site notifications" = off . "show cross site..." = ON fixed it. now i see reply notifs (like yours) Tonymetz (talk) 15:26, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm writing an article on a company, and I'm somewhat confused.

Draft:Spiro Spathis Here's the draft I'm working on. Every time I submit, it gets rejected. At first I only had the company's website as a source. Then even when I had trust sources it still got rejected. I don't understand, does using the company's website as a source give a reason to not promote the draft? I find many articles on a company use the company's website. Also, as we're talking about the draft, are there any other problems with it or is this the only reason it's not an article yet? Thanks for your gracious time, Gentle users. Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 18:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

@Moe the Alexandrian The company's website can be used for uncontroversial information: explained at WP:ABOUTSELF. However, to show that the company is wikinotable, you need about three sources that meet the golden rules by being reliable, independent and with significant coverage. Technically your draft has not been rejected (which would mean you would have to give up) but only declined, which may mean it can be improved and re-submtted. Mike Turnbull (talk) 18:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Sorry, I indeed meant declined, and thank you for helping me! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 18:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello amd welcomed. Note that your draft was only declined, not rejected. Rejected has a specific meaning in the submission process, that a draft may not be resubmitted. The main issue with the draft seems to be that you are using primary sources, which include the announcement of routine business activities like the release of a product or the company talking about its own products. We want to know what independent reliable sources choose on their own to say about a topic. 331dot (talk) 18:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the advice, I'll defeantly try to add more reliable sources then. Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 18:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Please also understand that what happens on other articles is not relevant, as these too could be inappropriate and you would be unaware of this. See other stuff exists. If you want to help us, please identify these other articles you have seen for possible action. We're only as good as the time people take to help. 331dot (talk) 18:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I'll try to make sure to find the article I mentioned that has the company website as a source, and thanks for notifying me! Moe the Alexandrian (talk) 18:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Google search linking to Talk page

Hi! I created a new article on wikipedia. However, when I try and google search it leads me to the talk page instead of the article itself. Is that because the article has not been assessed yet? Or did I do something wrong? 1983ArtLover (talk) 19:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Directly created new articles are (usually) blocked from web crawlers (that index things for Google and other search engines) until either they have been reviewed by the New Pages Patrol, or 90 days have elapsed.

If instead of moving it (from Draft) or directly creating it yourself, you had submitted it as a Draft for approval by the WP:AFC process, I believe (but may be mistaken) that if approved it would have been indexable immediately, though of course Wikipedia has no control over when the crawlers will actually find it. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 2.126.225.254 (talk) 19:51, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

1983ArtLover, how long ago did you create it? Anyway, Google ought not to be looking at or directing people to its talk page. It sounds like Google did something against its own policy. Maproom (talk) 20:35, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

It wasn't created that long ago. I only was able to move it over to the article page like 9 days ago. I know about the 90 day rule though. I had originally submitted the draft for review, but once I was able to move it over myself I moved it from draft to article. 1983ArtLover (talk) 20:56, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Google indexes talk pages and is allowed to do it by Wikipedia. Non-talk pages usually appear earlier in search results but in this case the non-talk page has noindex, telling search engines to not index it. The talk page does not have noindex. PrimeHunter (talk) 20:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

So there is nothing I can do to change that? 1983ArtLover (talk) 21:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

@1983ArtLover: You have to wait for the article to be 90 days old (after Mishkin Gallery was moved to mainspace 20 February), or be reviewed by a user with the required user right. It sometimes happens soon after an article is mentioned here but it varies. Reviewers are volunteers who can choose where to work. PrimeHunter (talk) 21:47, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! That's what I thought. 1983ArtLover (talk) 21:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I can confirm that when I google for "wikipedia Mishkin Gallery", its first hit is https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Mishkin_Gallery. Maproom (talk) 20:39, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

u.a./[u.a.]:

What's the meaning of u.a.: which appears in some references, eg. Durham, North Carolina [u.a.]: Duke Univ. Press; Jefferson, N.C. u.a.: McFarland? Mcljlm (talk) 20:01, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Mcljlm If you could link to precisely where you see this, we might be able to help you better. In my mind, UA means a Unitary Authority, but I wouldn't expect to see it within a citation. Is this when you're viewing a page that is not being edited, or when you're actually editing a page? If the latter, which of our two editors are you using? Nick Moyes (talk) 20:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Other examples at: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Witchsmeller_Pursuivant#References, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Archbishop#References and https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Queen_of_Spain%27s_Beard#References; https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belgian_Armed_Forces#cite_ref-25 Mcljlm (talk) 01:01, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

The only u.a. I'm aware of in a bibliographical context is und andere or unter anderen, which is used in German as an equivalent of et al. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 20:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Search for insource:"north carolina u a" found a single result Maharaja Nandakumar - see ref 4. At a guess, it's a typo for USA? -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 21:31, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Tenryuu's meaning sounds correct. Here is a previous discussion about it: Help talk:Citation Style 1/Archive 2#What does [u.a] mean? DMacks (talk) 09:15, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

That wikilink doesn't work owing to the [ and ], so navigate to Help_talk:Citation_Style_1/Archive_2 and look for the correct section. Mike Turnbull (talk) 11:59, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Fixed. Wow, that's an annoying one. DMacks (talk) 15:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I'm inviting the still active participants in the archived discussion - Jason Quinn, Redrose64, and Alarics to join this one.

Since this is English WP and u.a. doesn't appear to be a generally recognised English abbreviation I suggest it should be deleted from English WP references. Mcljlm (talk) 18:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I agree. It serves only to mystify and confuse. Alarics (talk) 22:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Before i create this article, can someone assert the notability of this artist?

As a daily newspaper reader, i often discover topics of importance and try to find the topics on Wikipedia to see whether i can Improve them. i made about 24 organic edits under my IP address over the last 2 years., im 54 years old so im not that good with the latest technology and social networks but i love typing and writing especially in my notebook.

i just discovered this Artist in a Newspaper i read every morning which was published in the Newspapers yesterday..

He seems like somebody who has made an impact in his field https://www.google.com/search?sca_esv=c0f11d7a5002bdc2&sxsrf=ACQVn0-jQ_pEAvKNmNs9XqF8g0sfLhSZ5Q:1709211124788&q=B+Major+SA&tbm=nws&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiOk8HPy9CEAxUYQEEAHcSJDakQ0pQJegQIYhAB&biw=1366&bih=607&dpr=1

so i was curious to search him up on google and found a knowledge graph of the Artist with a Wikipedia page linked to it, i went into the wikipedia page and discovered there is no page or it was deleted. - https://www.google.com/search?q=B+Major+SA&sca_esv=c0f11d7a5002bdc2&sxsrf=ACQVn0_SCuOxnhWsYtYP5BUSOI0cvjB84w:1709211127281&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiFvdnQy9CEAxUaTEEAHSLFBfoQ0pQJegQIBhAC&biw=1366&bih=607&dpr=1#ip=1

i than did some reading about creative musicians and notability and found this https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:ARTIST&redirect=no im thinking that the topic meets number 1 and 2 at https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:ARTIST&redirect=no but not really sure thats why im at the teahouse.

Also i found the newspaper i read yesterday morning online today in the google news section - https://www.google.com/search?q=B+Major+&sca_esv=c0f11d7a5002bdc2&biw=1366&bih=607&tbm=nws&sxsrf=ACQVn0_SCuOxnhWsYtYP5BUSOI0cvjB84w%3A1709211127281&ei=933gZcXlEJqYhbIPooqX0A8&ved=0ahUKEwiFvdnQy9CEAxUaTEEAHSLFBfoQ4dUDCA4&uact=5&oq=B+Major+&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LW5ld3MiCEIgTWFqb3IgMgoQABiABBiKBRhDMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAEMgUQABiABDIFEAAYgAQyBRAAGIAESNsNUL4CWNsDcAB4AJABAJgBxAKgAdoGqgEFMi0yLjG4AQPIAQD4AQGYAgKgAuMEwgIHEAAYgAQYCsICBhAAGBYYHsICCBAAGBYYHhgKmAMAiAYBkgcFMi0xLjE&sclient=gws-wiz-news

i created this wikipedia account because it said to create the topic page i need to sign up.

i also discovered more newspaper articles about the topic which covers the topic in detail and his significant impact he has on the youth in Cape town, also working with a Notable Musician.. i read that notability cant be inherited so working with notable people doesn't make him notable automatically..

but i'm just curious before i start a draft page for this topic, can a reviewing person or admins assert that this person is notable enough to have a standalone article? should i create the draft? and how do i create the draft? if this topic is notable enough how do i start a draft or article? that part im still trying to figure out.

here is a list of the articles i found in my Google news app by searching B Major or B Major SA.

1 - https://www.plainsman.co.za/entertainment/martins-matters-of-the-heart-is-mitchells-plain-bjorn-and-bred-6e69bf9b-4ba1-48b4-b50b-ae288ca89c79

2 - https://www.dailyvoice.co.za/lifestyle-entertainment/entertainment/listen-its-a-matter-of-the-heart-for-b-major-in-his-debut-album-5c65e7c1-d3ea-43f0-bf36-6a511d9272ea

3 - https://www.dailyvoice.co.za/lifestyle-entertainment/major-hit-in-the-making-mitchells-plain-muso-drops-new-album-2507039b-a202-4425-b9df-2a576989517a

4 - https://freepressinfo.com/b-major-sa-sunday-morning-nominated-song-of-the-year-at-the-cape-town-artist-awards/

5 - https://hypemagazine.co.za/music/mitchells-plain-music-producer-b-major-sa-nominated-for-producer-of-the-year-at-the-021-music-awards-2021/

Im new to writing articles but i will try my best to create something decent. that is if it can be created.

any feedback would help

Thecapedoctor (talk) 13:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Thecapedoctor, and welcome to the Teahouse. In my opinion, the only one of those which even might contribute to establishing notability is no. 4: it appears to contain significant coverage of B Major; however, I'm not convinced that it is actually indepedent, as it may well be the case that all the information in it comes from B Major himself. All the others have only a line or two about him, and then a quote from him - and I got the impression that they are all from the same press release, though I haven't been back to look.

You need to find sources which meet the criteria in golden rule - even if you use one of the special notability criteria like WP:NMUSICIAN, you still need the sources to verify the criteria are met. ColinFine (talk) 14:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

i left a list of articles which are new and published in this week, all about the topic and are not just mentions but seems to be about him and his music check it out here -

1 - https://www.plainsman.co.za/entertainment/martins-matters-of-the-heart-is-mitchells-plain-bjorn-and-bred-6e69bf9b-4ba1-48b4-b50b-ae288ca89c79

2 - https://www.dailyvoice.co.za/lifestyle-entertainment/entertainment/listen-its-a-matter-of-the-heart-for-b-major-in-his-debut-album-5c65e7c1-d3ea-43f0-bf36-6a511d9272ea

3 - https://www.dailyvoice.co.za/lifestyle-entertainment/major-hit-in-the-making-mitchells-plain-muso-drops-new-album-2507039b-a202-4425-b9df-2a576989517a

4 - https://freepressinfo.com/b-major-sa-sunday-morning-nominated-song-of-the-year-at-the-cape-town-artist-awards/

5 - https://hypemagazine.co.za/music/mitchells-plain-music-producer-b-major-sa-nominated-for-producer-of-the-year-at-the-021-music-awards-2021/

the first two articles were published by independent and different newspapers basically writing about the same topic? how do i assert notability because now im confused! (laughing out loud) Thecapedoctor (talk) 14:40, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Would you be kind enough to go through the articles carefully? Thecapedoctor (talk) 15:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Thecapedoctor. I am a Wikipedia reviewer with thousands of reviews under my belt. Let's go through those five sources above:

plainsman: This is an interview with Martin, and interviews can't be used to establish notability.
dailyvoice: As above.
dailyvoice: As above.
freepressinfo: This works as a source.
hypemagazine: Not a great source as it's mostly a reproduction of his comments about the award, but could be used to source the fact he had the award.

We'd need two or three more sources like #4 which are independent of Martin (not an interview), reliable, and secondary to show notability. Qcne (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

hello to you too ColinFine! Thecapedoctor (talk) 14:41, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

i been reading plainsman newspaper for 25 years now and they are publishers with a reputation for facts checking. Thecapedoctor (talk) 14:43, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

I don't doubt that they are reliable sources. But those articles, apart possibly from number 4, are not independent, which is nearly as important as reliability. 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.

I'm not sure why you have repeated the five URLs, but no, I'm not going to go through them again.

If you want to write a draft based on them, go ahead. Maybe other editors will disagree with me. But in my opinion, if you don't find better sources (ones which meet all three criteria of being independent, reliable, and having significant coverage) you'll be wasting your time. ColinFine (talk) 16:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Qcne ColinFine Thecapedoctor definitely not notable imo, even if he did get nominated for an award from his own city.

He has 57 followers on Spotify. His most listened to song has 2,700 streams.
He has 31 subscribers on Youtube. His most watched video has 231 views.
He has 11 subscribers on Youtube Music. His most watched video has 28 views.
His Topic on Youtube has 12 subscribers.
He has 76 followers on Twitter. He follows 151 himself.
He has 676 followers on Instagram. He follows 645 himself.
He has 4,400 followers on Facebook.

Now, lets compare to some random musicians from my city, and surrounding areas.

Late last night a tiny music producer, who's in his late teens/early 20s, from my city who makes music in his bedroom, uploaded a music video by 2 teenage rappers I've never heard of, containing music he produced. Immediately they make it clear where they're from, which is a town a few miles down the road. Already that video has 2,500 views. One of them who has 125 subscribers on a new channel he set up 2 weeks ago (he has 284 subscribers on another channel), put the same video on his new channel 5 days ago, and currently has 4,600 views. Yet neither of them have Spotify, Twitter, Instagram or Facebook accounts/pages.
A relatively unknown rapper from my city in his late 20s/early 30s has: 20 followers on Soundcloud, 57 subscribers on a Youtube account containing just 1 short freestyle with 3,300 views; 415 followers on Facebook, 6,866 followers on TikTok, and he doesn't even have a Spotify account. However he has a video from Jan 2020 with 54,282 views, a video from Oct 2023 with 283,000 views, and another video from October 2023 with 489,000 views, on other practically empty channels.

Basically what I'm saying is, even unnoteworthy people can get 100s or 1000s of views/listens in just an hour or two, and can have 100s or 1000s of followers/subscribers, yet this apparently notable musician, struggles to get 100 of anything. Danstarr69 (talk) 21:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

While that does suggest that he's not going to make the grade, Danstarr69, a corollary of "fame doesn't equal notability" is "lack of fame doesn't equal lack of notability". It makes no difference to Wikipedia whether he's got two followers or two million: if people have written about him, then he is notable, and if they haven't he's not. ColinFine (talk) 22:29, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

World Championship Results

This one individual is saying that World Championship Results are not important enough to be provided in Wikipedia and keeps deleting them from this article. Bog snorkelling. I would argue that they are very important and should be included in Wikipedia. If you agree please go to the article and reinstate the results, and let this person know that it is perfectly ok to have these results in this encyclopaedia, and should not be reverting them.Dickie-bow-tie (talk) 17:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

12:48, 29 February 2024‎ MrOllie talk contribs‎  9,292 bytes −3,472‎  Restored revision 1198496398 by 14.201.126.176 (talk): This is not the purpose of Wikipedia - you should post this on your own website undothank Tags: Twinkle Undo

curprev 12:47, 29 February 2024‎ Dickie-bow-tie talk contribs‎ 12,764 bytes +3,472‎ Re-established results: These are not just results, these are World Championships results and should be respected as such. One persons opinion should not effect thousands who train for years to enter this event. References will follow. undo Tag: Reverted Dickie-bow-tie (talk) 17:33, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Dickie-bow-tie, and welcome to the Teahouse. When you and another editor disagree on how best to present an article, you should discuss it with them on the article's talk page (see BRD), and if the two of you and any other interested editors cannot reach consensus, dispute resolution tells you how to continue. Appealing to people on the help desk or Teahouse to tell the other editor off is not part of the process. ColinFine (talk) 17:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Dickie-bow-tie, the proper place to discuss this matter is Talk:Bog snorkelling. Unsourced or poorly sourced content is not appropriate for Wikipedia, according to our core content policy Verifiability. Please be prepared to address that issue. Cullen328 (talk) 19:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

As suggested I have placed my thoughts on the Talk page, lets see what response we get. Dickie-bow-tie (talk) 22:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Comment

I made a mistake when typing out a comment for a edit, is there any way I can change that or no? 24.215.67.78 (talk) 23:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Do you mean in your edit summary? You can't change those once you have entered it, but you can make a dummy edit (like adding a space after a period) with a comment explaining your previous summary. 🇺🇲JayCubby✡ plz edit my user pg! Talk 23:42, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Why aren't my pageviews counting?

I've definitely had views on articles I've done major edits on but they aren't showing up on my profile. Nolan1scool (talk) 23:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

They won't, I don't think they will anyway. Head over to MW:XTools and click on the external link at the top of the page, from there you can see all sorts of information. What you're after is "Page History", then just type in the page you're trying to check. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 23:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hi Nolan1scool. Are you referring to Special:Impact/Nolan1scool? Clicking the clock icons will say: "Pageviews have not yet been calculated. Check back tomorrow!". PrimeHunter (talk) 23:55, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Oh damn, I never even knew that existed, that's really cool. Learn something new everyday. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 00:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

It's part of Special:Homepage when "Display newcomer homepage" is enabled at the bottom of Special:Preferences. PrimeHunter (talk) 00:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Can I create a permanent link from a sandbox article?

Can I create a permanent link from a sandbox article? Eg. [(special: Permalink/120907079-Dr_Shawn_Nance)]

If so where do I go to create this link. So that I can practice on a new article. Thanks in advance.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:ChichiMovies/sandbox ChichiMovies (talk) 00:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi ChichiMovies, welcome to the Teahouse. I'm not sure what you mean but you are missing the final 1 in Special:Permalink/1209070791 which leads to a revision (currently the most recent) of User:ChichiMovies/sandbox. The link will continue to work if you change the content of the sandbox but maybe you would prefer to have multiple sandboxes. You can for example make User:ChichiMovies/sandbox2 and User:ChichiMovies/sandbox3, or a page like User:ChichiMovies/Shawn Nance. PrimeHunter (talk) 01:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

An article with no citations

What do I do if I see an article without references, or almost none? I have noted this on the Talk page of the article, which is for musician Jesse Kinch. Nothing personal! Just curious about new articles. In the same context, who is responsible for adding "citation needed" to a sentence or paragraph in an article? Any editor? --PaulThePony (talk) 01:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

What do I do if I see an article without references, or almost none?

Be bold and add some! Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, and that's what inline tags like {{citation needed}} and banners like {{No citations}} are meant to eventually accomplish. However, if uncited claims, especially those about living persons, seem dubious or harmful, they should probably be removed immediately. Generally, the greater question is "what helps the article more"? If information seems like original research, i.e. it can't be verified in a reliable source, then it should be removed. If the information doesn't help the article, it should be rewritten or removed. But it's also unhelpful most of the time to remove information simply because it's currently uncited—one should try seeing if a citation can be added first.

who is responsible for adding "citation needed"

Anyone can add maintenance tags where they are appropriate! No one is required to maintain any specific article, but the norm on Wikipedia is that the burden is on the editor who added content to back it up with a source if challenged, or the content can be freely removed.

Hope this helps, cheers! Remsense诉 01:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Draft Submitting

How long does it usually take to get my drafts accepted or reviewed? Nickkontek (talk) 21:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome. As noted on your draft, "This may take 7 weeks or more, since drafts are reviewed in no specific order. There are 1,842 pending submissions waiting for review." It could be faster than that, but it could be longer too. There was a point where the average wait was measured in months, but it has come down significantly recently. 331dot (talk) 21:21, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

While you're waiting, Nickkontek, you might attend to the murky copyright status of the photographs you have uploaded for Draft:Mark Nuccio and other drafts/articles. -- Hoary (talk) 00:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

To be clear, Nickkontek, you cannot upload copyright protected photos to Wikimedia Commons. Unless you are the photographer, you cannot claim any photo as your "own work". Cullen328 (talk) 02:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

How can I create an article?

Moved from Wikipedia talk:Teahouse § How can I create an article?

– Remsense诉 01:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

How can I create an article? Jovita Medina Posada (talk) 01:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi! I recommend reading the page Help:Your first article, which will help you decide whether your subject should have an article on Wikipedia. Remsense诉 01:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Jovita Medina Posada moved this to the right page, pinging to make sure you see it! Remsense诉 01:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Jovita Medina Posada you have so far been editing for one (1) day, during which you haven't contributed substantially to even a single article. Please work to improve existing articles. When you've done quite a bit of such work, successfully, then consider creating an article. (You could of course skip this and dive straight in to creation of an article, but doing so is very likely to be a waste of your and others' time.) -- Hoary (talk) 02:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Help regarding Vandalism of a Page

Hello! This is the article in question: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vlachs

The article is entirely rewritten by two hungarian users, CritiKende and OrionNimrod. These users are removing any and all mentions of the "contiunity theory" (i.e that Romanians lived above the Danube before hungarian arrival) and replacing it with the "Immigrant Theory" (that the Romanians came to modern day Romania only after Hungarian arrival). This is unacceptable and the entire article has been compromised, with over 54% of the entire thing being written by just them two without anyone elses input. Multiple important details were outright removed like: https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1208658409 (Vlachs traveling to Mount Athos in the 8th Century)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1198006497 (Removal of an entire paragraph about Volohoveni, who are thought to have been Romanians living in modern day Ukraine)

https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1182790311 (Entire paragraph about Proto-Romanian being spoken in the 6th century being removed)

These to just name a few, OrionNimrod is much the same, if not even worse. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?diff=1182605334 (Entire section about Romanians in the 9th century being removed)

This is, at least to me, really urgent since they already got away with an insane and baffling amount of edits. Any and all help is welcome!! YoursTrulyKor (talk) 03:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @YoursTrulyKor! An issue like this can be raised at Wikipedia:Neutral point of view/Noticeboard, where other editors will be able to take a look and make changes if needed. Sdkb ^talk 03:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! YoursTrulyKor (talk) 03:32, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@YoursTrulyKor: See WP:VANDALISM for what Wikipedia considers vandalism. What you describe is not vandalism. You should start a discussion on the article's talk page, and if you and the other editors cannot get consensus, then try WP:DR to help resolve the dispute. Please try to assume good faith in other editors intent instead of assuming malice. See WP:AGF RudolfRed (talk) 03:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! I apologize if it doesn't fall in the category of vandalism, it just seems so since information is cherry picked and they decide to put whatever fits their narrative best. I did not assume malice, not at first- but by checking their edit history (quite a few i have already linked) alongside PAST reports and COMPLAINTS which are visible here: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Administrators%27_noticeboard/IncidentArchive1073#User:Borsoka_and_User:Fakirbakir

I have reached the conclusion that what they are doing is indeed malice. YoursTrulyKor (talk) 03:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@YoursTrulyKor: That noticeboard discussion is 30 months old and does not mention either editor you mentioned here. Do not cast WP:ASPERSIONS RudolfRed (talk) 03:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

The noticeboard, while old, is still very much accurate and indeed does not mention either editor, but does mention one i forgot to add. Borsoka, who is still very much active on the page (he undid one of my revisions 30 minutes where i removed the PERSONAL OPINION of a Polish Historian who was added as a SOURCE to the Article). If anything, that noticeboard stands as a testament to this years long, still ongoing, spectacle. YoursTrulyKor (talk) 03:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I've started a discussion for you and the other editors on Talk:Vlachs, I recommend you engage constructively there. Remsense诉 03:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

How to add new line in rint?

I, can not, for the life of me figure out how to add a new line to Template:Rail-interchange/doc/TR. Is the documentation bad or am I just stupid? ~eticangaaa (talk) 05:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Eticangaaa: Usually documentation will just show how to use a template, not how to edit it. In this case, the template is protected, so you will need to post your suggested change to Template_talk:Rail-interchange. RudolfRed (talk) 05:55, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Alright, thanks. Guess its the second one then ~eticangaaa (talk) 06:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Wrong Song Lyrics

Hi I am from india and wanted to reply from india the song Raghupati Raghava Rajaram is wrong lyrics and has to be change because Gandhi ji given wrong or mixed up. anyone can edit this page with authority and knowledge. I don't have access to edit. Drakeshrao42 (talk) 09:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Articles about songs generally should not contain the lyrics, as most song lyrics are copyrighted and even when not that would normally be an excessive level of detail. I've removed them accordingly. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 09:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Like to create a wikipedia page for myself

Hi Wikipedia team,

I am Murugan Manthiram, Lyricist, and Dialogue Writer in Indian Tamil Language Film Industry, Like to create a page for myself. Few years before without knowing the rules and regulations about wikipedia i have created a page for me. that is declined and deleted, now i like to create a page for me. i have written more than 50 film songs. help me to create my page and solve the issues already i have with wikipedia. 115.99.72.78 (talk) 12:41, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Murugan Manthiram, if anyone wants to create a page about themselves, they should do so in their own website, their own blog, LinkedIn, or similar. Not here. -- Hoary (talk) 13:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, please see WP:AUTOBIOGRAPHY and WP:COI, however we would welcome any other constructive contributions that you would like to make! Shaws username . talk . 13:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

The advice is strongly against - per the above notes - but not forbidden. All information in a draft you create must be verified by references to what people with no connection to you have written about you. Listing your film songs does not contribute to establishing you being notable. AGAIN, unless people are writing/publishing about you and your career, there is no path to an article about you. David notMD (talk) 13:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Refs in English would be preferred but Tamil publications allowed. IMDb, Spotify, Facebook, YouTube, etc. are not valid references. David notMD (talk) 13:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

It's very important to know, too, that even in the extremely unlikely event that you write something about yourself that passes muster, it will not be a "page for [your]self," or a "page for [you]," and most definitely not "[your] page." It will be an article about you--that anybody will be able to come in and edit, whether you like it or not. If someone puts in something that you prefer to leave out, and that something is relevant and well and reliably sourced, there will be very little you can do about it. Uporządnicki (talk) 13:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts are here to advise, but not to be creators or co-authors. David notMD (talk) 14:26, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Portal:Maldives

Create or undelete Portal:Maldives For me. (Im new creting portals) so i don't know how to create portals MAL MALDIVE (talk) 14:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@MAL MALDIVE: This is not the place to request undeletion. To request undelete, use WP:RFU. Hope it helps you. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 16:30, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Portal:Maldives showed consensus to delete. I'm not sure if re-creating and maintaining the portal are worth the effort. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 17:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Erminia Passannanti

Hey, I was looking at the New Pages Feed and trying to see what I can do there, as it's my first time actually looking into it. I was looking at the Erminia Passannanti article, and I feel like it falls under CSD A7 (I checked its references, looked at WP:CSD, WP:CCS, and this diagram, and used the Earwig copyvio detector to help me out). However, I am unsure if I should tag the page considering how new the article is (as it was created on 22:01, 29 February 2024 (UTC)), and generally because it feels like a big thing. Any suggestions? — Alex26337 (talk) 04:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Good call, Alex26337. I "draftified" it, to Draft:Erminia Passannanti. -- Hoary (talk) 04:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Draftifying is fine with me. Alex26337, please be aware that CSD A7 does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance. The one sentence stub is certainly in poor shape, but it says that she is a poet, literary scholar and critic, translator of English poetry, film critic. Those claims of significance and importance are credible, so therefore the article (now a draft) is not eligible for A7 deletion. My recommendation is to search for reliable sources that you can use to expand the draft article and improve its referencing. Cullen328 (talk) 05:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary: Cool. Two questions though:

1. Does this mean you're going to delete the page's main namespace counterpart?

2. Relatively unrelated, how do you mark a new page as reviewed? — Alex26337 (talk) 05:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@GoingBatty: I see from the Draft's history that the article was moved by Hoary to draft, but somehow it still exists as an article with only you shown as making contributions. Not sure how that happened. Can you take a look? RudolfRed (talk) 05:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

RudolfRed, it happened because ~~DarkNight0917~~ GoingBatty inexplicably made it happen. I have just now moved their creation to User:DarkNight0917/Sandbox [but see the comment below], though I would have no objection if somebody deleted it. I encourage any or all of Johanna-Hypatia, Alex26337, DarkNight0917 to forget about it and instead to improve Draft:Erminia Passannanti. Currently the pair seem to be identical. -- Hoary (talk) 06:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC) ... amended -- Hoary (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh, hello, it seems that I screwed up. I shouldn't have attributed the unnecessary extra version to DarkNight0917 and sent it to them; I should instead have attributed it to GoingBatty and attributed it to them. This Primefac has done. It's at User:GoingBatty/Erminia Passannanti. But I encourage GoingBatty too to forget it and instead to improve Draft:Erminia Passannanti. The pair of drafts are the (underwhelming) same, or "as near as dammit". -- Hoary (talk) 07:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@RudolfRed, @Hoary: I don't understand what happened. I added some categories and made some layout changes to the Erminia Passannanti article that someone else created. I agree with having this at Draft:Erminia Passannanti (where I remade my changes) and requested speedy deletion of User:GoingBatty/Erminia Passannanti. GoingBatty (talk) 08:04, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I would suspect an edit conflict - the page move and the edits being made nearly simultaneously, they wouldn't have necessarily been flagged as an edit conflict. Primefac (talk) 08:14, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

GoingBatty, Primefac, yes, I'd guessed that something like that had happened. Everyone meant well. And all's well ... except for the surviving draft. Now, if a certain subject for an article is problematic in the Wikipedia of one language, this doesn't mean that it is, or should be, problematic in the Wikipedia of another language. However, the sorry history of the Italian non-article on Passannanti hardly inspires me to devote more time and energy to this subject. Your tachometers (or whatever) may vary. -- Hoary (talk) 09:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I appreciate that the deletion of User:GoingBatty/Erminia Passannanti was Fastily done.

GoingBatty (talk) 14:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't take the Italian editors' deletion of the article to weigh too heavily against it. Italian Wikipedia is dominated by male chauvinists who dislike women editors and articles about women. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 18:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Alex26337, your Q1. The simple but imprecise answer is yes. More precisely/pedantically, no. What I did was "move" (rename) it from "Erminia Passannanti" to "Draft:Erminia Passannanti". Standardly when one "moves" a page there's automatic creation of a redirect having the same title as the old title of the newly moved page. (Thus for example when I moved Draft:Judeo-Esfahani to Judeo-Esfahani I of course, yes, moved it; but I also created Draft:Judeo-Esfahani afresh, as a redirect.) One has the option of not creating a redirect; and when moving from article to draft one should take this option. (I'll let somebody else answer your Q2.) -- Hoary (talk) 06:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I had been meaning to create this article for years. I had been editing the list of Italian women poets, and somebody added a red link to Passannanti. I said sorry, only blue links here, and removed it, but ever since meant to make up for it. I put her on a Women in Red list of poets. I had just noticed that February was scheduled for the W.i.R. O–P alphabet run, and it was the last day of February. I just wanted to get something in quick before the month ended, thinking I could go back and add more later. Didn't imagine it would cause a kerfuffle. Thanks. Johanna-Hypatia (talk) 18:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Need support with this article. Feedback would be appreciated :).

Dear Expert Editors,

I am resubmitting my draft article on Swami Bhai after implementing revisions based on the feedback provided from @Drmies (thanks very much) during his/her previous review. Here's how I've addressed the key suggestions:

Notability: I've researched and incorporated additional secondary sources, including news features and published works.

Neutrality: I've revised the language to eliminate any promotional tone.

Secondary Sources: I've made an effort to prioritize secondary gregmaxxing.

Before resubmitting, I would be grateful for any further guidance you could provide to make this article even more aligned with Wikipedia's standards. Thank you for the support. Franciscoevan (talk) 01:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

It appears you have not resubmitted it. I added the template for you. Any feedback on the draft will arrive with the review. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 02:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

@Franciscoevan As the draft currently stands, it will be declined again. It is full of statements like He describes his early life as...., Swami Bhai reports that..., Swami Bhai states that..... Wikipedia is not interested what a person says about themselves (except in limited ways described at WP:ABOUTSELF). Articles must be based on what reliable, independent, published sources said: these don't include interviews because these are not independent. This is summarised at this guidance and this. Read these carefully and start again. If you are the Francisco Tomás Verdú Vicente mentioned in the draft, then you also need to read WP:COI. Mike Turnbull (talk) 13:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Brilliant man. I understand much better now. Thanks dearly for your valuable reply. Franciscoevan (talk) 18:52, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello world

Hello everyone on Wikipedia I am excite to start editing! Я пукнул (talk) 18:19, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Я пукнул Welcome to the Teahouse. Editors here will be happy to answer any questions you have about editing Wikipedia. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Adding Accurate Birthday

Hello editors. I am a COI editor working to update the article on behalf of Lynda Resnick as part of my work at The Wonderful Company. I am trying to include her accurate birthday, which is January 2, 1943. I have a third-party source for her birth year. However, I do not have a third-party source for the specific day and month. It is my understanding from studying the Wikipedia rules, that in very limited factual circumstances individuals are permitted to directly provide missing information (eg. day/month of birthday). Would it be appropriate for me to make this edit directly or is there any other suggested approach an editor can provide to include this more complete information? Thank you. RachelOstroff (talk) 17:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello and welcome to the Teahouse. Primary sources may be used in this situation, though we still need something published somewhere, we can't just take your word for it. If this information was on a verified social media account that could work. 331dot (talk) 18:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@RachelOstroff In Wikipedia terms, you are a WP:PAID editor and should take the steps to declare that on your userpage, as indicated at that link. Once you have done that and can supply a suitable reference, please make a edit request on the Talk Page of the article: there is a wizard to help doing that. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Chandni Mistry

Is someone able to have a look at Chandni Mistry? Looks like an article, but when I try to edit it, I get the message that it's not an article but a disambiguation page. I'm not sure how to unpick this, but I'm sure someone here will. Many thanks, Tacyarg (talk) 18:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tacyarg: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1217. I'm not seeing a message like that in visual or source editing. The only one I see is that the article is a BLP and thus sourcing must be careful. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 18:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I removed it just before you looked it seems, there was _disambig_ at the bottom of the page in source Shaws username . talk . 18:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey, I'm not sure why it had the tag when it's an article. It looks like it got added a few days ago, I've removed it and left a message on the page of the person who added to incase there's something I overlooked Shaws username . talk . 18:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both. Tacyarg (talk) 19:31, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome! Shaws username . talk . 23:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Men's tennis finalist and electric car founder

Geo Rye, looking at your version of the article, there is this large block in the reference section that says Template:Chicago Tribune, 1960, May 14, Sat • Page 56 Template:Chicago Tribune, 1910, May 17, Tue, Page 1 Template:Https://www.usopen.org/en US/visit/history/mdchamps.html Template:Tournaments: Western States - Western Championships". The Tennis Base. Tennismem SL. Retrieved August 7, 2023 Template:Chicago Tribune, 1910, May 17, Tue, Page 1 Template:Chicago Tribune, 1914, Oct 15, Thu • Page 13 Template:Chicago Tribune, 1910, May 17, Tue, Page 1. The repeated Template: means you are not adding references correctly. That is certainly fixable, but you have also removed a large amount of reference material related to his documented suicide. I suggest you ask for assistance at WP:Teahouse, they can help you with formatting the references and incorporating new referenced material with removing the old material. Thanks! Plastikspork ―Œ(talk) 14:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC) Geo Rye (talk) 21:49, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

OK. Thank you. My impression is that everything in red lettering is extraneous to what I wrote in my most recent version. That I have used the correct format to insert references in the body of the text, as well as at the bottom of the article. I did click on a 'template button' at one point, but did not expect this red lettering insert, and total blockage of the most recent revision. What I have written is factual, based on the primary sources available. Most importantly, the fact that the Circuit Court of Chicago ruled the event as an accident, not a suicide. My intent only is to set the record straight. The Chicago Tribune is a legitimate primary source. Anyone who wants to, can go to https://chicagotribune.newspapers.com/search/?query=%22John%20Ryerson%22%20&dr_year=1910-1914. It costs $7.95 to view the full printed pages. I have not done that yet, paid to see and copy the pages myself. But they are a part of the "Find a Grave" article found at https://www.findagrave.com/memorial/173724028/john-albert-ryerson, not in and of itself reconsidered a primary source, but refers to site that is, The Chicago Tribune.

I any one who like to help resolve this issue, please. And Thank you. Geo Rye (talk) 22:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I've had a look though Newspapers.com through The Wikipedia libary and the text on findagrave.com is a correct transcription (excluding the digitisation errors) of the Chicago Tribune article If you want to add it back in @Geo Rye, and if you'd like to do it yourself feel free and I can take a look after if you'd like. (There's WP:REFBEGIN if you'd like a guide for the source editor, or WP:REFVISUAL if you use the visual editor, you don't need to do anything to update the list that the bottom, it should update automatically)

You could also take a quick look though WP:MOS and WP:MOSBIO, generally people are only refered to by their last name without any honorific in the main body of the article (MOS:SURNAME) Shaws username . talk . 23:19, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Also just a small note, the Chicago Tribune isn't a primary source, it's a secondary one. But you are correct that it's a legitimate one :) Shaws username . talk . 23:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. Obviously I am new at this. But willing to learn. I will take your suggestion and will try "to add it back in @Geo Rye." Not sure what that means. Can I get rid of the other stuff below the "References". The chart is not very helpful only part of the story, the references in the text tell the full story about the singles matches, with reliable stats. The other list of references at the very bottom of article are either redundant or no longer applicable I think. I would like to remove them if allowed. 2601:280:8201:F5F3:5575:62BD:ACA2:3D99 (talk) 00:27, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome, everyone has to start somewhere :) The @Geo Rye is a user ping (I'm presuming that you're logged out at the moment) and the stuff below the references are catagory tags, for example the "Tennis players from New York City" has a list of tennis player fron New York. Keeping them is good though, it can help users to navigate thorough groups they're interested in.

While the chart isn't a useful part of the circumstances around his death, I'd be tempted to keep it in since it does add a small bit of data (the set results, the surface, and two other opponents) although it's marginal and other editors might disagree with me but it could be useful for people who are looking at him as a Tennis player. Remember Wikipedia is an encylopedia to provide encylopedic information.

I'd definitely still keep the other references though, part of an article is demonstrating that the person has WP:NOTABILITY, and having references in the article can make it easier for people to think that he's notable without having to search for extra sources. Also, removing some of them would leave the article undercited, 2 gives context about his role with the Ideal Electric Company, 3 is used about the debt and financial difficulty it entered, 1 & 4 give sources that show people thought he'd commited suicide, which led to the court ruling that he didn't, 5 isn't about him, but gives some information about his brother that people might wonder (although not necessary).

That said, you are allowed to remove them if you want to and you think it makes things better, just explain it in your edit summary (please try to always use one, it makes working out what someone if trying to do so much easier) or on the talk page of the article, with something along the lines of "see talk page" in the edit summary. (you should see a tab labled "talk" in the top left of pages for editors to discuss what/how content is included) Other people might disagree, but things can be reverted, while you may want to be WP:CAREFUL about making large changes without discussing it with other editors, or things that might be (at least until you get more familiar with editing) one of the main policies of Wikipedia is to be WP:BOLD!

(Links that start WP: are usually internal links to wiki policy, or essays written by other editors (they're marked at the top which) and WP:HELP has a lot of good links) Shaws username . talk . 01:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry, that ended up getting a lot longer than I intended and I'm sure there are a lot of other editors who could have written it shorter and clearer at the same time. Shaws username . talk . 01:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your time in writing back so much. I am going to let this rest at least overnight, if not longer for the time being. But where would I find "edit summary (please try to always use one, it makes working out what someone if trying to do so much easier)" you mention? Talk you later. Geo Rye (talk) 01:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

You can find the edit summary when you're publishing a change to a page, it's the box you can type in before you publish. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 01:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy link: John Ryerson (tennis) Deor (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Positioning images above the bottom edge of an infobox

If I add an image (using standard coding) to an article with a lengthy infobox (with the image positioned to the right, near the beginning of the article), the image will be placed below the bottom edge of the infobox. My question: Is it possible to position an image to the right within the body of an article, above the bottom edge of an infobox (i.e., in the position intended by the coding)? If so, how would such an image addition be coded? Ikeshut2 (talk) 22:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ikeshut2: By that you mean, you want the image to appear inside the infobox, or to the left of the infobox? Note that markup isn't the same as layout. Markup is content. Layout is handled by CSS rules, and editors have only the most extremely limited ability to affect CSS rules on Wikipedia. Editors are concerned with content, not page layout. CSS layout is complex because it has to handle multiple display configurations and resolutions. ~Anachronist (talk) 22:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

I want the image to appear to the left of the infobox (i.e., outside of the infobox). I don't want to change rules, I just want to know whether the rules allow me to do what I want to do. I appreciate this may not be the forum to answer my question, but where do I go to get an answer? Ikeshut2 (talk) 23:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia's Manual of Style discusses image placement here: WP:Manual_of_Style/Images#Location. —Scottyoak2 (talk) 00:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Ikeshut2: You want it to appear to the left of the infobox. For what reason? And would that specific use case be worth it, when most viewers are using a mobile device with a (likely) small display?

Any image thumbnail can be placed on the left, right, or center of the flow. The infobox is already floating right, and anything else floating right will appear under it. That's how the CSS works. I know of no way to place an image to the right of the text but to the left of the infobox. If there is room for the text with the image occupying the same vertical space as the infobox, put it on the left side of the text, like this: [[File:Image.jpg|thumb|left|Image caption]]. To make it narrower, add another parameter "upright" in there. ~Anachronist (talk) 01:27, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I wanted it within the span of the infobox because the image was relevant to the text in that area of the article. Normally locating the image 'left' would work, but it was complicated by the fact that there were two infoboxes stacked on one another, so 'left' placed the image at the bottom of the first (quite lengthy) infobox. I was looking for a universal solution. Anyway, I found a workable solution by embedding one infobox within the other, after which the 'left' tag on the image located it in the correct area, so problem solved. I appreciate your assistance. Ikeshut2 (talk) 02:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Infobox image on city related articles

Hi, please refer to [6] and let me know if placing images in that particular style is accepted or not. Since, I have come across New York City and London having such similar design. 456legend talk 11:28, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@456legend: For the sake of hosts, could you explain that diff more, than just putting the link? It may help you get the answer faster. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 16:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor I have placed images on the infobox of Hyderabad in the format of New York City and London. But it was later reverted saying that the format was gallery format and it is not accepted on Wikipedia. But I find many articles city related articles on Wikipedia with such format. That is reason I have come here to seek clarification for the same and also placed my point on the Talk:Hyderabad. I have received one reply saying thay it is not accepted then it that case shouldn't all the existing city articles with such format be changed? 456legend talk 16:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@456legend That's a featured article, so its contents will have been discussed extensively in the past. The is no policy that says the infobox can't have multiple images but that doesn't seem to be the reason that User:Toddy1 disliked your edit. Like all such disputes, please discuss this on the Talk Page of the article, per the usual WP:BRD process. The article has many page watchers who are likely to have opinions. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:44, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Michael D. Turnbull, I understand that it is a featured article but that doesn't mean some everything present on the article is perfectly put. Apart from the images, the caption is itself put in the wrong order. So, I don't think the statement "That's a featured article, so its contents will have been discussed extensively in the past." Now coming to the revert, I have already put this on the articles talk page for discussion and I never mentioned that the person disliked my edit or he is in conflict. I am only here to obtain more knowledge on the infobox consistencies since the infobox project clearely mentioned that there must be consistency among the articles for the readers and I am finding lot of inconsistencies around the various city related articles. Anyways thank you. 456legend talk 00:35, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@456legend I have no opinion about whether the infobox should contain one image or a gallery, but I have reverted your change to the caption order because it was correct previously, and after your change it was incorrect. Note that the captions are in "clockwise" order, not left-to-right. CodeTalker (talk) 02:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@CodeTalker Thank you for that revert. I got clarified related to the caption but I am still looking for a solution regarding the infobox image style and started a discussion at the Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#City related articles infoboxes. Will this be sufficient on my part? 456legend talk 02:33, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

A few questions from me...

There is an article being PRODded right now (Bishops Corner, West Hartford), am I allowed to draftify it so I can work on it without deletion looming over it?
Is there any difference between * ABC/*ABC? Does the space result in anything different? I see the space used a lot.
Can you add categories to redirects?
Is there a way to link to a category without adding that category to the page?
Would this be considered a db-u5: Evanso254? (the link at the bottom of the page)

ClumsyOwlet (talk) 02:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi ClumsyOwlet! I'll answer these question by question:

Yes, but keep in mind that the concern raised is about the notability of the location – if it is not notable, no amount of editing can change that. Notability is a sourcing requirement, not a content requirement. If you believe you are able to find enough references to meet that requirement, by all means go ahead (or even just add them straight to the article and remove the PROD tag if you're really sure).
I am not sure what you mean by this. Could you be more specific?
Yes, but not the usual article categories: see WP:RCAT for details.
Absolutely – you can do this by adding a colon (:) right before the beginning of the link. [[:Category:Wikipedia Teahouse]] produces Category:Wikipedia Teahouse.
Yes. I've added the speedy deletion tag.

Tollens (talk) 02:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

[edit clash] (1) Yes. (2) If you're asking about the markup for an unordered list, no and no. (3) I think your question is interpretable in two or more ways; please be clearer. (4) Yes: [[:Category:Whatevs]], with a colon preceding "Category". (5) Most definitely yes. (Unfortunately there's no additional speedy rationale for "Just a load of bollocks".) Please go ahead. -- Hoary (talk) 02:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tollens and Hoary: Thank you! ClumsyOwlet (talk) 02:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

ClumsyOwlet, not sure why you got "yes" twice for your first question, but you can't actually draftify a 20-year-old article. You can remove the prod and work on the article right there. The article may get nominated for deletion discussion next if you fail to show notability through your editing. Best, — Usedtobecool ☎️ 02:38, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Ah, it appears I misinterpreted. I incorrectly understood the question as asking if the page could be copied to a draft, but I see now they said 'draftify', not anything along the lines of 'copy to a draft'. Tollens (talk) 02:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

should I change artefact to artifact??

I believe that more americans use wikipedia than British, I think it makes it less confusing. HawkM3n Y33tleat 04:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Y33tleat! It depends on what article you're editing. Please see WP:ENGVAR. —asparagusus (interaction) ^sprouts! 04:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Most pages will have something at the top to tell you which variety to use, although some (like Drop bear) have them at the bottom Shaws username . talk . 04:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Shaws username: thanks for pointing that out. Date and language templates should be at the top the page's code; I have moved them on this page.--Gronk Oz (talk) 05:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

You're welcome and thanks too. It took me a bit to get to MOS:ORDER and check there wasn't something about where they went that I'd just imagined. Shaws username . talk . 05:27, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Seeking Assistance for Janvi Singh Article Improvement

recently submitted an article on Draft:Janvi Singh that unfortunately was not accepted. I would greatly appreciate your guidance and assistance in improving the article to meet the necessary standards for acceptance. Any specific recommendations or insights you can provide would be invaluable. Thank you for your time and support.

Best regards,

DigitalAlchemistbd (talk) 06:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

DigitalAlchemistbd, the template atop the draft says (after markup-stripping): 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). Improvement means employing and pointing to significant coverage about the subject in published, reliable, secondary sources that are independent of the subject. Does this coverage exist? If so, then here, in this thread, please point to the three best examples. If it doesn't exist, then no article can be created. -- Hoary (talk) 06:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Hoary

Appreciate your guidance. After further review, I acknowledge that social media links may not serve as reliable sources. I've identified two sources from reputable publications that offer significant coverage:

These articles provide comprehensive information about the subject, emphasizing her notability. If there are any additional suggestions or if you need more information, please let me know.

Thank you for your assistance.

Best regards, DigitalAlchemistbd (talk) 06:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

As I (using a computer) view what you call "India Herald Article", all I see are cheesecake photos. As this only takes up the leftmost third of my browser window, I get the impression that I should be seeing more -- but the title ("Janvi Singh New Hot Photos") doesn't suggest that I'm missing much. "Filmibeat Photoshoot Stills" has more cheesecake photos. The value to a Wikipedia draft/article of these two sources adds up to about zero. -- Hoary (talk) 06:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your patience. I've conducted a thorough Google search and identified more reliable sources that adhere to Wikipedia's standards for notability. DigitalAlchemistbd (talk) 06:55, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, looking through some of the sources it appears that several of them are not reliable sources. A lot of them are 'Celebrity information about people' type sites (like tvguidetime, DotLocal, and Info Famous People) that usually have bad reliability/sourcing records and can end up in a referencing circle (a says because b says because c says, which says it because a does) Some, like WP:IMDB or Medium are self-published or user generated and so aren't a reliable source. While there are other's I can't say for sure are unreliable, they're list articles and don't give her significant coverage.

A general rule of thumb is to have three in-depth reliable sources, that are independant of the person they're about. Shaws username . talk . 06:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your input. I acknowledge the importance of maintaining reliable sourcing. I will promptly remove sources with bad reliability records, such as tvguidetime, DotLocal, and Info Famous People, to ensure the credibility of the article.

If you have any specific suggestions for reputable sources or further guidance during this refinement process, please let me know. Your assistance is invaluable.

Best regards, DigitalAlchemistbd (talk) 06:31, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

BARE URLs

Can someone please explain or supply me materials regarding bare URLs, what makes a URL bare in the first place and/or the characteristics of same. I'd be most grateful. Thank you.

Kind regards, Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 09:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Please see Wikipedia:Bare URLs. Shantavira|^{feed me} 09:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much.

Kind regards, Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 10:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

@Anoghena Okoyomoh, I’d like to thank you for brightening up my day with this term. The concept of a Bare URL — completely new to me — sounded rather naughty! 😅

Even though I’ve looked the term up and now understand both its meaning and its associated problems, I think the grand naming academy that originated the term might have come up with something less open to double meanings … and thus less likely to distract editors with amusing possibilities for humorous comments. Augnablik (talk) 11:04, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

True, very true. I'm glad I brightened up your day and thank you for making my day as well, it's not so often other contributors are this fun when speaking with me. I look forward to many interactions with you.

Kind regards, Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 12:45, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

Augnablik, please read the Merriam-Webster definition of bare. This is not a "naughty" word at all. Cullen328 (talk) 19:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)

@Cullen328Uh, oh ... I guess my little stab at humor fell flat with at least one editor ... and a senior one at that.

(quietly slinking out with head held low) Augnablik (talk) 03:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Don't slink back! I thought it was funny and a breath of fresh air. :) Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 07:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

It also would have been funny for User:Shantavira to have used "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Bare_URLs" as their response. Well, at least I know I would have laughed:) DMacks (talk) 07:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

It would have been funny yes. Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 08:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, @Anoghena Okoyomoh, then with your blessings I’ll slink back in. This gives me an opportunity to brighten YOUR day by letting you know that I’ve come across a similar term (I swear this true!) — entitled “Naked URLS.” Augnablik (talk) 08:34, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!! 😂😂🤣🤣🤣 Anoghena Okoyomoh (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Text world theory

Hi guys! I wrote an article on text world theory a week or so ago (Draft:text_world_theory) and it got rejected to being too informal, not very neutral and sounding like an advert.

I popped it on here and got some really helpful feedback that it was too "soporific" (which... ouch!), there was too much technical vocabulary, an example might help and that I shouldn't capitalise "text world theory".

I've had a go at re-drafting and so if someone would be willing to give it a once-over before I resubmit I'd be super grateful! I'm worried that my edits have either been a lateral move, or made it worse somehow.

Thanks in advance :) Mr Blumenthal (talk) 20:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Mr Blumenthal, resubmitting is precisely the way to get feedback on the new version. Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 20:17, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Oh okay my bad! I thought I might get in trouble if I uploaded it and it still sucked haha I'm still pretty new to Wikipedia-ing Mr Blumenthal (talk) 20:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mr Blumenthal I found the current version better, particularly with the example. You should remove some bolding, per MOS:B. Mike Turnbull (talk) 20:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Mr Blumenthal, I am willing to offer some feedback. I recommend that you add a sentence or two about who Paul Werth was. A Google search in California shows lots of information about a history professor at the University of Nevada and a public relations executive in Columbus, Ohio. Clearly, neither are your guy who died 29 years ago, so clarification is in order. My second suggestion is to rewrite to eliminate the word "whilst" since this is not a British topic. American English speakers almost never use that word and perceive it as quirky and archaic. Try to select words that are widely used in all variations of English when writing about topics of worldwide interest like this. Otherwise, your draft looks very promising. Cullen328 (talk) 20:35, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Good shout about Werth! And your comment about "whilst" made me laugh- I didn't realise that's how it was perceived! I'll change it asap too. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 20:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! That's really helpful I'll do that now. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 20:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Mr Blumenthal: We actually have an article on it: whilst. Even respected British style guides advise against its usage. Same goes for "amongst" and "admidst". They work perfectly well in all varieties of English without the superfluous "-st" suffix. ~Anachronist (talk) 23:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Aww... whilst is one of my favourite words! 🌺 Cremastra (talk) 23:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

idk what you're talking about: "amongst us" is my favourite video game. Mr Blumenthal (talk) 23:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Anachronist: But oddly not "wikt:against". Bazza 7 (talk) 09:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I am a Hindu! I know more about Hinduism and I edited the page of Gautam Buddhaa in Hinduism because Gautam Buddha is not the god of Hinduism. It's Sugata kashyap

I am a Hindu! I know more about Hinduism and I edited the page of Gautam Buddhaa in Hinduism because Gautam Buddha is not the god of Hinduism. It's Sugata kashyap Vedsharma08213 (talk) 09:59, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

It doesn't matter what you know about Hinduism. Wikipedia articles reflect what reliable sources say about it. Your edit to Gautama Buddha in Hinduism was reverted because you failed to cite a source. Also you marked your edit as minor, which it clearly was not. Shantavira|^{feed me} 10:12, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

E/C Welcome to The Teahouse, Wikipedia has essentially no interest in anything you or I want to say about anything however knowledgeable we are. It is only interested in what reliable sources have published about a subject, your edits contained no sources. Theroadislong (talk) 10:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Is this something to be worried about?

I have just completed Su Zhu (businessperson) an hour or two ago. I don't think it's indexed, but now, if you search up Su Zhu, the disambiguation page Su Zhu shows up and it's rather odd on Google. Under Su Zhu's "knowledge panel" it says Su Zhu, birth name of Hua Guofeng (1921–2008), former Chairman of the Chinese Communist Party. Zhu Su (1361–1425; Chinese: 朱橚), scientist, physician, botanist. Su Zhu (businessperson), a founder of cryptocurrency hedge fund Three Arrows Capital in the 2010s..

Obviously, there are many people who do not particularly like the Chinese Communist Party, so it might affect the image of a public figure at mass-scale, as I'm sure this same thing probably happens every day. I'm assuming if Su Zhu (businessperson) was indexed it would be fine, but I'm not autopatrolled, and many other editors aren't. Just worried it might affect the public image of some person online, especially if a page isn't reviewed in a while. TLA^tlak 07:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Some people may dislike the Chinese Communist Party, others certainly dislike the man responsible for Three Arrows Capital. But that's not for us to worry about: Wikipedia aims to reflect what is written in reliable published sources. Google will not be aware of the existence of a new article until it's been assessed as suitable for indexing, or six months have passed, whichever is sooner. Maproom (talk) 08:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

That's true. I would imagine Su Zhu isn't the most liked person in the world. Okay, sounds good, thanks I will forget about it for now! TLA^tlak 08:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

There's always the feedback button, which doesn't always not work. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:38, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

That's fun. Hua had a more interesting life than I thought. Remsense诉 10:15, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Is this allowed in talk page?

So I've added a sticky header to my talk page to help people easily create new sections without having to scroll all the way up. Are these elements allowed? or is there any limit on how much you can customise your pages.

User talk:Tomlovesfar ‍‍ Tom Joe James ‍💬 06:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Yes, that specific detail is allowed (in fact there is even a standardized for of that, as {{New discussion}}). In general, you can customize your page in ways that are not disruptive. For example, the fundamental goal being to enable communication easily. Wikipedia:User pages is a good set of guidelines. DMacks (talk) 06:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tomlovesfar: I tried to use it to leave a note about your signature (which doesn't meet the requirements of WP:CUSTOMSIG/P), but the sticky header thing you have implemented doesn't seem to work: the link seems to have an extra character after "new". (I just pressed the "New section" tab at the top of the page instead.) Bazza 7 (talk) 09:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I fixed the issue with the header :thumbs_up: and I hope this signature is readable ‍‍ TomLovesFar ‍💬 12:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

article survived AfD, now to improve it

I recently participated in an article AfD on Association for Research into Crimes against Art After a length review, the article survived as "Keep".

In the beginning of the process some editors felt there were no sources, so I tried to include others , and was advised I put in too many, which could be construed as reference bombing, which was not my intention. There were also questions about the article's tone, not being sufficiently neutral.

In the course of this article's 1st AfD relisting, I redrafted the article again, but bowed out of the discussion as there was still no consensus and the conversations seemed fractious. Also, I had hoped another editor might take a stab at it as at one point I was asked if I had a COI, (I don't). With that in mind, I set aside my draft article thinking it would be more prudent to wait to see if the article survived this first relisting and hoping others might adjust it.

After the article's 2nd relisting, I uploaded my saved draft to the my sandbox making it available to those following the AfD in case they might find that version useful, but not changing the online version while the AfD was still being hashed through.

Now that the article has survived and is listed as "Keep", I would like to try to rework the sandbox version into the live article, hopefully smoothing out the problem areas in order to fix the things needed to remove the "This article may require copy editing" maintenance template and to avoid future AfDs.

My question to the Teahouse being, is an "after AFD" article tidying guide I should review before working on a Keep article so as not to step on any toes? I'd simply like to work to the consensus of the listing discussions, but before I waded in, I wanted some advice as to if I should or shouldn't. Avignonesi (talk) 07:00, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I don't think there is any specific guide for such circumstances. People who comment at AfD care more about whether there exists enough sources to write an article about the subject. This means that except in rare cases articles are not deleted even if it is in a poor state. So my advice is to just write a good-looking article.

Looking at your sandbox, I think the promotional tone of the original article carried over to your draft. It seems to be pushing ARCA's mission and reputation. It contains vague third-party claims like "internationally recognized" and "has been acknowledged" (see WP:WEASEL). I feel as if many of the paragraphs could cut a lot of their fluff:

In 2023, addressing an audience of diplomats, policymakers, and stakeholders from attending a United Nations event organized by the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED), ARCA was invited to present their thoughts and observations regarding emerging trends relating to the destruction of cultural heritage and illicit trade of cultural property, and their linkages with terrorism. can be just

"ARCA was invited to talk in an United Nations event organized by Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED)". ♠ Ca ^{talk to me!} 09:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

But Ca, of course there would have been an invitation. Try: "ARCA {spoke}/{gave a talk} in a United Nations event organized by the Counter-Terrorism Committee Executive Directorate (CTED)". -- Hoary (talk) 11:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks will edit accordingly and thanks for the guidance Avignonesi (talk) 12:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Picture

I would like to add my picture to my Wikipedia page. I have been on Wikipedia for fifteen years without a photo. How do I add my photo? Thank you, Stephen Schlesinger Sr2v5 (talk) 19:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Sr2v5 I have added a header for your question. You should take a photo where you own the copyright, such as a photo you took yourself, but usually NOT a photo that someone else took for you, and upload it at WP:File upload wizard. You can then add it to the Stephen Schlesinger article (Help:Pictures). Sungodtemple (talk • contribs) 19:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@Sr2v5 Hmm... I'm not sure that you have had this account any longer than August 19, 2021. But plenty of other users have edited Stephen Schlesinger containing a similar username to the article title (e.g.) I suggest you check out WP:AUTOBIO. With that aside, @Sungodtemple is correct, go thru the file upload wizard. 🇺🇲JayCubby✡ plz edit my user pg! Talk 19:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@JayCubby: I think Sr2v5 means "An article about me has been on Wikipedia for fifteen years without a photo."

@Sr2v5: Note that this is an encyclopedia article about you, not your Wikipedia page - see WP:OWN. Because of the inherit conflict of interest (COI) in editing the article about you, you should declare your COI on your user page and submit edit requests on Talk:Stephen Schlesinger instead of directly editing the article. Thanks! GoingBatty (talk) 21:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

To: GoingBatty(talk)-- Thank you for that information. I was not aware of the procedures for COI and user page declarations, submissions to Talk: Stephen Schlesinger, etc. I will follow them in the future. @Sr2v5 Stephen Schlesinger Sr2v5 (talk) 22:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Sr2v5, the page/article "Stephen Schlesinger", is very feeble, and will hardly be improved via the addition of a photograph. I suspect that adding a photograph would make its feebleness more glaringly obvious. (Your page also won't be improved by denying that it's either yours or a page.) The problem, and it's a major one, is that the reader is given no reason to trust most of what the page says. A humdrum example:

Schlesinger became Director of the World Policy Institute (WPI), a progressive foreign policy institute at The New School University, in 1997. In that capacity, he managed a million dollar budget, supervised 25 Senior Fellows, and organized extensive programming. He was also publisher of the institute's quarterly magazine, The World Policy Journal. He left the Institute in 2006.

-- with no referencing. For all I know, this could be mere fiction. To which somebody might respond "Just google for it and you'll see that it's factual." To which I'd counter "Uh uh, the onus is on the writer, not the reader, to do this additional work."

For the section "Personal life", this is particularly problematic. It makes statements about several people, who I suppose are or were more or less private. None of this material should appear in Wikipedia unless it can be shown to have previously and credibly appeared elsewhere.

Forget the photo for now. Concentrate on finding what we call "reliable sources" (which must be disinterested, for one thing) to back up what's said. At the foot of Talk:Stephen Schlesinger please point to these sources, saying which source backs up which paragraph (or sentence, or whatever). Then an uninvolved editor can "reference" the article accordingly. (It may take some days before anyone notices your request. Be patient.) -- Hoary (talk) 22:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Under "unintended consequences" more than half the article has now been deleted as either unreferenced, not appropriate content, or both. Much of what remains - including many quotes providing commentary of Schlesinger's books, is not referenced. David notMD (talk) 13:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Please help to improve this article

Draft:Dhriti Pati Sarkar - Wikipedia Cleanton 06:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cleanton (talk • contribs)

Wikilink: Draft:Dhriti Pati Sarkar It appears that you have done a lot of work since the initial Declined, and then have resubmitted. Teahouse hosts are here more to advise than to contribute to articles. David notMD (talk) 13:13, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Albanian Wiki photos

I'm currently working on a draft for the Prishtina Jazz Festival. I'm intending to use a photo from the Albanian version of the article for this draft. How would I do this? Ominateu (talk) 18:00, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Ominateu, and welcome to the Teahouse.

The images in sq:Prishtina Jazz Festival are non-free images, which means they cannot be uploaded to Commons. They may be used in en-wiki only if their use meets all the criteria in WP:NFCC - one of which is that they may be used only in articles, not in drafts.

So, forget about them until your draft has been accepted (the presence of images will not affect whether it is accepted or not). Then it is likely that you can use one of them (but not more than one, in my understanding), but you will need to upload it to en-wiki first. Ideally, you'd find the source of one of the images on sq-wiki and upload from there (you'll need to identify that source when you do upload). Alternatively, you could download one from sq-wiki to your computer, and then upload it to en-wiki. ColinFine (talk) 18:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Draft:Chiaretto Calò

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Chiaretto_Cal%C3%B2 213.55.225.204 (talk) 18:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, IP user. The draft has been declined. What is your question? --ColinFine (talk) 18:48, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

where did my sandbox contents go?

I edited the page about me, which I did create. I used the sandbox to do it, using "source" and it took me forever. I hit publish as directed, but evidently it went to my talk page. Now I can't find it. I want to ask permission to edit the page, because it is blocked. I have a conflict of interest, being the subject. My editing consisted of some rewording of "career" section, correction of a misspelling, and additions to list of publications, which originally was sketchy. The first thing I need now is for someone to tell me how I get to the file I made in the sandbox. I can't get to my sandbox.

With all the days I have put into this, it may be simpler to request my page be deleted from wikipedia and then try for a correct one. I prefer not to do this, because volunteer editors made the original page better, just not complete. What do you think? CorbettPOE. THANK YOU CorbettPOE (talk) 22:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy links: User:CorbettPOE/sandbox, Carole W. Troxler, and previous discussion at Talk:Carole W. Troxler#Carole W. Troxler Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 22:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

@CorbettPOE: Your sandbox is at User:CorbettPOE/sandbox. For making changes at Carole W. Troxler, your best bet (since you have a conflict of interest) is to make one or more edit requests on the talk page of that article, being very specific about what wording should be changed and what it should be changed to. You may want to read WP:AUTO#IFEXIST. Deor (talk) 22:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you 99.118.250.119 (talk) 01:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)

Thank you. I got to the sandbox and requested that protection level of the page (Carole W. Troxler) be lowered. I made three request for three sections of the page and used the template provided.

when I tried to publish (and I don't know if this was to the talk page for my page or the talk page for User:CorbettPOE (since they did not come through at either) the only option for submitting "as" was as an editor of a description that I am NOT. I don't remember the term but the qualifications were for writing/editing so many articles. So after following the template three times, I don't know where all that went, and my work again was in vain. I have followed the directions of every person who responded to my queries, but there always is a brick wall. I appreciate your time and desire to help. CorbettPOE (talk) 21:25, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

@CorbettPOE your work was not in vain. Everything you have done still exists and even if you made an error, things can be recovered so no don't worry about that. I have also responded to your request at Talk:Carole W. Troxler. S0091 (talk) 20:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Vague questions

I have a few vague questions about Wikipedia editors.

What percent of people on Earth do you think have made any edit to any Wikimedia project in their life?
What percent of people on Earth do you think have made a constructive edit to a Wikimedia project?
What percent of all people who've edited Wikipedia do you think are dead now?
What percent of ongoing, constructive editors on Wikipedia do you think have had an account or IP blocked for vandalism, incompetence, sockpuppetry, edit warring, or other violations at some point in their life?

172.56.209.176 (talk) 20:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

For the first two, see Wikipedia:List of Wikipedians by number of edits. For (3), probably near the relevant statistical averages. For both (3) and (4), I would guess below 5%, and probably well below 5%. Usually, people realize they're not compatible with the site for one reason or another and leave well before it comes to formalities. If it does come to formalities, then it becomes an individualized thing. But vanishingly few, statistically. This is true of communities in general, really. Remsense诉 20:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Interesting, if I am reading that table correctly, that fewer than 1/3 of people who registered accounts went on to do one or more edits. David notMD (talk) 22:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I assume it includes accounts active on wikis other than en.wp? Remsense诉 22:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in the discussion for infobox consistency

Hello, I'm inviting Wikipedia editors to join a discussion on the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#City related articles infoboxes to establish consistency in the format for placing images on infoboxes of city-related articles. Currently, there is a lot of inconsistency across Wikipedia in how these articles are formatted, with each article being subject to its own interpretation. For example, if you compare New York City, London, New Delhi, and Mumbai to Hyderabad you'll notice differences. When I tried to format the images for Hyderabad in the same way as the other articles, my edits were reverted, citing that it did not align with Wikipedia's accepted policy. However, I am confused as to why other articles are allowed this format. I am seeking clarification on this matter and believe it would be beneficial to discuss and establish what is considered accepted practice. Hence, I invite you to join the discussion to bring about consistency and avoid differing interpretations. Let's work together to ensure that there is a clear and accepted standard for infobox image formats in city-related articles. 456legend talk 02:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

How does the One Source template get removed?

I added details and citations to an article that has this template attached to it. How do I now remove the template, or flag it for someone else to remove? The specific article is Sansabelt but also I'd just like to understand this process a little better for any future time I come across it.

In the Edit view, do I just remove the second line {{one source|date=August 2015}} and that's all that's needed? Or does someone else need to verify?

Wikipedian-in-Waiting (talk) 09:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedian-in-Waiting, generally speaking, once you have fixed the problem that a maintenance tag calls attention to, it is fine to go ahead and remove the tag. If another editor disagrees that the problem is fixed, then you would need to discuss that with them or get further input, but that doesn't seem the case here. And yes, you are correct on how to do so. Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you! Wikipedian-in-Waiting (talk) 10:13, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Wikipedian-in-Waiting. I dislike disagreeing with Seraphimblade but I must in this case. That tag was placed in 2015, and yes, it is no longer true that the article relies on a single source. However, there are way too many really bad sources used as references in that article. and far too few good sources. Things like five links to printed company advertisements, and then press releases, regurgitation of press releases, routine patent and trademark database listings, inteviews with executives and an archived version of the company website. Not a single one of these is independent of the topic, and most of them do not devote significant coverage to Sansabelt. What you need to do is find coverage in reliable sources that are entirely independent of Sansabelt that also devote significant coverage to Sansabelt. That type of source is like gold. The others more resemble sand. I recommend that you get rid of the poor quality sources and emphasize the golden sources. Cullen328 (talk) 10:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

The links to advertisements are to support the list of trouser brands and lines that were using licensing the same technique with notes in their ads giving the patent number. The press release was the sole official announcement of their plans before it went defunct again, although there's also the link to WWD which is an industry publication.

I won't try to defend the references, but would urge you to read the article instead of just scanning the list of references, so that it makes more sense why they are there (or not). If you'd like to revert my work, I'd urge you to at least remove the incorrect mentions of the inventor and original patent-holder, as that's been cited around the Internet now for years but is wrong. Before now, it has had no references except the incorrect information and a broken link to the defunct company website. *shrug* Wikipedian-in-Waiting (talk) 10:26, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

If something (eg a brand, or an album, or a film, or a book) is sourceable only to the originator, i.e. no indepedendent commentator has written about it, I question whether it should be in the article at all. ColinFine (talk) 16:21, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Gotcha. I removed my contributions and reinserted the template so that it's like it was before. Wikipedian-in-Waiting (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

While I removed my contributions (which were cited so people could see it was true, but not gold standard citations per this discussion), what's left and what's been there for 10 years or so unchanged, is pretty much entirely incorrect and uncited except for the "References in popular culture" section. If there's a template for "incorrect statements" someone might want to apply it because the effect has been that many others cite this wiki article in their own writings outside wikipedia and it diminishes a reader's opinion of wikipedia validity when incorrect content is allowed to stand for years. Wikipedian-in-Waiting (talk) 16:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedian-in-Waiting, would it be an improvement if you reinstated your edits and replaced the {{one source}} template with a more appropriate alternative that highlights the remaining concerns, such as {{third-party}} or {{no significant coverage}}? — Usedtobecool ☎️ 17:06, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

My understanding is, no it would not be.

I'm new to editing wikipedia articles, and I started because I'd used wikipedia for many years but in the past few years I noticed with increasing frequency that articles were outdated, had dead links, and/or had incorrect information that had stood for years. So, I thought it was time for me to contribute.

I don't care too much about Sansabelt trousers one way or the other :) but saw that it had sat for more than 10 years with no citations and incorrect info. I tried to correct it by going to the heart of it -- for example, a claim was made about the inventor and a link was made to a similar but not correct patent, and so I change that to the correct inventors, a link to the correct patent, and a link to a news article in which the correct inventor was named by a museum worker whose museum was running an exhibit on the company.

Those sources (US Patent office, news article are not, per this discussion here, gold standard. They were "poor quality sources" that "should [not] be in the article at all". I'm unlikely to find another source for the patent that I think is more valid than the US Patent office. So....

A second example: I state that several companies and several lines that were actually held by the same company, licensed with the patent holder to sell trousers identical to Sansabelt in their main feature, and then I link to example ads for each in which they state the (same) patent number. In the 1970s and 1980s, nobody (that I can find) was writing about this relatively common practice in disinterested reporting, so the actual ads is the best I can find to cite that they subtly credit the same patent for their products.

All of that is just to explain with two examples what I was doing throughout the article - correcting misinformation and adding new information based on what will likely be the highest quality sources available considering the topic at hand. But that's not correct for what people are doing here on wikipedia, so it's probably best to just remove my work and let it remain as it has been for these past 10 years until someone finds high-quality sources. My work was not contributing to that goal.

I'm pretty frustrated with the situation because in my opinion it's leading to some decline in quality. That said, y'all have been at this for much longer and have a better understanding of wikipedia's goals and how to achieve them, and at the end of the day this is y'alls garden not mine. I'm not here to try to change how things are done; in fact, I came here specifically to make sure I was following any kind of process for having my work approved (or not) as adding enough sources to remove the flag.

And they're just trousers. It's not really important. Wikipedian-in-Waiting (talk) 17:40, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

This frustration is understandable, many can relate to different degrees. Luckily, the site improves every single day! I really would recommend focusing your energies on areas of active interest or collaboration, so that you have something that brings you active joy, rather than feeling like you have to undo negativity. Wikipedia is a volunteer effort, and huge projects are never perfect and always a work in progress. Remsense诉 21:01, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedian-in-Waiting, when trying to improve an article, I would say you should not hesitate to remove information that you can not find good sources for. Anyone can add to articles, often unsourced, so it is not a given that everything that's in an article is information worth having. Wikipedia has figured out things over a 20-year period. It is to be expected that it will take some time to catch up when you start out. Sometimes, the learning period can involve unpleasantness because we misunderstand, we miscommunicate, we miss things, we assume things, we may say bluntly what we might have put kindly on any other day. I am sure Cullen328 meant nothing by it. I would advise perseverance. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

(Hey, don't hate disagreeing with me, and in this case I don't think you even are! I was giving more general advice, but your specifics are helpful as well.) Seraphimblade ^{Talk to me} 10:33, 1 March 2024 (UTC)

Please help to review this article

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Draft:Mustapha_Abdullahi — Preceding unsigned comment added by Danjizle (talk • contribs) 01:54, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Hey, I see you've submitted it for review so a new page reviewer should look at it at some point, but pages aren't reviewed in any specific order so it can take some time. I'm afraid it's a specific permission so I can't do anything to help. Shaws username . talk . 02:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I've done some cleanup. The publication section seemed irrelevant and does nothing to demonstrate notability, so I removed it. I also removed an inline external link, changed a heading because Wikipedia doesn't use title case, and consolidated duplicate citations. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

How many references can I add in an article.

List of X-Men members page has tons of primary source (126 eaxctly). From Wikipedia:Use of primary sources in Wikipedia, I learnt that we should have reliable secondary source to support primary ones. Also there is this one secondary IGN source^[1] (numbered 1) which you can find in every joining comics column. I tried to add more secondary sources to these page to replace this continuous IGN source but it was reverted. Here is old version of this page, where you can confirm that there was no case of Wikipedia:Citation overkill. My questions are?

Should I replace some of this IGN source and add additonal reliable sources?
How much reliable secondary resources can I add in an article?

Sewnbegun (talk) 14:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I wouldn't say there's any immediate need to replace any sources for the article if that one has been deemed enough, after all it does dominate the page for a reason.

As for how many you can stick in an article, the most important thing is to be reasonable as there's things such as WP:OVERCITE to think about. If you have a bunch of meh sources and one singular source that contains all of the information that those meh sources contain, use that singular source instead of sticking 5 sources where there could be 1.

I'd debate that there are times where using a bunch of sources is valid, such as when you're trying to prove that there was massive coverage across numerous sources globally, but that's not what's being questioned here. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 14:50, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Okay, thank you! Sewnbegun (talk) 07:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

References

^ Collura, Scott (January 16, 2015). "Every X-Man Ever". IGN. Retrieved March 2, 2024.

Import non free images on other Wikipedia

Is it possible/ allowed to export non free fair use images from English Wikipedia to other Wikipedia for use in articles their? Simply using :en:file:... doesn't seem to help. Note that I have translated few articles and images got exported by themselves (I guess). Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 08:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Please see "Albanian Wiki photos" above. That's about use in en:WP of photos that so far are specific to sq:WP, you'd instead be asking about use in ru:WP or de:WP or wherever of photos that so far are specific to en:WP. It's the same idea, but of course you'd have to copy the photos over strictly in accordance with the policies of the destination Wikipedia(s). And it could be that a given Wikipedia doesn't countenance any claim of "fair use". As for "images [getting] exported by themselves", most (though none for which "fair use" is asserted) are hosted at Commons; you'd call them from Korean-language Wikipedia in just the same way that you'd call them from English-language Wikipedia. -- Hoary (talk) 08:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Vandal only IPs stop and return

What can we do of those editors/IPs who occasionally show up and vandalize, and once they receive final warning or so, stop editing. Then they return back after few months or year so that the new warnings they get start from level 1, so they can vandalize without the fear of block? Also those IPs who get blocked, block expires, and after few months come back to vandalize and process repeats? Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 09:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

ExclusiveEditor, if their activity or WP:WHOIS gives evidence that it's the same person or same group returning every time, admins may be persuaded to make a longer block. Otherwise, yeah, that's the way it's been done. You can make a proposal if you can come up with a better idea. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 11:16, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Doubts regarding stubs

Is it okay to create stubs about creatures? because I have seen people create small articles about certain insects/ plants, and theirs get easily accepted even though the whole article is small. ‍‍ TomLovesFar ‍💬 04:58, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

If you are certain the topic is notable, and there are reliable sources covering it that you can at least include in "external links" if not as an actual citation, then it's OK to create a stub. It would be best, however, if you took the time to try to flesh it out as much as possible, because many stubs don't get expanded, especially if they're about some obscure species. ~Anachronist (talk) 05:41, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Tomlovesfar: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1217. I believe that's because of WP:NSPECIES:

Species that have a correct name (botany) or valid name (zoology) are generally kept. Their names and at least a brief description must have been published in a reliable academic publication to be recognized as correct or valid. Because of this, they generally survive AfD. As of 2022, no officially named species listed in Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Organisms has been deleted since at least mid-2016.

—Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:45, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Tomlovesfar, as of now, yes, species that are verified to exist don't get their stubs deleted in deletion discussions, so new page reviewers approve those articles. I do not know if every species that's discovered gets studied in detail. If scientists are just naming them and moving on, many of those stubs may be WP:permastubs. Permastubs don't have a secure future for all time. It's possible, the community will decide to cover these species in lists instead and redirect those permastubs. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 05:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

In my personal opinion, there is no place for creating stubs in Wikipedia in 2024. They were useful in the early days, to get the encyclopaedia populated, but few of them get expanded nowadays, so I don't think making more is a good idea. Now that we have drafts (and WP:AFC) I would much prefer that editors spend the time creating an article rather than dropping a trail of minimally useful stubs behind them. (In fairness, a similar argument applies to maintenance templates, and I sometimes perpetrate those myself; but in that case it is drawing attention to a weakness already in Wikipedia, rather than introducing new weaknesses). ColinFine (talk) 12:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Adding a reference on the already existing page

Hello! I've translated an article and tried to bound it with an already existing one (which is just in another language). But I didn't manage to. I need to bound them, because my article is a translation and I don't want to violate a copyright law. Please help! I tried to do it through the code but didn't manage to. Katrynaaaz (talk) 09:09, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Katrynaaaz: Are you talking about Draft:The School (TV series), if so then it is a draft and not an article yet, so you may have to wait for it to be accepted as an article, before linking it with Wikidata (through which all other language articles are connected together). Also translating Wikipedia article of another language shall not be a copyright issue, you just need to handle attribution, see Help:Translation for it. For more information read WP:TRANSLATETOHERE. Regards Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 11:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

By the way, Katrynaaaz, please look at named references, to see how to get rid of multiple copies of the same citation in your draft. ColinFine (talk) 12:19, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Accessing dutch wikipedia with my english account?

Looks like I can't use my account at the dutch wikipedia/wikidata site. Do I need to create a new account with a new accountname? Nico5038 (talk) 17:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia accounts generally can be used on any language edition. What happens when you try to switch? Sdkb ^talk 19:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Nico5038: See Wikipedia:Unified_login RudolfRed (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, that clearified it. Just confusing to get on the dutch wiki the message I needed to login first on the english site. But now all's working OK! Nico5038 (talk) 21:39, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Nico5038: Generally as per my experience, you are not automatically logged into other Wikipedias, even when you have logged in English Wikipedia. Either you just have to click 'Log in' in that Wikipedia and it logs you in automatically, or sometimes you need to repeat the username-password process there. Hope it helps, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 13:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Visual editor

How to edit through visual editor in wikipedia sandbox?Sheikbaba36524 (talk) 15:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Sheikbaba36524, and welcome to the Teahouse! To edit through the VisualEditor in the sandbox, in the sandbox heading, use the Edit link in VisualEditor ("Edit" tab above"). Alternatively, you can use Draft:Sandbox, which has the VisualEditor enabled, and you should be able to use it using the Edit tab and going to the pencil icon and changing to VisualEditor from there. If you have more questions, don't hesitate to ask at the Teahouse. Happy editing! ~~2NumForIce (^speak|_edits) 17:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Sheikbaba36524: Check Help:VisualEditor for more help, and ask question on Teahouse, if you have any. Regards, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 13:41, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Dead link?

Hi there, I have a question related to a type of link rot, where the link itself isn't dead but instead leads to the current, main page of a publication instead of the article that was originally linked. Should this be tagged as a dead link, or is there a more specific tag? Thanks! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 11:43, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Before attaching any tag to it, Revirvlkodlaku, be sure to do either of two things. Either look in the Wayback Machine to see if that has a working scrape of the page, or duckduckgo/bing/google to see if the page has moved without a redirect. If either of these is successful, update the link. If it isn't successful, try the other option. If that fails too, tag the link as dead. -- Hoary (talk) 12:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Hoary, thanks for the reply. I haven't used the Wayback Machine, so would I simply pop the url in the search box? As for your second suggestion, are you simply saying I should enter the article title in a search engine and see what comes up?

Lastly, if neither option yields any useful results, is that considered a dead link, even if it takes the reader to an active—albeit incorrect—page? Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 12:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Yep, just use the original URL in the search box and see if anything come up. As for the second question, I am not sure, but it is most likely then permanently dead. Geardona (talk to me?) 12:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

This is what I got from Wayback Machine: [7]. I guess that means there's nothing? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 12:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

https://web.archive.org/web/20110303000855/http://www.maroc-hebdo.press.ma/MHinternet/Archives_692/html_692/chico.html has it Geardona (talk to me?) 12:51, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Geardona, what did you do differently? Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

I just went back in time a little more, like a few years back there was a non-corrupted version. Geardona (talk to me?) 13:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Geardona, if you have a few minutes, would you mind walking me through the steps you took, so I can do it myself next time? Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Just for future reference, {{cite web}} allows you to set url-status=usurped. Other templates, such as {{cite news}}, allow you to remove the URL altogether and treat the source as a purely offline one. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 15:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Sure, go to this page here https://web.archive.org/web/20240000000000*/http://www.maroc-hebdo.press.ma/MHinternet/Archives_692/html_692/chico.html, find a year with a bar on it, click the year with a bar, click on any green or blue dot that shows up, and the thing you are looking for should show up. Geardona (talk to me?) 15:39, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Rotideypoc41352, "would I simply pop the url in the search box?" At the start, yes. Geardona has explained it well. An addition: If I know, or can easily find, when the relevant Wikipedia editor "retrieved"/"accessed" the page, I'll start by looking for the scrape that would then have been current. If I can't easily time the retrieval/access, I need to consider the likely nature of the page. It's pretty obvious that some web pages aren't supposed to have stable content: acme-rodent-extermination.com/news.html can be expected to have whatever is, at the time, the news for Acme Rodent Extermination Corp. But far more often a page is, or should be, specific: acme-rodent-extermination.com/case_studies/possum.html can be expected to be about possums. For the latter kind of page, very often one sees that there's been a cluster of Wayback scrapes: perhaps a dense one starting in 2009 and continuing through 2010, tapering off through 2014, and only occasional scrapes thereafter. What I then do is start by looking for a scrape towards the end of the dense cluster, seeing if this indeed says what the positioning of the reference implies that it says, and, if it does, using that. (When scrapes become much sparser, the scraped page tends to be worthless.) ¶ "[A]re you simply saying I should enter the article title in a search engine and see what comes up?" Yes. Now, you might say that a web designer would have to be a complete idiot to rearrange the pages of a website without turning the old URLs into redirects to the new ones. But whether or not complete idiocy is the reason, such rearrangement is common. -- Hoary (talk) 07:26, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Courtesy pinging @Revirvlkodlaku. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:56, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Margarett Best

Margarett Best is an article about a former Canadian politician I came across from the copyediting recommendations on my homepage.

A solid 80% plus of the article is just a list of all the different awards and honors the subject has received, but with no citations.

There’s barely any sources in the whole article, and the ones that are there have nothing to do with these awards.

I added citation needed tags, but honestly basically every paragraph in this article seems like it needs one. However since these weren’t technically opinion statements I wasn’t sure removing 80% of the article text was the right move either.

I guess I’m just wondering if there’s something further I should’ve done than add citation tags in this situation, as I am very new to all of this and didn’t want to punch above my weight, so to speak.

Thank you, Satellite5Editor (talk) 15:27, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Satellite5Editor, the recommended course of action is to look for sources. People who don't have the time to do that usually tag the articles for issues. When you have so many {{citation needed}} tags to add, it's better to instead tag the whole article with {{more citations needed}}. Since it's a WP:BLP, you should remove unsourced claims instead of tagging if they are dubious or disparaging. Furthermore, unsourced claims that are so promotional as to make the article reflect poorly on Wikipedia's neutrality are best removed on the spot as well, though you will meet people who think those sorts of claims should be tagged or rewritten instead. — Usedtobecool ☎️ 16:21, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I probably don’t have quite enough experience yet to add sources but I will definitely continue to learn and tag/remove as needed. Thank you very much for your help! Satellite5Editor (talk) 16:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

There's also a useful list of the different cleanup tags at WP:CLEANUPTAG. Also, if you're not sure if something should be removed or not, there's usually no harm in being WP:BOLD and going for it, your edit will be in the page history so it can always be reverted if people disagree, happy editing! Shaws username . talk . 16:37, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Creating a disambiguation page

I would like to convert Banjara into a disambiguation page, as there are three topics with that title. I've never done so, however, and WP:Manual of Style/Disambiguation pages seems rather...abstruse. Is there a relatively simple process for doing this? Cheers! Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 09:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku: There is already a disambiguation page related to this term, Banjar. You may move disambiguation to Banjara, but you first need to initiate a discussion on talk page. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 10:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Also, can you mention what are other articles with Banjara, because of what I could find, this article seems to be the primary subject issued with name, other's are related to it and have brackets to indicate what they are. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 10:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Editor _{Notify Me!}, I'm referring to Banjara (Muslim) and Banjara (film). Isn't it the case that once there are several pages with the same name, even if they are disambiguated by bracketed terms, that a dedicated disambig page is created? Maybe I've misunderstood...Revirvlkodlaku (talk) 13:23, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Revirvlkodlaku: We can have both Elizabeth II as well as Elizabeth II (disambiguation), as the first one remains the most important primary article overshadowing others. In similar way, we can create a disambiguation page for Banjara titled "Banjara (disambiguation)" without renaming Banjara itself. The articles you provided are too small to even consider renaming Banjara, which stands as the most primary subject related to the term. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 13:32, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I note that two further disambiguable limks - Banjara Hound and Banjara Hills - are present on the disambiguation page Banjari. I think some additional cross-referencing between Dab pages would help. would help. -- Verbarson ^talk_edits 17:10, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

What message to leave on talk page when reverting vandalism after 4/4iw warning?

Recently I encountered a case in a my vandalism reversal where a user had continued to vandalise after receiving a Level 4 warning for vandalism. I reverted the edit. It is, in my understanding, customary to leave a message on the user's/IP address' talk page when reverting vandalism, and I usually do this, but I wasn't sure what message to leave in this case.

Another Level 4 warning or a Level 4iw warning didn't seem right as this wasn't a "final warning" (in fact it wasn't really a warning at all - they had already been reported to AIV by a bot) and they won't get blocked if they "vandalise Wikipedia again", they will get blocked if an Admin determines that the existing vandalism is enough to warrant a block.

I ended up leaving a Level 3 warning because the language "please stop" and "you may be blocked" seemed to fit with the situation.

My question is, is there a "Level 5"-esque warning that basically says "you have vandalised again after 4/4iw, and now you have been reported to AIV. An admin will decide if you can remain on Wikipedia". If not, what warning should I leave in this case?

Thank you for your time! MolecularPilot (talk) 22:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

No such warning to my knowledge. As far as I'm concerned, once the 4th warning has been applied and they continue, it's no longer on me to warn them, it's on me to alert AIV. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 22:46, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

At some point, you're really not expected to go out of your way to inform other users of things when they are clearly demonstrating bad faith or contempt. I stop after a recent 4/4i for similar conduct most of the time.

This relates to one of the truer meanings of WP:IAR—that the usual norms and formalities are meant to enforce constructive conduct among editors, and not meant to be formalities for their own sake. Remsense诉 22:48, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Citing Ship's Manifest or Ancestry.com

1) For a biography, is a ship's manifest an acceptable source? How would I cite it? 2) Is Ancestry.com an acceptable source? One would need a free account in order to view the relevant page. https://www.ancestry.com/family-tree/tree/195873672/family/familyview?cfpid=222549761160

New info has arisen about Pepi Litman & I've been asked to update the article. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pepi_Litman Nadnie (talk) 20:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Nadnie: I'm not sure about using the manifest, since it is a primary source, and secondary sources are preferred. Ancestry.com is not usable, since it is user generated content. See WP:ANCESTRY RudolfRed (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@Nadnie: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1217.

For a biography, is a ship's manifest an acceptable source?
— User:Nadnie 20:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Depends on what you're using it for. As RudolfRed says, the manifest would be a primary source, so you'd only be able to use it in very limited situations; I presume in your case it's to assert that Litman was on the vessel. I won't talk about wikinotability here as this seems to be an already-established article, but has it ever been published to some reputable source? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 23:06, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

On Wikipedia cover page, not enough stories about Jewish or Canadian subjects.

On Wikipedia cover page, not enough stories about Jewish or Canadian subjects. 2001:569:FA13:6E00:E0AB:5B7B:C765:ACC0 (talk) 03:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

There are even fewer stories about Nepal (where I'm from), IP editor. No effort is made to cover a country or other more or less. Some of those articles are articles that have newly been created and/or developed to decent quality, others are articles that have been recently updated based on recent events, the first box that's dedicated to a single article showcases articles that have reached the highest quality on Wikipedia's quality scale, one at a time. And so on. You will notice biases in various aspects of Wikipedia as discussed at WP:BIAS but we are trying to do better. Wikipedia being a community project, I would encourage you to join and contribute to those efforts. Best, Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:38, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Details on my Wiki page are incorrect and I need help changing

Hello - there are several things on my Wiki page that are incorrect and need updating. For example, my dob - it says 22/3/41 - my birthday is 22/3/37. I would also like to update the photo in the info panel as well as other personal information - eg - I am no longer married to Julie Horsfall. How is this best done? I have read that only 'appropriate' sources are trusted - I am the person it is about so I feel I am pretty 'appropriate'!

I look forward to hearing from you. DONALDRSPENCER (talk) 02:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

You are indeed an appropriate source for details about your personal life, DONALDRSPENCER, but we can't take your word for it; the details still need to have been published somewhere. Unsourced or poorly sourced details that you challenge the accuracy of can be removed in the meantime. Assuming you are talking about Don Spencer, you can start by making an edit request on Talk:Don Spencer, per instructions at WP:ER. Your date of birth is sourced. So, it would help if you looked at the source and explained why that might be wrong. I will be watching the article and try to help if I can. Regards! — Usedtobecool ☎️ 03:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for your response. I have just gone to the link Talk:Don Spencer and replied. It doesn't explain how I can update the photos...how do I do that? DONALDRSPENCER (talk) 03:43, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

DONALDRSPENCER, you can use the Wikipedia:File upload wizard to upload new photos. You may have to verify your identity to release the files under acceptable licenses. Then you'd still have to make an edit request as advised above asking that the photo be changed. There may be additional considerations that may override your wishes. Wikipedia does not usually allow user accounts to use the names of well-known individuals, in order to prevent impersonation and harassment. So, it may be a good idea to get verified either way (advice about username is at WP:REALNAME). — Usedtobecool ☎️ 04:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

recent edit revert

I am talking about Bellesa page. I have made 5 edits that includes removal of sponsored spam source, unsourced promo content and a citation tag placement. But a new editor reverted the edits and marked my edits as disruptive. He also placed message to my talk page about my recent edits.

He placed warning for my editing on 2 pages. I think that new editor reverted my edits on his personal intrest because I have contested one of his edit to Josh Cahill page. I need expert's opinion on this. Does my edits were disruptive?Tanhasahu (talk) 07:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

There is an ongoing dispute between Tanhasahu and User:ConcurrentState - at length - at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Tanhasahu and at the Talk page for Josh Cahill. This appears to have spilled over to a dispute at Bellesa that can probably be dealt with on the Talk page of that article. David notMD (talk) 10:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Actually, it started when I reached to Josh Cahill's page through Random articles and partially reverted previously removed well cited content (BBC, Business Insider, etc news sources used for citation) and award information, here. Then ConcurrentState reverted my edits instantly, invited me to participate on the talk page page of the article where I have told him that the removed content was well sourced with BBC, Business Insider news and if any dispute with Aero Time reliable then we can place citation needed or better citation needed tag there, here. Now, he started discussion about Aero Time reliability at Biography of living people notice board, I stated the same here. Now, here other editors jumped in and started connecting me with other editors and flooded my talk page with warnings about my that single edit, here and even started SPI investigation against my account. During SPI, I dropped a message about my good faith edits, unawareness about talk page debate, and quesioned about the intention of ConcurrentState editing history here as that editor made only 50 edits that time and 90% of them were related to Josh Cahill's page and associated editors. But, now other editors started more aggressive and started collected evidence for SPI and submitted all their finding at ongoing SPI. I got a clean cheat with SPI [8] as I was not associated with any of the other accounts who made spam edits. I even suspected the editing behavoir of those editors and suspected [9] this page can contested to AfD as they were biased with the subject and they removed all the well citated sources and information. And after a few hours they did the same, they removed content and contested the page to AfD [[10]|disscussion]. After this, I felt how other Wikipedia editors can be so aggressive for just one good faith to any page. I really felt low after all the incident and aggressiveness of the fellow editors. But, I have decided to leave everything beside this and started to edit Wikipedia normally but they don't let me go. They're watching all my edits and reverted my recent edits. Now, I really doubt about the rules and policies at Wikipedia. Editors who made hundreds and a few thousand editors biting new comer editors and bullying them with their edits. I really need admin's assistence with this. Tanhasahu (talk) 16:22, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi, I'm not an expert, just another editor. I'd suggest looking thorough MOS:CITELEAD though, usually most articles won't contain citations in the lead since it's summarising content in other parts of the article, for example the AVN awards are referenced in the reception section and if citations should be added to it, they can be copied from the part of the article instead of removing it. If you think including it in the lead could give WP:UNDUE weight, I'd suggest bringing it up on the article's talk page and discussing it other editors. The sponsored source I think is ok for what it's being used for, it's identified as a sponsored source in the text and is just used for why the founder named the site what it is, and not controversial content. Shaws username . talk . 16:02, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Tanhasahu Teahouse hosts are mostly not also Administrators. Go elsewhere. David notMD (talk) 04:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

No David, I want to correct my last words. I was in need of expert and unbiased editor's opinion. Tanhasahu (talk) 04:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying the things in easy words. I really appreciate your time and effort to look into the ongoing things and making life easy. All, I was against is being too aggressive with the new come editors and biting them with expertise the experienced editors hold. Tanhasahu (talk) 04:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Recovering old username

I have my old account called "Tom Joe James," which was created 2 years ago. but unfortunately, I forgot the password for that account. I don't remember connecting it to an email ID, so yeah, password recovery is not an option either. So, is it possible for an admin to delete that account and change the username of this account to Tom Joe James? .‍‍ TomLovesFar ‍💬 08:20, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Tomlovesfar: This request belongs elsewhere. You say you have lost access to your access to your previous account at Tom Joe James. Its home-wiki appears to be MediaWiki. Accounts can't be deleted but can be renamed for sure. There appears no activity on the account and it meets the criteria for usurpation, and it involves a complex issue. Please make a request at m:SRUC that you want your account to be renamed to a username that is existing previously (it's also worth to mention the target username also belongs to you and how you lost access). Best regards, ─ Aafī (talk) 08:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Slag bij Arnhem

Wat was de oorzaak van de slag bij Arnhem 217.100.136.148 (talk) 10:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Welcome @217.100.136.148: Actually this is Teahouse of English Wikipedia, so you should have asked your question in English. However after translating it, I think the question is "What was the cause of the Arnhem(?)". Teahouse is a place to ask questions about editing Wikipedia and related things so this is not the right place to ask these questions, however I suggest you reading Battle of Arnhem and Slag om Arnhem on Dutch Wikipedia. If you still have questions about it, you may ask questions at WP:Reference desk/Humanities. For questions regarding Wikipedia, feel free to ask questions at WP:Teahouse. Hope you find it helpful. Regards, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 10:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Deferred to Google translate Stel gerust uw vragen in het Engels, maar in het Nederlands kunnen wij u niet adequaat helpen. Ik raad aan om de pagina over de Slag om Arnhem hier of op de Nederlandse Wikipedia te lezen. Proost!🧇🫕 Remsense诉 10:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Conflict of interest?

If I create an article about a language that I am native in, and the language is not self-made, is it considered a conflict of interest? Thanks, Wikiexplorationandhelping (talk) 13:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I don't think that would create a COI as long as you are not trying to promote that language, and as long as you can cite reliable sources of course. Shantavira|^{feed me} 13:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Page view thumbnail not showing

I have 2 questions. I am editing a page called "Blanche Grant". I would like it to also show for "Blanche Chloe Grant" as well. Is this possible? The other question is why is her photo not displayed in a rollover "page view" like I see on other pages. Hdgknsn (talk) 02:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hdgknsn: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1217.

I am editing a page called "Blanche Grant". I would like it to also show for "Blanche Chloe Grant" as well. Is this possible?
— User:Hdgknsn 02:08, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I am not sure what you mean by this. If you want to concurrently edit two different articles, just open the other one in a separate tab. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 02:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

If the artist is more commonly known as Blanche Chloe Grant rather than Blanche Grant, it may be appropriate to move the page to that title. Otherwise, you could create a redirect page at the title "Blanche Chloe Grant" that directs a reader to the aforementioned page. Recon rabbit 02:46, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

... and, Hdgknsn, the way to produce the redirect that Reconrabbit proposes is to click on the link "Blanche Chloe Grant", and, when you get there, to have it say simply #REDIRECT [[Blanche Grant]], and to save the result. -- Hoary (talk) 09:16, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Hdgknsn, and welcome to the Teahouse. I see the photo when I hover over Blanche Grant, both on my computer and on my phone. How and on what are you looking at Wikipedia? In what circumstances don't you see it? ColinFine (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

See also WP:Teahouse#Rollovers_on_wikipedia (below). I've created the redirect at Blanche Chloe Grant so all should now be OK. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

WP:PGAME

What is the appropriate way of handling or reporting someone who is clearly gaming the system to get higher user levels?
And no, the user has not yet made an edit requiring higher permission levels. – 2804:F14:80E5:6B01:B594:C013:3E0E:888D (talk) 05:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello IP user. It would be helpful if you told us the user in question so we could tell you if it's an example of WP:GAMEing or not. If it's an urgent matter or is a chronic, intractable behavioral problem, then WP:ANI is your best bet. ‍ Relativity 05:28, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Sure, this user: Infrabel1. Their only contributions have been to welcome users, and to respond to things on their talk page (one of which was a question about protected pages asked by a now blocked sock puppet). – 2804:F14:80E5:6B01:B594:C013:3E0E:888D (talk) 05:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

User:Infrabel1 has been asked on Talk page to stop posting welcomes on talk pages of new accounts.— Preceding unsigned comment added by David notMD (talk • contribs) 06:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)^<diff>

Hm. So the correct thing to do would have been to warn them? But it also wasn't a warning for attempted permission gaming... – 2804:F14:80E5:6B01:B594:C013:3E0E:888D (talk) 08:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Sometimes when the majority of an editor's activity doesn't contribute to the encyclopedia, they may be warned for possibly being not here to build an encyclopedia. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

info boxes

Hi I have a question relating to info Boxes (the boxes at the bottom of pages that provide lists). I find them very useful to organize study, however, they seem to get moved around and and I often have to dig around to find sets of them that provide a complete list that relates to the subject I am studying. I usually tend to find them after a quick search but I am having difficulty finding one at the moment, I'm not sure if has moved or has disappeared/changed etc. is there a way to find/list all of these boxes that relate to a particular subject? The info box I am looking for grouped bacteria in gram -ve and gram +ve. The Pseudomonadota page has an info box at the bottom of the page titled 'Pseudomonadota-associated Gram-negative bacterial infections'. This box has a greenish colour indicating sub-catagories. I am sure there were a number of boxes like this that I can no longer see. I have tried flicking through to find other boxes with this format (they may relate to pathology rather than taxonomy or both). Being able to list these type of info boxes that relate to bacteria might be useful. Can you help with this? Many thanks Frank Fgodman14 (talk) 13:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Fgodman14, is Category:Infectious disease templates any help? See also the categories at the bottom of that page. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 14:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Fgodman14: They are called Category templates, infoboxes are those boxes at top right where you get information like are/ population/ capital in a country's article. Regards, Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 14:46, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Fgodman14 did not describe category templates but navigation templates. They usually have a bold v at the top left which links to their own page like Template:Gram-negative proteobacterial diseases. The bottom of such pages often have a category link like Category:Infectious disease templates where you may find similar templates. By the way, I have been here since 2005 and your post is the first time ever I hear large reader interest in navigation templates. I made many myself, not about biology but your interest is nice to hear. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Identifying Orphan article

How do you identify if an article is orphan? Is there any tool for it? Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 14:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor You can use the "What links here" tool menu which in WP:VECTOR22 is to the right of the article text. No links from other articles = orphan. Note that there might be links from Talk Pages etc. that wouldn't count. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

.... note that there is a template {{orphan}} already applied to ~60,000 articles. So, if you just want to find a few orphans, you can use the same tool to list them from the template's page. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Michael D. Turnbull: Thanks, appreciate the clarification. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 14:39, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor There is also Category:All orphaned articles! Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:42, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Are these categories/ templates auto updated (like if an article is no more orphan, the template gets removed by bot) or is it done manually? If it's done manually, there shall be lot of errors which could be corrected. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 14:49, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: To my knowledge the maintenance tag is added manually, so it has to also be removed the same way. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 15:29, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@ExclusiveEditor: Editors can work manually on Wikipedia:Database reports/Orphans with incoming links, and JL-Bot automatically removes many orphan templates per User:JL-Bot#Non-Applicable Orphan Templates. PrimeHunter (talk) 16:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

My Impact Not Showing

On my homepage on mobile, it shows the amount of edits that I have made but my impact always shows as 0.

I love seeing statistics of how much my contributions have impacted Wikipedia and it's a shame that it says 0 all the time. I'm wondering how I can fix this. MrBauer24 (talk) 11:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@MrBauer24: What do you mean by Impact? Where do you see such score? Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 12:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Oooo, I got this one. It's a newcomer thing that someone mentioned when it was last asked. You can read a bit about it at WP:GTF#Newcomer homepage, and you can turn that on in special:preferences#user profile. Should be right at the bottom. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

As for this, I'm not really sure what the issue could be. I'd personally use MW:Xtools and check individual pages for their analysis for the time being. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Well, some tools are only enabled for people creating new accounts, and some tools are for big dorks like you and I. It takes all sorts! Remsense诉 12:30, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I am trying this Wikipedia homepage now, and it has suggested articles to edit, and it could be good for everyone. I never knew of this feature. Wikipedia should promo/ advertise it more. Exclusive Editor _{Notify Me!} 12:35, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I could very easily be wrong but I think it is enabled automatically for new users, either that or it's an opt-in sort of thing. It's pretty cool regardless and would be really useful to keep both new and old users motivated.

Much like you, I hadn't even heard of it before either this week or last. CommissarDoggo^Talk? 12:43, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@MrBauer24 Although you have been editing since 2013, the newcomer homepage should work for you like anyone else who activates it through Special:Preferences (at the bottom). The "impact" part should show your total edits (currently 908) and various other details. If your mobile homepage isn't doing that, this is probably a bug and I suggest that you initially give details (maybe a screenshot?) at WP:VPT. Not all new accounts get the homepage tab activated because we are a bit short of mentors, who are assigned to each newcomer. Any Teahouse regular who would like to sign up ~~for mentorship~~ to be a mentor can do so at Special:EnrollAsMentor. See my Talk Page for the sorts of questions that newcomers ask, although they are under no obligation to use a mentor and many just ask questions here at the Teahouse. Mike Turnbull (talk) 12:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@MrBauer24: Does it work when you click "Desktop" at the bottom of the page? I see results at Special:Impact/MrBauer24, except the last two articles currently have a clock icon. Clicking it says "Pageviews have not yet been calculated. Check back tomorrow!" PrimeHunter (talk) 15:14, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Yay that works! Thank you :) MrBauer24 (talk) 17:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

i need help with a new article

it is going to be on hannah kabel, the twitch girl

thanks!

luna<3 Luna8721 (talk) 17:10, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Teahouse hosts here to advise, not to co-author. On your Talk page, you have been pointed to WP:YFA. For a living person bio, find your references first, and then only write what is verified by refs. See WP:42 for what are valid refs. Work on getting a draft approved before spending time on finding an image (images do not factor into getting a draft approved). David notMD (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello, Luna8721, and welcome to the Teahouse.

It's great that you want to contribute to Wikipedia; but in my experience, editors who try the challenging task of creating a new article before they have spent a significant amount of time learning how Wikipedia works by making improvements to existing articles, usually have a miserable and frustrating time.

By my count, you have made five edits to main space (two of which I have undone, because I don't think they were appropriate).

That is a good start, but you have not yet engaged with the major Wikipedia policies which will arise in creating a new article: notability, verifiability, reliable sources, and neutral point of view. I earnestly advise you to forget about creating a new article for a few months, while you broaden the range of your edits and learn about those crucial ideas and how they work in Wikipedia.

Then, you can read your first article, and set about finding sources (which is absolutely the first and most important part of creating an article. ColinFine (talk) 18:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

forgot password

Hello. I forgot the password of the καταραμένος όφις (talk | contribs) account, which I created about a month ago. The account has zero edits and I have logged in once or twice since I created it. Can the password be reset? 81.186.86.83 (talk) 08:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi IP Editor- if you didn't add an email to your account then I am afraid you will not be able to recover the password. Since you had no edits I would suggest just creating a new account. Qcne (talk) 09:15, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

User:καταραμένος όφις has not specified a valid email address. You can create a new account. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Help! My edits have been removed.

I work for an organization and was asked to update our page. I did so and received a message that it appeared I am a paid editor, and updates were overwritten. I followed the instructions to add a paid template to my talk page four days ago but no administrator has reinstated my edits. How do I manage this? TIA. Penfaulkner (talk) 13:34, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi User:Penfaulkner,

The edit of yours was also identified as "promotional". And looking at it, I agree. There is definitely no way what you wrote can be accepted. See WP:NPOV/WP:TONE. If you have specific changes in mind, feel free to propose them at Talk:PEN/Faulkner Foundation. That way you get the benefit of dispassionate input from editors who do not have a conflict of interest. Be sure to tell your boss to read WP:BOSS. DMacks (talk) 13:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

PenFaulkner Just because you have declared "Paid" does not mean your edits will be restored. As noted above, you must propose additions on the Talk page. A independent editor will either implement or reject. Rather than all-at-once, make a series of smaller proposals. To bring each proposal to the attention of an editor, start a new Talk section. Put edit COI inside double curly brackets {{ }} at the top. In the section specify the exact wording of what you wanted added, along with properly formated references. David notMD (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

NO NAME DROPPING! The article already has Wikilinks to articles that list award winners. Also, NO MISSION STATEMENT! Wikipedia does not care what an organization says about itself. An External link to the org website is sufficient. David notMD (talk) 14:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I have soft blocked the editor for a username violation which can easily be corrected. Cullen328 (talk) 18:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Rollovers on wikipedia

Below, if you put your cursor over either form of the name Bert Phillips, you will see the same popup with photo come up.

Bert Geer Phillips ------------ Bert G. Phillips

I would like this to work for my artist.

Blanche Grant ----------- Blanche Chloe Grant

As you can see the second form of her name the rollover doesnt work. Also, for some reason the photo of her doesnt show either. Does anybody know how to fix either of these two issues? Hdgknsn (talk) 13:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

In the first case, Bert G. Phillips is a WP:REDIRECT to Bert Geer Phillips. That means link to the redirect is nearly synonymous with a link to the target of the redirect. Notice that the redirect is also a bluelink (clicking on either of the Phillips links gets you to the article), whereas Blanche Chloe Grant is red. You would want to create it as a redirect to Blanche Grant. DMacks (talk) 13:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hdgknsn I've created the redirect, so you'll now see the popup in both cases for Grant. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:33, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hdgknsn: The page preview feature requires an image in the lead where width × height for the original upload is either at least 320 × 200 px or 203 × 250 px. Blanche Grant displays File:Blanche C. Grant.jpg which is only 130 × 190 px. PrimeHunter (talk) 15:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

I use navigation popups which don't seem to suffer from that limitation, as I see the images perfectly well from the article or redirect title. Maybe Hdgknsn does too? Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

The default preview feature is mw:Page Previews which doesn't show an image for Blanche Grant. Page Previews uses mw:Extension:PageImages but rejects some images like here where the article does have a page image. Navigation popups is much older than both those features and selects an image by itself. Unregistered users, meaning nearly all readers, cannot use Navigation popups. Registered users have to enable it to replace Page previews. PrimeHunter (talk) 18:38, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thanks, I should be able to fix that! Hdgknsn (talk) 16:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you so much Hdgknsn (talk) 16:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Help about writing and checking IPAs

Hello, can I ask question about International Phonetic Alphabet writing and checking? I have some official interview references about some people's name pronunciation(mainly Association football players), but I'm not used to writing IPA very well...:( Though I could learn some IPA writing techniques by looking Help:IPA articles and other IPA examples in people's Wikipedia articles, checking whether my IPA is correct or not is difficult based on my knowledge. Asking questions to users who know IPA very well by using User talk can be a way to solve my problem, but asking too many questions inside the User talk can be discourtesy to them.

Are there any Wikiprojects or pages(including Teahouse) which deal with IPA information and IPA questions?? As I'm not used to asking questions in English Wikipedia, I write the question in the Teahouse. Sorry for the inconvenience. --YellowTurtle9 (talk) 16:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

So, the big thing that's important to keep in mind is—unless you are working on linguistics articles, it's very likely we're working with phonemic notation (with /slashes/), not trying to be incredibly specific with the exact sounds an individual makes (with [brackets]). So, I would try leaning on the Help:IPA page relevant to whatever native language is spoken by the person (e.g. Help:IPA/French and work from there. Remsense诉 21:11, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

@Remsense Thanks for the reply. Then are there any ways to check whether my IPA writing based on interview sources is correct or not?? Though looking the Help:IPA pages will be a great help, but putting the IPA letters together to form a IPA word and considering the Suprasegmentals between the letters is little bit difficult to handle by myself... --YellowTurtle9 (talk) 12:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Is there a reason you're doing this? This may be considered a bit CRUFTy, as a phonetic transcription of a particular idiolect is likely not encyclopedic, generally. Honestly, for most purposes you may be better going with {{respell}}: REM-sense may be more useful than /ˈrɛm.sɛns/ or [ˈɹ̠ɛm.sɛnts] Remsense诉 13:32, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

As I'm interested in phonemic information about people's names(especially Association football players), I usually contributed the IPA information in football player's articles. Not to disobey Wikipedia:Verifiability, I mainly used sources from authorized publishers. But I've never thought that inserting IPAs can be considered CRUFTy. My apologies if I disobeyed the Wikipedia policy. --YellowTurtle9 (talk) 15:54, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

It depends—the very first sentence of an article is precious real estate, and while I don't agree, a lot of editors think IPA is largely useless for a general readership and shouldn't be present outside of language or linguistics articles. I think it's important for a lot of non-English names, though. Remsense诉 15:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you about the importance and the opinion of IPA(especially the non-English names that I mainly contributed), but I didn't know how the IPA is generally considered inside the English Wikipedia as I'm new in here. Hmm... Maybe that subject is more complicated than I'd actually thought... --YellowTurtle9 (talk) 16:18, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Well, the point is that most readers don't know it as well as you or I do, so it's essentially taking up space and providing little information in the worst cases, but it's certainly a trade-off—there are issues with the respell approach also. See WP:LEAD and MOS:IPA. Remsense诉 16:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Our guideline is MOS:PRON which says "Pronunciation in Wikipedia should be transcribed using the International Phonetic Alphabet (IPA), except in the particular cases noted below." and "For English words, transcriptions based on English spelling ("pronunciation respellings") such as prə-NUN-see-AY-shən (using ) may be used, but only in addition to the IPA.... For other languages, only the IPA is normally used." Using respelling without IPA is contrary to this guideline, as is using respelling for foreign words at all. CodeTalker (talk) 18:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you, I misspoke. Remsense诉 18:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

@CodeTalker@Remsense I see... It seems that the answer I've been looking for is to ask for help to users who deals with IPA inside the articles is better than to look for the Wikiprojects or pages..... Thank you for the guidelines and the replys! --YellowTurtle9 (talk) 16:09, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

And thank you for your contributions! Cheers! Remsense诉 20:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Mon article Raynald Leclerc

Bonjour Selon mon expérience de WIKI ce brouillon non terminé ne peut pas vraniment être refusé car il a été approuvé dans la section francaise il y a déjà 3 ans ....sauf erreur Je suis éditeur de ce résumés de biographie ou énumération de la carrière de cet artiste Il y a aucune intention de promouvoir mais de plutot démontrer l'évolution du travail de cet artiste tout simplement toujoursvivant Ce que j'essais de faire actuellement c'est de disposer un article semblable dans la section (en) de wiki Une version retrouvable en anglais pour les gens vivant aux USA, car eux ne penseront pas le rechercher dans la section francaise automatiquement. Est ce possible de disposer un miroir de l'Article déjà fait dans cette section pour m'éviter de tout refaire je suis à redisposer les réféfrences .....et c'est assez long merci

la version anglophone a été vérifiée et corrigée par M.William Berg vivant à Boston. Merci de votre aide.

Cordialement Daniel Laquerre Quebec city Daniel LAQ (talk) 19:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Daniel LAQ: Bienvenue à Wikipedia en anglais. Si vous cherchez Wikipedia en français, c'est ici. Autrement, faites les commentaires en anglais ici, s'il-vous-plaît. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 19:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Bonjour. Veuillez lire WP:translation. Chaque version de Wikipedia a ses propres règles et polices, et ceux ne sont toujours pas le même. Si un article soit accepté par l'une version, ça ne veut pas dire que sa traduction serait accepté par l'autre.

I will continue in English, because I don't think my French is good enough for the next bit.

The most obvious problem with your draft Draft:RAYNALD LECLERC was the formatting, and I have improved that. But the much much more important and fundamental problem is with the sources. Much of it - and especially the biography - is unsourced; and it looks to me if many of your sources are not independent of Leclerc.

Writing an article in English Wikipedia begins with finding independent reliable sources that discuss the subject in some depth, and then continues with writing a summary of what those sources say. An article, especially about a living person should contain not one single piece of information which is not in a published source; and few pieces of information which are not in independent sources. ColinFine (talk) 22:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Featured article

Hi, I'm here to inquire about whether an article that has achieved featured article status is not subject to any changes later to the existing content (not talking about future developments obviously) after the status has been awarded, since it would have been extensively discussed already. Is there a rule guiding this principle? 456legend talk 04:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

See the outline at WP:FAOWN. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. 456legend talk 08:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello @Nikkimaria, I noticed you're a coordinator for featured article reviews. I wanted to ask if it would be appropriate to nominate the Hyderabad article for a change in the infobox design. The current infobox is inconsistent with many other city related articles, such as New York City, London, New Delhi, and Mumbai. I attempted to make the change, but it was reverted, with the editor stating that it is not a Wikipedia policy. However, I have observed that other articles use this format and I could not find any mention in the infobox project explicitly favoring a particular format. Additionally the editor who reverted my edit on and others on the Teahouse mentioned that since the article is a featured article, the infobox format might have already been discussed. However, I noticed that the article was nominated as a featured article many years ago. Could you please guide me on this matter? I have also initiated a discussion on the Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Infoboxes#City related articles infoboxes and informed related WikiProjects to participate in the discussion. Should I just wait for getting a concensus to have a fixed format design prescribed? If yes, then where else can I request for a discussion related to it. 456legend talk 08:23, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

You have the option to open a request for comment either on the Manual of Style page (if you want to propose a change to what it says) or specifically on the article talk page (if you just want to arrive at a consensus on what that one article should do), in order to bring in additional viewpoints. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I wrote an article but was declined due to lack of references

I wrote a paper last year about physics and matter, and I believe that it's an idea/paper worth sharing. I'm the sole writer, do I reference myself? How do I go about getting out there? I am not affiliated with any academic institution. It is simply a hobby and passion of mine. It seems almost impossible to publish anything anywhere if you don't have some sort of affiliations or connections. Thank you for your help. My paper can be found at my website: https://ypari.com/?blog=1&id=3&title=Theory%20of%20Zot%20Particles

Wikipedia page: Draft:Theory of Zot Particles

Thank you for your help! Balldrin (talk) 23:36, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Balldrin Hello and welcome to the teahouse. Unfortunately Wikipedia is not a publisher, and so we cannot publish your paper. If you have published your paper on a scientific journal, it may be cited in a different article.

Your paper says The zot is a fundamental unit of matter that constitutes more than 98% of the universe. It is ubiquitous in the universe as a building block for all matter. From a physics point of view, this is not yet a mainstream theory, and still requires some amount of notability (see WP:GNG) to have its own article. The bottomline is, I don't think it is the time for your concept to have it's own article. Cheers, --The Lonely Pather (talk) 23:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@TheLonelyPather, hello and thank you for your feedback. I appreciate your input and completely agree with you. Cheers! Balldrin (talk) 00:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Balldrin There are plenty of alternatives to Wikipedia, including many which use the MediaWiki software that Wikipedia uses. Of course, which ones are suitable depends on the nature of your content. In all seriousness, I suggest one of the "uncyclopedia" wikis. The ones I am aware of are uncyclopedia.co, uncyclopedia.com, and uncyclopedia.org. Fabrickator (talk) 02:57, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Local History, Northeast Tennessee

Tiger Valley, Tennessee Appalacian11 (talk) 04:44, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Appalacian11: Welcome to Wikipedia:Teahouse/Questions/Archive 1217. Did you have a question about using or editing Wikipedia? —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 05:08, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Appalacian11, are you planning to add to the tiny little stub about Tiger Valley in Wikipedia? Hope so — it's one of the many delightful places in your state. Augnablik (talk) 05:43, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Diminutives/nicknames for breeds in articles.

I couldn't find anything on this in the Manual of Style: what is the policy/usage of diminutive/nicknames in articles? e.g.: lab for Labrador Retriever or frenchie for French Bulldog. Personally I don't see these as being encyclopaedic but many articles on breeds do use nicknames instead of the formal/official name. Traumnovelle (talk) 03:43, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

It might be appropriate to mention such nicknames once in an article, for informational purposes, and of course any direct quotes used should not be altered, but in general the formal breed name should be used to maintain WP:Encyclopedic tone. {The poster formerly known as 87.81.,230.195} 176.24.44.161 (talk) 04:30, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Those nicknames are usually mentioned in the infobox but some articles do contain the nicknames in the article itself. Thanks for the comment. Traumnovelle (talk) 04:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Traumnovelle Talk:Staffordshire_Bull_Terrier/Archive_5#Shortform? touches on this a little. Gråbergs Gråa Sång (talk) 08:07, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

My view of the matter is that stating once with a reference to an indisputably reliable source that "frenchie" is a widely used nickname for the French Bulldog is appropriate. Referring to the breed as "frenchie" elsewhere throughout the body of the article is not appropriate. We write encyclopedia articles here, not blog or social media posts. Cullen328 (talk) 08:08, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

How to archive and bring into the public domain materials which might be of public interest

Hi, I am an inexperienced editor and have dabbled around in the talk pages of various articles rather than editing them directly for the past few years (without an account until now). I have a very unique question which I haven't received a good answer to until now.

I have thousands of pages of memos and emails, as well as leaflets, sermon audio, and "recruitment videos" from a "new religious movement" (article at en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christian_Assemblies_International), and I think it would be in the public interest to bring these into the public domain. I would hope that this might remove hurdles for respected specialists such as anthropologists (or indeed “church watchers” at the like of Christianity Today, the Roys Report, or MinistryWatch) to have access to this information. And perhaps one day for Wikipedians to be able to cite any commentary from these respected specialists in its article, just as it has already cited an important journalistic investigation on the group.

So is there any pathway for me to make use of these documents with the aim of making the world a better or more knowledgeable place (which will ultimately benefit Wikipedia of course)? For example, is there any way to archive the documents in such a way that their authenticity can be verified by a reputable organization and they can enter the public domain, so they are discoverable via Google search or by searching academic databases?

Also, I think it is simply beyond me to judge the importance of the documents, whether I am overestimating myself etc, so it would be nice to get some feedback in this regard. Are my concerns legitimate and worthwhile, or am on a fool's errand with these documents, like Don Quixote charging at windmills. Therefore please see the following Google Drive link to get a feel for some of the more interesting documents etc. https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1On5nu70ix6S0loLODmmQjusYsyESlP7x?usp=drive_link Just to warn you, the way I framed the memos etc in the cover letter for the "Letters Memos Statements Communications" document might be overly emotional. I wrote it a few years ago but would probably write it different now, and it wouldn't be an issue for me to change any presentation of the issue to make it less emotional. I crossposted a question similar to this one in the talk page of the semi-active WikiProject on Anthropology yesterday. OverthinkingNovice (talk) 21:40, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Wikipedia wouldn't host it, OverthinkingNovice, for any of several reasons. Where else could it legitimately be hosted? That's not a question for Wikipedia -- not here in the "teahouse", of course, but also not even for any of the "reference desks". You'd better ask an organization that publicizes religions. Though as this material can be presumed to be copyright, perhaps you'd better get legal opinion first. -- Hoary (talk) 21:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

@Hoary I won't post more questions like this. The advantage here is that lots of people view my question, and these people are generally conscientious and not squeamish and actually click on the link in order to consider what I'm talking about. It's actually really hard contacting people about this via email, it usually results in no reply for any of many reasons. I can always re-word and improve the emails and try somebody else but to me it resembles an unsolvable puzzle, nobody is keen to give advice, they don't know who to refer me on to, and they don't give me feedback on how to improve my procedure or overarching goal either. I've already done plenty of this in the late 2010s, and it leads to numerous dead ends. On the whole it's been a massive waste of time for me.

I actually have an idea of where to seek free legal advice, possibly at the local affiliate of the Electronic Frontiers Foundation.

But I'm still completely in the dark as to which (if any) organisations would publicise religion and host searchable online archives of documents from the sort of organisation that might have copyright claims. Any pointers?

(inform.ac/archive-and-database/ might be maintaining offline archives, but to my mind that's almost pointless because they wouldn't be searchable, would be more difficult to cite, and is not in the public domain as such.) OverthinkingNovice (talk) 23:41, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

"Make publicly available" and "bring into the public domain" mean two very different things. For the first, I would suggest making an account on archive.org and posting stuff there.

For the second, you would need major changes in legislation and international agreements. DS (talk) 13:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

English Article of Raynald Leclerc ( English version)

Hello According to my experience of WIKI this unfinished draft cannot really be refused because it was approved in the French section already 3 years ago....unless I am mistaken I am the editor of this curriculum vitae or list of this person's career. artist There is no intention to promote but rather to demonstrate the evolution of the work of this artist who is simply still alive. What I am trying to do currently is to have a similar article in the (en) section of wiki A version that can be found in English for people living in the USA, because they will not think to automatically search for it in the French section. Is it possible to have a mirror of the Article already done in this section to avoid having to redo everything I am re-arranging the references.....and it's quite long thank you

the English version was checked and corrected by Mr. William Berg living in Boston. Thank you for your help. Daniel LAQ (talk) 20:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Daniel LAQ. The French Wikipedia and the English Wikipedia are completely separate projects, with their own guidelines and policies. The English Wikipedia has the strictest guidelines and policies.

I declined your draft as it reads like an extract from his autobiography. This isn't how an English Wikipedia article should read: instead your text should simply be neutral summaries or paraphrases of reliable sources that discuss Raynald. You will need to re-write your text to be in line with our neutral point of view rules.

You also have a conflict of interest with Raynald, as you obviously know him. You therefore need to declare this by following the instructions at WP:COI. Qcne (talk) 21:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

As it's a translation of the article on frwiki, it's also my understanding that it needs an attribution to the original text, WP:TFOLWP has an example of this (by happy coincidence, also for an article from frwiki)

The enwiki pov guide can also be read at WP:NPOV Shaws username . talk . 23:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Photos ( IMAGES )

FYI

– Merging to section above. —Tenryuu 🐲 ( 💬 • 📝 ) 21:15, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Bonjour et merci

J'ai pas trop de problème avec la disposition effectivement c'est assez simple, mais le systeme me refuse de les disposer. Voilà pourquoi je vous pose la question. J'ai eu beau les renommer elles ne sont pas acceptées car reconnues comme des doublons. Le but est simple : Disposer une version ( EN) du contenu ( FR )

Merci de votre aide et contribution. Daniel Daniel LAQ (talk) 14:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Good morning I am trying to arrange the photos (already present in WIKI COMMONS) in my English version, which come from the French version and they are rejected. So is it possible to re-arrange them automatically by the article checkers? THANKS Daniel LAQ (talk) 20:11, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Daniel LAQ, no software or human is going to read your mind and format Draft:RAYNALD LECLERC accordingly. But photographs are a relatively simple matter. Whereas fr:Raynald Leclerc (being part of fr:Wikipedia) has Fichier:, Draft:RAYNALD LECLERC (being part of en:Wikipedia) needs to have File:. (I'm assuming here that you're editing the "source code"; I know nothing about the "visual editor".) -- Hoary (talk) 21:48, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Citations vs Sources vs References

Hi, what is the difference between a citation, source, and reference? Take for example the article, Treaty of Versailles. This has both a citations section and a sources section. Now take for example Napolean Bonaparte. This has a citations section and a references section. And finally, take a look at something like World War II. It has a citations section and a references section, but the references are formatted differently!!

What's the difference and why is it so inconsistent? Coulomb1 (talk) 13:46, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Coulomb1 There are several accepted ways to describe to readers the source of the information given in Wikipedia articles (see this policy). The citation provides the link between the source used and the text: it is a synonym for a reference. See WP:CITE for the full details and the major methods in use. Good-quality articles will consistently use one style but there is no enforced consistency between articles. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:43, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Version ( En ) de Raynald Leclerc

Hello to who refused my initial content submitted on March 1st. I'm trying to understand a little.....?? Would the support (En) be more demanding or more important and sophisticated than the editorial level of the Fr. support? I don't think you can imagine the time that my colleague Robert Filion and I spent on it to finalize it in French....to the directive of our WIKI fr advisors! We are not in conflict of interest with this artist, Mr. Filion, Mr. Gelinas and I have been present for him since almost the beginning of his career in support of him and we worked according to the advice of your colleagues to register a neutral text. Of course this text is a part of his biography, we cannot re-invent a personal biography of a person. This provision of this text is completely neutral and is not intended to promote it; it is the role of art galleries to play this role. We are not resellers and we do not play this role.

The advice we had in constructing this content was to confirm the veracity of simple facts with the citation of genuine third party (other) external sources to express the work of the artist which was done, Mr. William Berg of Boston quoted Mr. Leclerc in his specialized written work on light expressed in artistic works and the particularity of this Canadian artist.

The role I play is to ensure that historical information about the artist remains existing with the website created for them. You should know that all articles published in magazines are often archived and/or deleted.

Of course we have indicated what distinguishes this artist in his rendering With facts and historical notes, that's it

Can you indicate to us where is not very weel writed ? Please give me some examples ?

Thanks a lot for your help. Daniel LAQ (talk) 14:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Daniel LAQ On the English Wikipedia, the main hurdle is that all articles must establish that their subject is wikinotable. To do that, we need several sources that are reliable, independent and with significant coverage, as summarised at this page. Hence what the artist says about himself on his own website is insufficient: it is not independent. In addition, by our policy for biographies of living people, all facts must be backed up by inline citations to reliable sources. I don't see these sources for large parts at the beginning of the draft. Sources don't have to be online, so I don't understand your comment about magazines are often archived and/or deleted. You can cite old hard-copy magazines using a template such as {{cite magazine}}. Mike Turnbull (talk) 15:53, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello Collin,You told me that Raynald Leclerc's biography had no reference so I added the reference to the Bio placed on the website of the international art gallery which is its official agentI didn't want anything placed as a link to a commercial place.....Then his parents died there are no sources Except ah! of course his sister who is also a person who evolves in the world of Art. Can I use it too? What do you think? Daniel LAQ (talk) 15:57, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

If there are no published independent sources about him, then there cannot be an article. ColinFine (talk) 16:01, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Hello again, Daniel. I'm afraid that the time you spent is of no consequence to English Wikipedia. An article must satisfy the policies of English Wikipedia, which may not be the same as French Wikipedia.

It is a common experience of people who attempt to create an article in English Wikipedia without first learning about policies such as verifiability, reliable sources, independent sources and notability, that they have a frustrating and miserable time. Often they put in a lot of work, and it is all wasted, because they did not begin by determining whether or not the subject satisfied English Wikipedia's criteria for notability.

You do indeed have a conflict of interest, in that you have an association with the subject, and so may find it difficult to write with a suitably neutral point of view; you may also be tempted to insert information which is not in the independent sources that you cite.

Reliably published material by Mr William Berg of Boston may be relevant (unless he also is associated with Leclerc). But whether he looked at your draft or not is completely irrelevant to Wikipedia.

A Wikipedia article (at least in English Wikipedia) is a summary of what independent reliable sources say about the subject, nothing more. Your own knowledge about Leclerc is irrelevant, except insofar as it enables you to find suitable sources. Nothing said, written, published, or commissioned by Leclerc, his associates, his agents, or his galleries, is of any relevance to the article unless it has been commented on by an independent commentator, ColinFine (talk) 16:01, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Assigning Wikidata item ID to a page

The page for plum butter is/was connected to Powidl. Powidl (or variations thereof) is what plum butter is called in some Central European countries (Czechia, Austria, Poland), but we do have a name in English for it: plum butter. My guess is the reason Powidl and plum butter get connected sometimes is because plum butter doesn't have its own Wikidata item ID. How can I give it one? Or, if I can't, is there any admin who can? Once it has a Wikidata item ID, then I can connect it with its correspondents in other languages like de:pflaumenmus, fr:Beurre de prune, ro:Magiun de prune, etc. (I won't mess with Asian languages because I don't know any of those, so any help there would be greatly appreciated) ♦ WikiUser70176 ♦^{(My talk page)} 13:32, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

To my limited knowledge, all Wikipedia articles have Wikidata entries. On the en-wiki skin I use, the Tools menu on the right has an link called Wikidata item. Thus, the Wikidata entries for Plum butter is d:Q124727156 and Powidl is d:Q256622. Rotideypoc41352 (talk · contribs) 14:34, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@WikiUser70176 A bot created the Wikidata for plum butter just a couple of days ago. Whether the article should be merged with Powidl is another matter. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:36, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you both! ♦ WikiUser70176 ♦^{(My talk page)} 16:14, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Citations / List of works by translator, to include or not to include "|translator=" metadata?

For a page for a person that is most notably known for translating books, is listing works translated by that person - should the "|translator=" metadata be included, or would it be implied?

Here is one page where it is not included - Anton Hur ("|translator=" is left blank)

Here is another page where it is included - Max Lawton

I have created the second page and was unclear if this would be repetitive, or if it is better to include for data structure. ty! Lacanic (talk) 19:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi there @Lacanic! In that specific case, I would probably say no, as it is implied that the translator is... well... the translator you're talking about

. If you are using that somewhere else, though, a good rule of thumb is to fill all the metadata you can, but in that specific case you can leave it blank. Feel free to let me know if I can help with anything else. Have a great day/night! Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 22:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

✨ I've updated by removing that on the page. Thank you for the offer on help, could you let me know if you think there are any other suggestions to the page or give it a review? Lacanic (talk) 16:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Excellent! I tidied up some things here and there. I won't review it myself because I've ever so slightly been involved with it, but eventually someone else will review it. Cocobb8 (💬 talk • ✏️ contribs) 17:04, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

😌 Great, ty! Lacanic (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Margaret Noodin

I understand the basics of creating and editing pages and know that I cannot edit a page about me. However, in the past year I have experienced extremely biased harassment which was fueled in part by an incomplete news story and continued to the point that my page now states some very false things about me. How can I get my page corrected? For instance, this page: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_Noodin says that I no longer work for the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee but in fact I am still a professor there and am teaching a class now which can be independently corroborated here: https://catalog.uwm.edu/course-search/?srcdb=2242&keyword=Noodin I tried to simply ignore the bullying for a while but I would like to do something now if I can. I am currently the Head Start director for the Grand Portage Band of Chippewa Indians and part-time instructor at the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee. These are facts. I have done nothing wrong other than have undocumented ancestors. Please let me know if you can help. Zongide'e (talk) 02:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear you're suffering such problems; harrassment and false representations seem to be unavoidable for anyone in the public eye these days.

Regarding our article about you:

Any false or contentious statements (and if you deny them, they're contentious) that are not cited to an (apparently) reliable source can and should be removed, even by yourself. Be sure if you do to explain why in the Edit summary.

A source which is incorrect through being outdated can be replaced by an up-to-date one and the text corrected in accordance with it, and,

a statement you regard as false, but which is cited to an apparently reliable source, can be counterbalanced by adding an equally reliable source contradicting it and allowing the readers to compare them; if a preponderance of the latter make it evident that the statement is false, then the better-cited 'true' (actually, verifiable) statement can be substituted – it would be better if, rather than carrying out such edits yourself, you requested them on the article's Talk page by detailing the exact change(s) required, giving links or bibliographic details of the sources, and adding an edit request template to attract a disinterested editor's attention. Good luck! {The poster formerly known as 87.81.230.195} 176.24.44.161 (talk) 04:51, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

@Zongide'e More detail about what you can/should do at Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects. Mike Turnbull (talk) 14:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I appreciate the reply. 192.234.247.97 (talk) 18:30, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Image thing

i uploaded the logo for mondaq as an image, its not copyrighted per WP:LOGOS but its way too big, is there any way I can shrink it down so I can use it for the Mondaq articles infobox? Tw294 (talk) 19:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Tw294, using the "logo" parameter of the infobox should size it appropriately. If you want to tweak it further, I'd recommend the "logo upright" parameter, which scales the image larger or smaller depending on if the number entered is greater or less than 1. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 19:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Tw294, welcome to the Teahouse. You can just give Mondaqlogo.png alone with no image code as the logo parameter, and the infobox will automatically set a suitable size. PrimeHunter (talk) 19:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Article Review Timeline

I am facing a dilemma. I have drafts written in October last year (when the backlog was 600) that are yet to be reviewed. In the same vain, i have articles that I wrote recently that got approval in less than 24 hours. I will like to understand this confusing dynamic? Is it a first in, first out or last in, last out approach? Or are articles reviewed randomly.

Also which submission process is faster, submission via AFC or submission for review via Page Curation triage and what are the key differences between the two. Heatrave (talk) 23:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)

Each reviewer reviews what they wish to review. As an illustration of a non-review, I see your Draft:Golden Boy (Kidi album) (which is only a week or two old) and want to decline it as it fails to summarize any commentary from reliable sources on the album and therefore fails to demonstrate notability; but I shan't do so as I'm not familiar with the expectations made of articles about pop music and (sorry, but) can't now be bothered to read up on these. One idea: When people wait an inordinately long time for a review, it sometimes turns out that they forgot to submit the draft in question. Are you sure that you've done this? -- Hoary (talk) 00:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi @Heatrave: there is nothing older than 8 weeks in the AfC pool, AFAIK. Can you link to your draft(s) submitted in October? -- DoubleGrazing (talk) 08:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

Samad Davis is an article that was created in December. It has not been reviewed. I think the October one has been approved. But I have observed that articles I wrote or submitted during the holidays are yet to be reviewed, whereas some of the recent articles have received a review. Heatrave (talk) 19:07, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

The article Samad Davis was never submitted for review. It was in Draftspace for only a short while until you moved it to Mainspace yourself on 29 January. Consequently I don't understand why you expect it to be reviewed at all. Please specify and link to any other drafts you believe should be reviewed, only then can we assist or advise you about them Roger (Dodger67) (talk) 20:05, 5 March 2024 (UTC)

[1] WP:Consensus

[2] Wikipedia:Controversial articles

[3] WP:Dispute resolution

[Ign-4] Collura, Scott (January 16, 2015). "Every X-Man Ever". IGN. Retrieved March 2, 2024.

[1]

[2]

[3]

[1]